Singapore vs Vanuatu: Nutrient potash K2O (total) — Agricultural Use, per capita
Singapore
0 t per person
in 2024
Vanuatu
0 t per person
in 2024
Singapore rank
163rd
Vanuatu rank
164th
Nutrient potash K2O (total) — Agricultural Use, per capita over time
- Singapore
- Vanuatu
How they compare
Singapore currently reports 0 t per person against 0 t per person in Vanuatu, a difference of 0 t per person.
That makes Singapore's figure about 1.3 times Vanuatu's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 23 shared years of data; in 2002 it was Vanuatu ahead.
Singapore ranks 163rd and Vanuatu ranks 164th of 173 countries.
Vanuatu has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Singapore | Vanuatu | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0 t per person | 0.0017 t per person | 0.0017 t per person | Vanuatu |
| 2010s | 0 t per person | 0.0048 t per person | 0.0048 t per person | Vanuatu |
| 2020s | 0 t per person | 0.0032 t per person | 0.0032 t per person | Vanuatu |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher nutrient potash k2o (total) — agricultural use, per capita, Singapore or Vanuatu?
- Singapore, at 0 t per person against 0 t per person in Vanuatu as of 2024.
- What is the difference in nutrient potash k2o (total) — agricultural use, per capita between Singapore and Vanuatu?
- 0 t per person, with Singapore ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Singapore and Vanuatu?
- 23 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2024.
- How do Singapore and Vanuatu rank globally for nutrient potash k2o (total) — agricultural use, per capita?
- Singapore ranks 163rd and Vanuatu ranks 164th of 173 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Nutrient potash K2O (total) — Agricultural Use, per capita. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Nutrient potash K2O (total) — Agricultural Use divided by Population, total, matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.