Luxembourg vs Serbia: Other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — Import quantity
Other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — Import quantity over time
- Luxembourg
- Serbia
How they compare
Serbia currently reports 24.61 t against 23.16 t in Luxembourg, a difference of 1.45 t.
That makes Serbia's figure about 1.1 times Luxembourg's.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 16 shared years of data; in 2007 it was Serbia ahead.
Luxembourg ranks 129th and Serbia ranks 126th of 189 countries.
Serbia has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Luxembourg | Serbia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 2.83 t | 24 t | 21.17 t | Serbia |
| 2010s | 39.9 t | 206.74 t | 166.84 t | Serbia |
| 2020s | 24.67 t | 107 t | 82.33 t | Serbia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — import quantity, Luxembourg or Serbia?
- Serbia, at 24.61 t against 23.16 t in Luxembourg as of 2024.
- What is the difference in other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — import quantity between Luxembourg and Serbia?
- 1.45 t, with Serbia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Luxembourg and Serbia?
- 16 years are reported by both, from 2007 to 2024.
- How do Luxembourg and Serbia rank globally for other phosphatic fertilizers, n.e.c. — import quantity?
- Luxembourg ranks 129th and Serbia ranks 126th of 189 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