American Samoa vs Malta: Capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre

American Samoa
6.24 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Malta
6.29 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
American Samoa rank
29th
Malta rank
28th

Capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre over time

  • American Samoa
  • Malta
0102030196119922023

How they compare

Malta currently reports 6.29 metric tons per square kilometre against 6.24 metric tons per square kilometre in American Samoa, a difference of 0.05 metric tons per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 4 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Malta ahead.

American Samoa ranks 29th and Malta ranks 28th of 216 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, American Samoa averaged higher in 2 and Malta in 5.

Head to head by decade

Decade American Samoa Malta Difference Ahead
1960s 0 metric tons per square kilometre 4.17 metric tons per square kilometre 4.17 metric tons per square kilometre Malta
1970s 0.5045 metric tons per square kilometre 4.34 metric tons per square kilometre 3.83 metric tons per square kilometre Malta
1980s 0.6395 metric tons per square kilometre 3.78 metric tons per square kilometre 3.14 metric tons per square kilometre Malta
1990s 1.15 metric tons per square kilometre 7.08 metric tons per square kilometre 5.94 metric tons per square kilometre Malta
2000s 22.92 metric tons per square kilometre 3.86 metric tons per square kilometre 19.06 metric tons per square kilometre American Samoa
2010s 14.37 metric tons per square kilometre 7.57 metric tons per square kilometre 6.8 metric tons per square kilometre American Samoa
2020s 6 metric tons per square kilometre 7.37 metric tons per square kilometre 1.37 metric tons per square kilometre Malta

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre, American Samoa or Malta?
Malta, at 6.29 metric tons per square kilometre against 6.24 metric tons per square kilometre in American Samoa as of 2023.
What is the difference in capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre between American Samoa and Malta?
0.05 metric tons per square kilometre, with Malta ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for American Samoa and Malta?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do American Samoa and Malta rank globally for capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre?
American Samoa ranks 29th and Malta ranks 28th of 216 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre. 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

American Samoa vs Malta: Capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 21 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/capture-fisheries-production-metric-tons-per-square-kilometre/american-samoa/malta/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/capture-fisheries-production-metric-tons-per-square-kilometre/american-samoa/malta/">American Samoa vs Malta: Capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre
Unit
metric tons per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
264 places, 15,328 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Capture fisheries production (metric tons) divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.