Moldova vs Sri Lanka: Consumption-based deforestation per person
Moldova
4.6 square meters
in 2023
Sri Lanka
4.47 square meters
in 2023
Moldova rank
74th
Sri Lanka rank
76th
Consumption-based deforestation per person over time
- Moldova
- Sri Lanka
How they compare
Moldova currently reports 4.6 square meters against 4.47 square meters in Sri Lanka, a difference of 0.13 square meters.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 19 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Sri Lanka ahead.
Moldova ranks 74th and Sri Lanka ranks 76th of 178 countries.
Sri Lanka has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Moldova | Sri Lanka | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.5274 square meters | 1.7 square meters | 1.17 square meters | Sri Lanka |
| 2010s | 0.712 square meters | 2.93 square meters | 2.22 square meters | Sri Lanka |
| 2020s | 2.72 square meters | 3.75 square meters | 1.03 square meters | Sri Lanka |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher consumption-based deforestation per person, Moldova or Sri Lanka?
- Moldova, at 4.6 square meters against 4.47 square meters in Sri Lanka as of 2023.
- What is the difference in consumption-based deforestation per person between Moldova and Sri Lanka?
- 0.13 square meters, with Moldova ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Moldova and Sri Lanka?
- 19 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2023.
- How do Moldova and Sri Lanka rank globally for consumption-based deforestation per person?
- Moldova ranks 74th and Sri Lanka ranks 76th 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.