Ecuador vs Guinea: NPK fertilizers — Agricultural Use

Ecuador
11,313 t
in 2023
Guinea
11,710 t
in 2018
Ecuador rank
72nd
Guinea rank
71st

NPK fertilizers — Agricultural Use over time

  • Ecuador
  • Guinea
020.0k40.0k60.0k80.0k200220122023

How they compare

Guinea currently reports 11,710 t against 11,313 t in Ecuador, a difference of 397 t.

Across all 13 years both countries report, Ecuador has been ahead every year.

Ecuador ranks 72nd and Guinea ranks 71st of 130 countries.

Ecuador has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Ecuador Guinea Difference Ahead
2000s 19,512 t 1,186 t 18,326 t Ecuador
2010s 37,331 t 8,625 t 28,706 t Ecuador

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher npk fertilizers — agricultural use, Ecuador or Guinea?
Guinea, at 11,710 t against 11,313 t in Ecuador as of 2018.
What is the difference in npk fertilizers — agricultural use between Ecuador and Guinea?
397 t, with Guinea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Guinea?
13 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2018.
How do Ecuador and Guinea rank globally for npk fertilizers — agricultural use?
Ecuador ranks 72nd and Guinea ranks 71st of 130 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as NPK fertilizers — Agricultural Use. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
NPK fertilizers — Agricultural Use
Unit
t
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
131 places, 1,535 data points, 2002–2024
Last refreshed

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