Croatia vs Nicaragua: Monoammonium phosphate (MAP) — Agricultural Use
Monoammonium phosphate (MAP) — Agricultural Use over time
- Croatia
- Nicaragua
How they compare
Nicaragua currently reports 4,146 t against 2,636 t in Croatia, a difference of 1,510 t.
That makes Nicaragua's figure about 1.6 times Croatia's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Croatia ahead.
Croatia ranks 34th and Nicaragua ranks 31st of 77 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Croatia averaged higher in 2 and Nicaragua in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Croatia | Nicaragua | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 56,957 t | 1,464 t | 55,494 t | Croatia |
| 2010s | 28,542 t | 5,539 t | 23,003 t | Croatia |
| 2020s | 4,095 t | 18,923 t | 14,828 t | Nicaragua |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher monoammonium phosphate (map) — agricultural use, Croatia or Nicaragua?
- Nicaragua, at 4,146 t against 2,636 t in Croatia as of 2022.
- What is the difference in monoammonium phosphate (map) — agricultural use between Croatia and Nicaragua?
- 1,510 t, with Nicaragua ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Croatia and Nicaragua?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2022.
- How do Croatia and Nicaragua rank globally for monoammonium phosphate (map) — agricultural use?
- Croatia ranks 34th and Nicaragua ranks 31st of 77 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Monoammonium phosphate (MAP) — Agricultural Use. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Fertilizers by Product dataset contains information on the Production, Trade and Agriculture Use of inorganic (chemical or mineral) fertilizers products. The fertilizer statistics data are for a set of 23 product categories. Both straight and compound fertilizers are included. Methodological details can be found at: https://files-faostat.fao.org/production/RFB/RFB_EN_README.pdf