Costa Rica vs Serbia: Input — Cropland potassium
Input — Cropland potassium over time
- Costa Rica
- Serbia
How they compare
Costa Rica currently reports 100,103 t against 97,560 t in Serbia, a difference of 2,543 t.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 18 shared years of data; in 2006 it was Serbia ahead.
Costa Rica ranks 64th and Serbia ranks 67th of 201 countries.
Serbia has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Costa Rica | Serbia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 87,563 t | 133,976 t | 46,413 t | Serbia |
| 2010s | 91,715 t | 121,541 t | 29,825 t | Serbia |
| 2020s | 99,868 t | 112,257 t | 12,389 t | Serbia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher input — cropland potassium, Costa Rica or Serbia?
- Costa Rica, at 100,103 t against 97,560 t in Serbia as of 2023.
- What is the difference in input — cropland potassium between Costa Rica and Serbia?
- 2,543 t, with Costa Rica ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Costa Rica and Serbia?
- 18 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2023.
- How do Costa Rica and Serbia rank globally for input — cropland potassium?
- Costa Rica ranks 64th and Serbia ranks 67th of 201 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Input — 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 (%).