Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) vs Pakistan: Buffalo — Stocks

Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)
3.10 million An
in 2023
Pakistan
44.97 million An
in 2023
Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) rank
8th
Pakistan rank
2nd

Buffalo — Stocks over time

  • Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)
  • Pakistan
010.0M20.0M30.0M40.0M196119922023

How they compare

Pakistan currently reports 44.97 million An against 3.10 million An in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs), a difference of 41.87 million An.

That makes Pakistan's figure about 14.5 times Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)'s.

Across all 63 years both countries report, Pakistan has been ahead every year.

Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) ranks 8th and Pakistan ranks 2nd of 26 groups.

Pakistan has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) Pakistan Difference Ahead
1960s 905,544 An 7.89 million An 6.99 million An Pakistan
1970s 1.60 million An 10.30 million An 8.69 million An Pakistan
1980s 2.74 million An 13.93 million An 11.19 million An Pakistan
1990s 3.23 million An 19.57 million An 16.34 million An Pakistan
2000s 4.07 million An 26.10 million An 22.03 million An Pakistan
2010s 5.17 million An 35.07 million An 29.90 million An Pakistan
2020s 4.68 million An 43.06 million An 38.38 million An Pakistan

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher buffalo — stocks, Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) or Pakistan?
Pakistan, at 44.97 million An against 3.10 million An in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) as of 2023.
What is the difference in buffalo — stocks between Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) and Pakistan?
41.87 million An, with Pakistan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) and Pakistan?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) and Pakistan rank globally for buffalo — stocks?
Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) ranks 8th and Pakistan ranks 2nd of 26 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Buffalo — Stocks. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) vs Pakistan: Buffalo — Stocks. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved 04 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/buffalo-stocks-2/low-income-food-deficit-countries-lifdcs/pakistan/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/buffalo-stocks-2/low-income-food-deficit-countries-lifdcs/pakistan/">Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) vs Pakistan: Buffalo — Stocks</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Buffalo — Stocks
Unit
An
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
97 places, 4,384 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

The Livestock Manure domain of FAOSTAT contains estimates of nitrogen (N) inputs to agricultural soils from livestock manure. Data on the N losses to air and water are also disseminated. These estimates are compiled using official FAOSTAT statistics of animal stocks and by applying the internationally approved Guidelines of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Data are available by country, with global coverage and updated annually.The following elements are disseminated: 1) Stocks; 2) Amount excreted in manure (N content); 3) Manure left on pasture (N content); 4) Manure left on pasture that volatilises (N content); 5) Manure left on pasture that leaches (N content); 6) Manure treated (N content); 7) Losses from manure treated (N content); 8) Manure applied to soils (N content); 9) Manure applied to soils that volatilises (N content); 10) Manure applied to soils that leaches (N content).