China vs Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs): Cattle β€” Stocks

China
47.92 million LSU
in 2023
Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
257.51 million LSU
in 2023
China rank
5th
Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) rank
6th

Cattle β€” Stocks over time

  • China
  • Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
50.0M100.0M150.0M200.0M250.0M196119922023

How they compare

Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) currently reports 257.51 million LSU against 47.92 million LSU in China, a difference of 209.60 million LSU.

That makes Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)'s figure about 5.4 times China's.

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

China ranks 5th and Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) ranks 6th of 206 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade China Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) Difference Ahead
1960s 33.95 million LSU 104.20 million LSU 70.25 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
1970s 36.30 million LSU 117.99 million LSU 81.69 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
1980s 40.64 million LSU 128.58 million LSU 87.94 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
1990s 59.82 million LSU 144.23 million LSU 84.41 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
2000s 58.45 million LSU 176.28 million LSU 117.83 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
2010s 41.67 million LSU 222.21 million LSU 180.53 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)
2020s 45.72 million LSU 251.57 million LSU 205.85 million LSU Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher cattle β€” stocks, China or Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)?
Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs), at 257.51 million LSU against 47.92 million LSU in China as of 2023.
What is the difference in cattle β€” stocks between China and Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)?
209.60 million LSU, with Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for China and Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs)?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do China and Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) rank globally for cattle β€” stocks?
China ranks 5th and Net Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) ranks 6th of 206 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Cattle β€” Stocks. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Cattle β€” Stocks
Unit
LSU
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
241 places, 13,793 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.