Malawi vs Zimbabwe: Nutrient balance — Cropland potassium use efficiency
Nutrient balance — Cropland potassium use efficiency over time
- Malawi
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Malawi currently reports 155.83 % against 153.13 % in Zimbabwe, a difference of 2.7 %.
Across all 63 years both countries report, Malawi has been ahead every year.
Malawi ranks 48th and Zimbabwe ranks 49th of 201 countries.
Malawi has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Malawi | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 220.76 % | 63.79 % | 156.97 % | Malawi |
| 1970s | 227.14 % | 66.02 % | 161.12 % | Malawi |
| 1980s | 205.89 % | 84.83 % | 121.06 % | Malawi |
| 1990s | 272.51 % | 79.55 % | 192.95 % | Malawi |
| 2000s | 299.62 % | 125.25 % | 174.37 % | Malawi |
| 2010s | 231.67 % | 108.66 % | 123.01 % | Malawi |
| 2020s | 162.33 % | 143.98 % | 18.35 % | Malawi |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher nutrient balance — cropland potassium use efficiency, Malawi or Zimbabwe?
- Malawi, at 155.83 % against 153.13 % in Zimbabwe as of 2023.
- What is the difference in nutrient balance — cropland potassium use efficiency between Malawi and Zimbabwe?
- 2.7 %, with Malawi ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Malawi and Zimbabwe?
- 63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
- How do Malawi and Zimbabwe rank globally for nutrient balance — cropland potassium use efficiency?
- Malawi ranks 48th and Zimbabwe ranks 49th of 201 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Nutrient balance — Cropland potassium use efficiency. 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 (%).