Congo vs Eswatini: Mineral fertilizers — Cropland potassium
Mineral fertilizers — Cropland potassium over time
- Congo
- Eswatini
How they compare
Congo currently reports 2,668 t against 2,479 t in Eswatini, a difference of 189 t.
That makes Congo's figure about 1.1 times Eswatini's.
The two have swapped places 11 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Eswatini ahead.
Congo ranks 127th and Eswatini ranks 130th of 201 countries.
Across the 7 decades both report, Congo averaged higher in 2 and Eswatini in 5.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Congo | Eswatini | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 1,213 t | 733.35 t | 479.28 t | Congo |
| 1970s | 2,233 t | 2,208 t | 25.23 t | Congo |
| 1980s | 982.97 t | 2,642 t | 1,659 t | Eswatini |
| 1990s | 873.99 t | 1,717 t | 843.2 t | Eswatini |
| 2000s | 590.21 t | 1,392 t | 802.03 t | Eswatini |
| 2010s | 599.51 t | 1,603 t | 1,004 t | Eswatini |
| 2020s | 2,058 t | 2,672 t | 614.61 t | Eswatini |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher mineral fertilizers — cropland potassium, Congo or Eswatini?
- Congo, at 2,668 t against 2,479 t in Eswatini as of 2023.
- What is the difference in mineral fertilizers — cropland potassium between Congo and Eswatini?
- 189 t, with Congo ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Congo and Eswatini?
- 63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
- How do Congo and Eswatini rank globally for mineral fertilizers — cropland potassium?
- Congo ranks 127th and Eswatini ranks 130th of 201 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Mineral fertilizers — 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 (%).