Chile vs Latvia: Nutrient balance — Cropland potassium

Chile
25,880 t
in 2023
Latvia
22,114 t
in 2023
Chile rank
57th
Latvia rank
60th

Nutrient balance — Cropland potassium over time

  • Chile
  • Latvia
025.0k50.0k75.0k100.0k196119922023

How they compare

Chile currently reports 25,880 t against 22,114 t in Latvia, a difference of 3,766 t.

That makes Chile's figure about 1.2 times Latvia's.

The two have swapped places 7 times across 32 shared years of data; in 1992 it was Latvia ahead.

Chile ranks 57th and Latvia ranks 60th of 201 countries.

Latvia has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Chile Latvia Difference Ahead
1990s 38,967 t 52,307 t 13,339 t Latvia
2000s 21,573 t 23,170 t 1,598 t Latvia
2010s 7,853 t 26,678 t 18,825 t Latvia
2020s 21,418 t 25,834 t 4,416 t Latvia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher nutrient balance — cropland potassium, Chile or Latvia?
Chile, at 25,880 t against 22,114 t in Latvia as of 2023.
What is the difference in nutrient balance — cropland potassium between Chile and Latvia?
3,766 t, with Chile ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Chile and Latvia?
32 years are reported by both, from 1992 to 2023.
How do Chile and Latvia rank globally for nutrient balance — cropland potassium?
Chile ranks 57th and Latvia ranks 60th of 201 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Nutrient balance — Cropland potassium. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Nutrient balance — Cropland potassium
Unit
t
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
233 places, 13,500 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

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 (%).