China, Hong Kong SAR vs Latvia: Fung & Bact – Diazines, morpholines — Agricultural Use

China, Hong Kong SAR
0 t
in 2024
Latvia
0 t
in 2021
China, Hong Kong SAR rank
44th
Latvia rank
44th

Fung & Bact – Diazines, morpholines — Agricultural Use over time

  • China, Hong Kong SAR
  • Latvia
01020304050199720102024

How they compare

China, Hong Kong SAR currently reports 0 t against 0 t in Latvia, a difference of 0 t.

Across all 13 years both countries report, Latvia has been ahead every year.

China, Hong Kong SAR ranks 44th and Latvia ranks 44th of 60 countries.

Latvia has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade China, Hong Kong SAR Latvia Difference Ahead
2000s 0.25 t 12.5 t 12.25 t Latvia
2010s 0 t 30.29 t 30.29 t Latvia
2020s 0 t 0 t 0 t

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher fung & bact – diazines, morpholines — agricultural use, China, Hong Kong SAR or Latvia?
China, Hong Kong SAR, at 0 t against 0 t in Latvia as of 2024.
What is the difference in fung & bact – diazines, morpholines — agricultural use between China, Hong Kong SAR and Latvia?
0 t, with China, Hong Kong SAR ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for China, Hong Kong SAR and Latvia?
13 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2021.
How do China, Hong Kong SAR and Latvia rank globally for fung & bact – diazines, morpholines — agricultural use?
China, Hong Kong SAR ranks 44th and Latvia ranks 44th of 60 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Fung & Bact – Diazines, morpholines — Agricultural Use. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

China, Hong Kong SAR vs Latvia: Fung & Bact – Diazines, morpholines — Agricultural Use. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved 04 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/fung-and-bact-diazines-morpholines-agricultural-use/china-hong-kong-sar/latvia/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/fung-and-bact-diazines-morpholines-agricultural-use/china-hong-kong-sar/latvia/">China, Hong Kong SAR vs Latvia: Fung & Bact – Diazines, morpholines — Agricultural Use</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Fung & Bact – Diazines, morpholines — Agricultural Use
Unit
t
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
61 places, 912 data points, 1990–2024
Last refreshed

The FAOSTAT Pesticides Use domain contains statistics on the agricultural use of major pesticide groups and of relevant chemical families. Data are disseminated by country, with global coverage and are updated annually. The FAOSTAT Pesticides Use domain contains information on the use of major pesticide groups:1. Insecticides (Chlorinated hydrocarbons, Organo-phosphates, Carbamates-insecticides, Pyrethroids, Botanical and biological products and Others not elsewhere classified);2. Mineral Oils;3. Herbicides (Phenoxy hormone products, Triazines, Amides, Carbamates-herbicides, Dinitroanilines, Urea derivatives, Sulfonyl urea, Bipiridils, Uracil, Others not elsewhere classified);4. Fungicides and Bactericides (Inorganic, Dithiocarbamates, Benzimidazoles, Triazoles, Diazoles, Diazines, Morpholines, Others not elsewhere classified);5. Plant Growth Regulators;6. Rodenticides (Anti-coagulants, Cyanide Generators, Hypercalcaemics, Narcotics, Others not elsewhere classified);7. Other Pesticides NES (not elsewhere specified).