Mozambique vs Thailand: Consumption-based deforestation per person
Mozambique
4.79 square meters
in 2023
Thailand
4.69 square meters
in 2023
Mozambique rank
70th
Thailand rank
72nd
Consumption-based deforestation per person over time
- Mozambique
- Thailand
How they compare
Mozambique currently reports 4.79 square meters against 4.69 square meters in Thailand, a difference of 0.1 square meters.
Across all 19 years both countries report, Mozambique has been ahead every year.
Mozambique ranks 70th and Thailand ranks 72nd of 178 countries.
Mozambique has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Mozambique | Thailand | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 15.15 square meters | 9.63 square meters | 5.52 square meters | Mozambique |
| 2010s | 14.98 square meters | 6.84 square meters | 8.14 square meters | Mozambique |
| 2020s | 6.73 square meters | 5.44 square meters | 1.29 square meters | Mozambique |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher consumption-based deforestation per person, Mozambique or Thailand?
- Mozambique, at 4.79 square meters against 4.69 square meters in Thailand as of 2023.
- What is the difference in consumption-based deforestation per person between Mozambique and Thailand?
- 0.1 square meters, with Mozambique ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Mozambique and Thailand?
- 19 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2023.
- How do Mozambique and Thailand rank globally for consumption-based deforestation per person?
- Mozambique ranks 70th and Thailand ranks 72nd 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.