Afghanistan vs Comoros: Consumption-based deforestation per person
Afghanistan
0.4774 square meters
in 2023
Comoros
0 square meters
in 2023
Afghanistan rank
153rd
Comoros rank
156th
Consumption-based deforestation per person over time
- Afghanistan
- Comoros
How they compare
Afghanistan currently reports 0.4774 square meters against 0 square meters in Comoros, a difference of 0.4774 square meters.
Across all 18 years both countries report, Afghanistan has been ahead every year.
Afghanistan ranks 153rd and Comoros ranks 156th of 178 countries.
Afghanistan has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Afghanistan | Comoros | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.111 square meters | 0 square meters | 0.111 square meters | Afghanistan |
| 2010s | 0.1312 square meters | 0 square meters | 0.1312 square meters | Afghanistan |
| 2020s | 0.3045 square meters | 0 square meters | 0.3045 square meters | Afghanistan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher consumption-based deforestation per person, Afghanistan or Comoros?
- Afghanistan, at 0.4774 square meters against 0 square meters in Comoros as of 2023.
- What is the difference in consumption-based deforestation per person between Afghanistan and Comoros?
- 0.4774 square meters, with Afghanistan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Afghanistan and Comoros?
- 18 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2023.
- How do Afghanistan and Comoros rank globally for consumption-based deforestation per person?
- Afghanistan ranks 153rd and Comoros ranks 156th of 178 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Singh et al. (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Consumption-based deforestation per person. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Estimated average deforestation for agricultural and forestry products, per person. This is adjusted for trade, so it reflects deforestation caused by consumption, not domestic production.