Azerbaijan vs Chile: Outputs — Cropland phosphorus
Outputs — Cropland phosphorus over time
- Azerbaijan
- Chile
How they compare
Chile currently reports 18,599 t against 17,994 t in Azerbaijan, a difference of 605 t.
Across all 32 years both countries report, Chile has been ahead every year.
Azerbaijan ranks 92nd and Chile ranks 90th of 201 countries.
Chile has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Azerbaijan | Chile | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 7,578 t | 16,900 t | 9,322 t | Chile |
| 2000s | 11,120 t | 19,544 t | 8,424 t | Chile |
| 2010s | 14,093 t | 22,591 t | 8,498 t | Chile |
| 2020s | 18,280 t | 19,614 t | 1,334 t | Chile |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher outputs — cropland phosphorus, Azerbaijan or Chile?
- Chile, at 18,599 t against 17,994 t in Azerbaijan as of 2023.
- What is the difference in outputs — cropland phosphorus between Azerbaijan and Chile?
- 605 t, with Chile ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Azerbaijan and Chile?
- 32 years are reported by both, from 1992 to 2023.
- How do Azerbaijan and Chile rank globally for outputs — cropland phosphorus?
- Azerbaijan ranks 92nd and Chile ranks 90th of 201 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Outputs — Cropland phosphorus. 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 (%).