Colombia vs Democratic Republic of the Congo: PK compounds — Agricultural Use
PK compounds — Agricultural Use over time
- Colombia
- Democratic Republic of the Congo
How they compare
Colombia currently reports 210,040 t against 8 t in Democratic Republic of the Congo, a difference of 210,032 t.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Colombia has been ahead every year.
Colombia ranks 3rd and Democratic Republic of the Congo ranks 2nd of 64 countries.
Colombia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Colombia | Democratic Republic of the Congo | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 899.33 t | 26 t | 873.33 t | Colombia |
| 2010s | 761.5 t | 7 t | 754.5 t | Colombia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher pk compounds — agricultural use, Colombia or Democratic Republic of the Congo?
- Colombia, at 210,040 t against 8 t in Democratic Republic of the Congo as of 2022.
- What is the difference in pk compounds — agricultural use between Colombia and Democratic Republic of the Congo?
- 210,032 t, with Colombia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Colombia and Democratic Republic of the Congo?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2007 to 2011.
- How do Colombia and Democratic Republic of the Congo rank globally for pk compounds — agricultural use?
- Colombia ranks 3rd and Democratic Republic of the Congo ranks 2nd of 64 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as PK compounds — Agricultural Use. 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