Honduras vs Latvia: Biological fixation — Cropland nitrogen
Biological fixation — Cropland nitrogen over time
- Honduras
- Latvia
How they compare
Latvia currently reports 10,014 t against 9,811 t in Honduras, a difference of 203 t.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 32 shared years of data; in 1992 it was Honduras ahead.
Honduras ranks 97th and Latvia ranks 95th of 191 countries.
Honduras has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Honduras | Latvia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 4,862 t | 438.23 t | 4,424 t | Honduras |
| 2000s | 5,772 t | 227.52 t | 5,545 t | Honduras |
| 2010s | 7,601 t | 3,367 t | 4,234 t | Honduras |
| 2020s | 8,960 t | 8,739 t | 220.61 t | Honduras |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher biological fixation — cropland nitrogen, Honduras or Latvia?
- Latvia, at 10,014 t against 9,811 t in Honduras as of 2023.
- What is the difference in biological fixation — cropland nitrogen between Honduras and Latvia?
- 203 t, with Latvia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Honduras and Latvia?
- 32 years are reported by both, from 1992 to 2023.
- How do Honduras and Latvia rank globally for biological fixation — cropland nitrogen?
- Honduras ranks 97th and Latvia ranks 95th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Biological fixation — Cropland nitrogen. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Cropland Nutrient balance domain contains information on the flows of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium from mineral fertilizer, manure applied, atmospheric deposition, crop removal, and biological fixation over cropland and per unit area of cropland. The flows are aggregated to total inputs and total outputs, from which the overall nutrient balance and nutrient use efficiency on cropland are calculated. Statistics are disseminated in units of tonnes and in kg/ha, as appropriate. Nutrient use efficiency is expressed as a fraction (%).