Gibraltar vs Sierra Leone: Capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre

Gibraltar
2.87 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Sierra Leone
2.87 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Gibraltar rank
54th
Sierra Leone rank
55th

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

  • Gibraltar
  • Sierra Leone
0123196119922023

How they compare

Gibraltar currently reports 2.87 metric tons per square kilometre against 2.87 metric tons per square kilometre in Sierra Leone, a difference of 0 metric tons per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Sierra Leone ahead.

Gibraltar ranks 54th and Sierra Leone ranks 55th of 216 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Gibraltar Sierra Leone Difference Ahead
1960s 0.1 metric tons per square kilometre 0.3913 metric tons per square kilometre 0.2913 metric tons per square kilometre Sierra Leone
1970s 0.1 metric tons per square kilometre 0.7478 metric tons per square kilometre 0.6478 metric tons per square kilometre Sierra Leone
1980s 0.1 metric tons per square kilometre 0.7115 metric tons per square kilometre 0.6115 metric tons per square kilometre Sierra Leone
1990s 0.1 metric tons per square kilometre 0.8961 metric tons per square kilometre 0.7961 metric tons per square kilometre Sierra Leone
2000s 0.1 metric tons per square kilometre 1.78 metric tons per square kilometre 1.68 metric tons per square kilometre Sierra Leone
2010s 0.8473 metric tons per square kilometre 2.81 metric tons per square kilometre 1.96 metric tons per square kilometre Sierra Leone
2020s 2.46 metric tons per square kilometre 2.87 metric tons per square kilometre 0.4104 metric tons per square kilometre Sierra Leone

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre, Gibraltar or Sierra Leone?
Gibraltar, at 2.87 metric tons per square kilometre against 2.87 metric tons per square kilometre in Sierra Leone as of 2023.
What is the difference in capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre between Gibraltar and Sierra Leone?
0 metric tons per square kilometre, with Gibraltar ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Gibraltar and Sierra Leone?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Gibraltar and Sierra Leone rank globally for capture fisheries production (metric tons), per square kilometre?
Gibraltar ranks 54th and Sierra Leone ranks 55th 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

Gibraltar vs Sierra Leone: 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/gibraltar/sierra-leone/

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/gibraltar/sierra-leone/">Gibraltar vs Sierra Leone: 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.