Belarus vs Jordan: Consumption-based deforestation per person
Belarus
2.94 square meters
in 2023
Jordan
3.2 square meters
in 2023
Belarus rank
102nd
Jordan rank
99th
Consumption-based deforestation per person over time
- Belarus
- Jordan
How they compare
Jordan currently reports 3.2 square meters against 2.94 square meters in Belarus, a difference of 0.26 square meters.
That makes Jordan's figure about 1.1 times Belarus's.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 19 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Jordan ahead.
Belarus ranks 102nd and Jordan ranks 99th of 178 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Belarus averaged higher in 1 and Jordan in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Belarus | Jordan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 1.45 square meters | 2.92 square meters | 1.47 square meters | Jordan |
| 2010s | 2.42 square meters | 2.63 square meters | 0.2132 square meters | Jordan |
| 2020s | 2.7 square meters | 2.33 square meters | 0.3723 square meters | Belarus |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher consumption-based deforestation per person, Belarus or Jordan?
- Jordan, at 3.2 square meters against 2.94 square meters in Belarus as of 2023.
- What is the difference in consumption-based deforestation per person between Belarus and Jordan?
- 0.26 square meters, with Jordan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Belarus and Jordan?
- 19 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2023.
- How do Belarus and Jordan rank globally for consumption-based deforestation per person?
- Belarus ranks 102nd and Jordan ranks 99th 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.