Pakistan vs East Timor: Consumption-based deforestation per person
Pakistan
0.3212 square meters
in 2023
East Timor
0 square meters
in 2023
Pakistan rank
154th
East Timor rank
156th
Consumption-based deforestation per person over time
- Pakistan
- East Timor
How they compare
Pakistan currently reports 0.3212 square meters against 0 square meters in East Timor, a difference of 0.3212 square meters.
Across all 19 years both countries report, Pakistan has been ahead every year.
Pakistan ranks 154th and East Timor ranks 156th of 178 countries.
Pakistan has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Pakistan | East Timor | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.6895 square meters | 0 square meters | 0.6895 square meters | Pakistan |
| 2010s | 0.8315 square meters | 0 square meters | 0.8315 square meters | Pakistan |
| 2020s | 0.4412 square meters | 0 square meters | 0.4412 square meters | Pakistan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher consumption-based deforestation per person, Pakistan or East Timor?
- Pakistan, at 0.3212 square meters against 0 square meters in East Timor as of 2023.
- What is the difference in consumption-based deforestation per person between Pakistan and East Timor?
- 0.3212 square meters, with Pakistan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Pakistan and East Timor?
- 19 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2023.
- How do Pakistan and East Timor rank globally for consumption-based deforestation per person?
- Pakistan ranks 154th and East Timor 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.