Dominican Republic vs Ethiopia: Nutrient balance — Cropland potassium
Nutrient balance — Cropland potassium over time
- Dominican Republic
- Ethiopia
How they compare
Ethiopia currently reports -123,533 t against -204,104 t in Dominican Republic, a difference of 80,571 t.
The two have swapped places 9 times across 31 shared years of data; in 1993 it was Dominican Republic ahead.
Dominican Republic ranks 180th and Ethiopia ranks 177th of 186 countries.
Across the 4 decades both report, Dominican Republic averaged higher in 2 and Ethiopia in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Dominican Republic | Ethiopia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 7,497 t | -9,166 t | 16,663 t | Dominican Republic |
| 2000s | -33,891 t | -32,240 t | 1,651 t | Ethiopia |
| 2010s | -77,228 t | -89,515 t | 12,287 t | Dominican Republic |
| 2020s | -153,290 t | -125,337 t | 27,953 t | Ethiopia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher nutrient balance — cropland potassium, Dominican Republic or Ethiopia?
- Ethiopia, at -123,533 t against -204,104 t in Dominican Republic as of 2023.
- What is the difference in nutrient balance — cropland potassium between Dominican Republic and Ethiopia?
- 80,571 t, with Ethiopia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Dominican Republic and Ethiopia?
- 31 years are reported by both, from 1993 to 2023.
- How do Dominican Republic and Ethiopia rank globally for nutrient balance — cropland potassium?
- Dominican Republic ranks 180th and Ethiopia ranks 177th of 186 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
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 (%).