Argentina vs Chile: Consumption-based deforestation per person
Argentina
12.88 square meters
in 2023
Chile
13.85 square meters
in 2023
Argentina rank
25th
Chile rank
23rd
Consumption-based deforestation per person over time
- Argentina
- Chile
How they compare
Chile currently reports 13.85 square meters against 12.88 square meters in Argentina, a difference of 0.97 square meters.
That makes Chile's figure about 1.1 times Argentina's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 19 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Chile ahead.
Argentina ranks 25th and Chile ranks 23rd of 178 countries.
Chile has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Argentina | Chile | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 19.84 square meters | 22.68 square meters | 2.83 square meters | Chile |
| 2010s | 21.59 square meters | 25.37 square meters | 3.77 square meters | Chile |
| 2020s | 13.39 square meters | 17.51 square meters | 4.12 square meters | Chile |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher consumption-based deforestation per person, Argentina or Chile?
- Chile, at 13.85 square meters against 12.88 square meters in Argentina as of 2023.
- What is the difference in consumption-based deforestation per person between Argentina and Chile?
- 0.97 square meters, with Chile ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Argentina and Chile?
- 19 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2023.
- How do Argentina and Chile rank globally for consumption-based deforestation per person?
- Argentina ranks 25th and Chile ranks 23rd 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.