Poland vs Viet Nam: Forestry, Recurrent (general government expenditure) — Value US$
Forestry, Recurrent (general government expenditure) — Value US$ over time
- Poland
- Viet Nam
How they compare
Viet Nam currently reports 112.41 million USD against 28.07 million USD in Poland, a difference of 84.34 million USD.
That makes Viet Nam's figure about 4.0 times Poland's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2008 it was Poland ahead.
Poland ranks 7th and Viet Nam ranks 1st of 25 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Poland averaged higher in 1 and Viet Nam in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Poland | Viet Nam | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 55.65 million USD | 50.74 million USD | 4.91 million USD | Poland |
| 2010s | 56.59 million USD | 116.8 million USD | 60.21 million USD | Viet Nam |
| 2020s | 48.35 million USD | 120.59 million USD | 72.24 million USD | Viet Nam |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher forestry, recurrent (general government expenditure) — value us$, Poland or Viet Nam?
- Viet Nam, at 112.41 million USD against 28.07 million USD in Poland as of 2022.
- What is the difference in forestry, recurrent (general government expenditure) — value us$ between Poland and Viet Nam?
- 84.34 million USD, with Viet Nam ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Poland and Viet Nam?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2008 to 2022.
- How do Poland and Viet Nam rank globally for forestry, recurrent (general government expenditure) — value us$?
- Poland ranks 7th and Viet Nam ranks 1st of 25 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Forestry, Recurrent (general government expenditure) — Value US$. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Statistics Division of FAO collects annually data on Government Expenditure on Agriculture through a questionnaire, which was developed in partnership with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF is the responsible institution for the Government Finance Statistics (GFS) methodology and annually collects GFS data, including Expenditure by Functions of Government (COFOG). The Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) is an international classification developed by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and published by the United Nations Statistical Division (UNSD), with the aim of categorise governments' functions according to their purposes. The FAO questionnaire aligns with Table 7 of the IMF GFS questionnaire, replicates the relevant aggregates and drills down to request additional detail related to Agriculture. The FAO dataset consists of a time series, from 2001 onwards, of Total Government Expenditure and expenditure in: Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, along with its three disaggregated subsectors of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing; and Environmental Protection. In addition, expenditure in each detailed function are further disaggregated into Recurrent and Capital expenditure. Additional indicators include the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure, and the Agriculture Orientation Index (ratio between the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure and the Agriculture Value Added as Share of GDP). Data are reported for the highest level of government available (Consolidated general government, consolidated central government or budgetary central government) and are available for about 100 countries on a regular basis.