Costa Rica vs Finland: Leaching — Cropland nitrogen
Leaching — Cropland nitrogen over time
- Costa Rica
- Finland
How they compare
Costa Rica currently reports 17,192 t against 15,980 t in Finland, a difference of 1,212 t.
That makes Costa Rica's figure about 1.1 times Finland's.
The two have swapped places 7 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Finland ahead.
Costa Rica ranks 84th and Finland ranks 87th of 201 countries.
Across the 7 decades both report, Costa Rica averaged higher in 1 and Finland in 6.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Costa Rica | Finland | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 3,677 t | 20,150 t | 16,473 t | Finland |
| 1970s | 6,076 t | 24,942 t | 18,866 t | Finland |
| 1980s | 8,318 t | 24,916 t | 16,598 t | Finland |
| 1990s | 11,974 t | 20,749 t | 8,775 t | Finland |
| 2000s | 12,633 t | 17,984 t | 5,352 t | Finland |
| 2010s | 16,451 t | 16,560 t | 109.01 t | Finland |
| 2020s | 16,341 t | 15,461 t | 880.38 t | Costa Rica |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher leaching — cropland nitrogen, Costa Rica or Finland?
- Costa Rica, at 17,192 t against 15,980 t in Finland as of 2023.
- What is the difference in leaching — cropland nitrogen between Costa Rica and Finland?
- 1,212 t, with Costa Rica ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Costa Rica and Finland?
- 63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
- How do Costa Rica and Finland rank globally for leaching — cropland nitrogen?
- Costa Rica ranks 84th and Finland ranks 87th of 201 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Leaching — Cropland nitrogen. 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 (%).