Kazakhstan vs Serbia: Input — Cropland phosphorus
Input — Cropland phosphorus over time
- Kazakhstan
- Serbia
How they compare
Serbia currently reports 63,180 t against 61,165 t in Kazakhstan, a difference of 2,015 t.
The two have swapped places 7 times across 18 shared years of data; in 2006 it was Kazakhstan ahead.
Kazakhstan ranks 49th and Serbia ranks 46th of 201 countries.
Kazakhstan has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Kazakhstan | Serbia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 50,099 t | 47,396 t | 2,703 t | Kazakhstan |
| 2010s | 58,358 t | 50,635 t | 7,723 t | Kazakhstan |
| 2020s | 63,399 t | 57,606 t | 5,793 t | Kazakhstan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher input — cropland phosphorus, Kazakhstan or Serbia?
- Serbia, at 63,180 t against 61,165 t in Kazakhstan as of 2023.
- What is the difference in input — cropland phosphorus between Kazakhstan and Serbia?
- 2,015 t, with Serbia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kazakhstan and Serbia?
- 18 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2023.
- How do Kazakhstan and Serbia rank globally for input — cropland phosphorus?
- Kazakhstan ranks 49th and Serbia ranks 46th of 201 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Input — Cropland phosphorus. 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 (%).