Rwanda vs South Sudan: Input — Cropland phosphorus
Input — Cropland phosphorus over time
- Rwanda
- South Sudan
How they compare
Rwanda currently reports 10,724 t against 10,138 t in South Sudan, a difference of 586 t.
That makes Rwanda's figure about 1.1 times South Sudan's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 12 shared years of data; in 2012 it was South Sudan ahead.
Rwanda ranks 115th and South Sudan ranks 116th of 201 countries.
Rwanda has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Rwanda | South Sudan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 9,144 t | 8,892 t | 251.73 t | Rwanda |
| 2020s | 12,372 t | 9,959 t | 2,413 t | Rwanda |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher input — cropland phosphorus, Rwanda or South Sudan?
- Rwanda, at 10,724 t against 10,138 t in South Sudan as of 2023.
- What is the difference in input — cropland phosphorus between Rwanda and South Sudan?
- 586 t, with Rwanda ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Rwanda and South Sudan?
- 12 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2023.
- How do Rwanda and South Sudan rank globally for input — cropland phosphorus?
- Rwanda ranks 115th and South Sudan ranks 116th 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 (%).