Latvia vs Slovakia: Input — Cropland potassium
Input — Cropland potassium over time
- Latvia
- Slovakia
How they compare
Latvia currently reports 40,078 t against 37,790 t in Slovakia, a difference of 2,288 t.
That makes Latvia's figure about 1.1 times Slovakia's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 31 shared years of data; in 1993 it was Latvia ahead.
Latvia ranks 93rd and Slovakia ranks 95th of 186 countries.
Across the 4 decades both report, Latvia averaged higher in 1 and Slovakia in 3.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Latvia | Slovakia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 56,482 t | 74,679 t | 18,197 t | Slovakia |
| 2000s | 35,720 t | 53,061 t | 17,342 t | Slovakia |
| 2010s | 43,296 t | 43,621 t | 324.53 t | Slovakia |
| 2020s | 45,868 t | 41,724 t | 4,143 t | Latvia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher input — cropland potassium, Latvia or Slovakia?
- Latvia, at 40,078 t against 37,790 t in Slovakia as of 2023.
- What is the difference in input — cropland potassium between Latvia and Slovakia?
- 2,288 t, with Latvia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Slovakia?
- 31 years are reported by both, from 1993 to 2023.
- How do Latvia and Slovakia rank globally for input — cropland potassium?
- Latvia ranks 93rd and Slovakia ranks 95th of 186 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 (%).