Guatemala vs Mali: Crop harvest removal — Cropland potassium
Crop harvest removal — Cropland potassium over time
- Guatemala
- Mali
How they compare
Guatemala currently reports 136,040 t against 119,107 t in Mali, a difference of 16,933 t.
That makes Guatemala's figure about 1.1 times Mali's.
Across all 63 years both countries report, Guatemala has been ahead every year.
Guatemala ranks 43rd and Mali ranks 46th of 185 countries.
Guatemala has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Guatemala | Mali | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 18,318 t | 10,306 t | 8,012 t | Guatemala |
| 1970s | 29,554 t | 13,545 t | 16,009 t | Guatemala |
| 1980s | 33,321 t | 19,443 t | 13,878 t | Guatemala |
| 1990s | 49,235 t | 34,979 t | 14,257 t | Guatemala |
| 2000s | 75,439 t | 46,778 t | 28,661 t | Guatemala |
| 2010s | 120,344 t | 86,094 t | 34,251 t | Guatemala |
| 2020s | 134,531 t | 107,962 t | 26,569 t | Guatemala |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher crop harvest removal — cropland potassium, Guatemala or Mali?
- Guatemala, at 136,040 t against 119,107 t in Mali as of 2023.
- What is the difference in crop harvest removal — cropland potassium between Guatemala and Mali?
- 16,933 t, with Guatemala ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Guatemala and Mali?
- 63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
- How do Guatemala and Mali rank globally for crop harvest removal — cropland potassium?
- Guatemala ranks 43rd and Mali ranks 46th of 185 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Crop harvest removal — Cropland potassium. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Cropland Nutrient balance domain contains information on the flows of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium from mineral fertilizer, manure applied, atmospheric deposition, crop removal, and biological fixation over cropland and per unit area of cropland. The flows are aggregated to total inputs and total outputs, from which the overall nutrient balance and nutrient use efficiency on cropland are calculated. Statistics are disseminated in units of tonnes and in kg/ha, as appropriate. Nutrient use efficiency is expressed as a fraction (%).