Marshall Islands vs Norway: Land use hidden — Permanent meadows and pastures, per square kilometre

Marshall Islands
0.0056 Square kilometres per square kilometre
in 2020
Norway
0.0048 Square kilometres per square kilometre
in 2023
Marshall Islands rank
157th
Norway rank
158th

Land use hidden — Permanent meadows and pastures, per square kilometre over time

  • Marshall Islands
  • Norway
00.050.10.15196119922023

How they compare

Marshall Islands currently reports 0.0056 Square kilometres per square kilometre against 0.0048 Square kilometres per square kilometre in Norway, a difference of 0.0008 Square kilometres per square kilometre.

That makes Marshall Islands's figure about 1.1 times Norway's.

Across all 30 years both countries report, Marshall Islands has been ahead every year.

Marshall Islands ranks 157th and Norway ranks 158th of 167 countries.

Marshall Islands has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Marshall Islands Norway Difference Ahead
1990s 0.1667 Square kilometres per square kilometre 0.0036 Square kilometres per square kilometre 0.1631 Square kilometres per square kilometre Marshall Islands
2000s 0.1667 Square kilometres per square kilometre 0.0046 Square kilometres per square kilometre 0.1621 Square kilometres per square kilometre Marshall Islands
2010s 0.0539 Square kilometres per square kilometre 0.0049 Square kilometres per square kilometre 0.049 Square kilometres per square kilometre Marshall Islands
2020s 0.0056 Square kilometres per square kilometre 0.0049 Square kilometres per square kilometre 0.0007 Square kilometres per square kilometre Marshall Islands

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher land use hidden — permanent meadows and pastures, per square kilometre, Marshall Islands or Norway?
Marshall Islands, at 0.0056 Square kilometres per square kilometre against 0.0048 Square kilometres per square kilometre in Norway as of 2020.
What is the difference in land use hidden — permanent meadows and pastures, per square kilometre between Marshall Islands and Norway?
0.0008 Square kilometres per square kilometre, with Marshall Islands ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Marshall Islands and Norway?
30 years are reported by both, from 1991 to 2020.
How do Marshall Islands and Norway rank globally for land use hidden — permanent meadows and pastures, per square kilometre?
Marshall Islands ranks 157th and Norway ranks 158th of 167 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Land use hidden — Permanent meadows and pastures, per square kilometre. 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

Marshall Islands vs Norway: Land use hidden — Permanent meadows and pastures, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 02 October 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/land-use-hidden-permanent-meadows-and-pastures-per-square-kilometre/marshall-islands/norway/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/land-use-hidden-permanent-meadows-and-pastures-per-square-kilometre/marshall-islands/norway/">Marshall Islands vs Norway: Land use hidden — Permanent meadows and pastures, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Land use hidden — Permanent meadows and pastures, per square kilometre
Unit
Square kilometres per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
167 places, 9,813 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Land use hidden — Permanent meadows and pastures divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.