Kyrgyzstan vs Latvia: Other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — Import quantity
Other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — Import quantity over time
- Kyrgyzstan
- Latvia
How they compare
Kyrgyzstan currently reports 69 t against 60 t in Latvia, a difference of 9 t.
That makes Kyrgyzstan's figure about 1.1 times Latvia's.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 5 shared years of data; in 2004 it was Latvia ahead.
Kyrgyzstan ranks 92nd and Latvia ranks 95th of 174 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Kyrgyzstan averaged higher in 1 and Latvia in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Kyrgyzstan | Latvia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.4 t | 3,495 t | 3,495 t | Latvia |
| 2010s | 1,337 t | 75.65 t | 1,262 t | Kyrgyzstan |
| 2020s | 806.7 t | 3,727 t | 2,920 t | Latvia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — import quantity, Kyrgyzstan or Latvia?
- Kyrgyzstan, at 69 t against 60 t in Latvia as of 2022.
- What is the difference in other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — import quantity between Kyrgyzstan and Latvia?
- 9 t, with Kyrgyzstan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kyrgyzstan and Latvia?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2022.
- How do Kyrgyzstan and Latvia rank globally for other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — import quantity?
- Kyrgyzstan ranks 92nd and Latvia ranks 95th of 174 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — Import quantity. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
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