Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) vs Viet Nam: Buffalo β€” Stocks

Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
28.86 million LSU
in 2023
Viet Nam
1.50 million LSU
in 2023
Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) rank
4th
Viet Nam rank
7th

Buffalo β€” Stocks over time

  • Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
  • Viet Nam
010.0M20.0M30.0M196119922023

How they compare

Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) currently reports 28.86 million LSU against 1.50 million LSU in Viet Nam, a difference of 27.36 million LSU.

That makes Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)'s figure about 19.3 times Viet Nam's.

Across all 63 years both countries report, Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) has been ahead every year.

Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) ranks 4th and Viet Nam ranks 7th of 26 groups.

Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) Viet Nam Difference Ahead
1960s 8.13 million LSU 1.63 million LSU 6.50 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
1970s 10.32 million LSU 1.59 million LSU 8.74 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
1980s 13.33 million LSU 1.81 million LSU 11.52 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
1990s 17.11 million LSU 2.05 million LSU 15.06 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
2000s 21.67 million LSU 2.02 million LSU 19.65 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
2010s 27.05 million LSU 1.80 million LSU 25.26 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
2020s 28.67 million LSU 1.57 million LSU 27.10 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher buffalo β€” stocks, Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) or Viet Nam?
Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs), at 28.86 million LSU against 1.50 million LSU in Viet Nam as of 2023.
What is the difference in buffalo β€” stocks between Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) and Viet Nam?
27.36 million LSU, with Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) and Viet Nam?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) and Viet Nam rank globally for buffalo β€” stocks?
Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) ranks 4th and Viet Nam ranks 7th of 26 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Buffalo β€” Stocks. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Buffalo β€” Stocks
Unit
LSU
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
95 places, 4,258 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

The Livestock Patterns domain of FAOSTAT contains data on livestock numbers, shares of major livestock species and densities of livestock units in the agricultural land area. Values are calculated using Livestock Units (LSU), which facilitate aggregating information for different livestock types. Data are available by country, with global coverage, for the period 1961 to the most recent year available with annual updates. This methodology applies the LSU coefficients reported in the "Guidelines for the preparation of livestock sector reviews" (FAO, 2011). From this publication, LSU coefficients are computed by livestock type and by country. The reference unit used for the calculation of livestock units (=1 LSU) is the grazing equivalent of one adult dairy cow producing 3000 kg of milk annually, fed without additional concentrated foodstuffs. FAOSTAT agri-environmental indicators on livestock patterns closely follow the structure of the indicators in EUROSTAT.