Israel vs Lithuania: Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape, Capital (central government)
Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape, Capital (central government) over time
- Israel
- Lithuania
How they compare
Israel currently reports 39.52 million USD against 27.5 million USD in Lithuania, a difference of 12.02 million USD.
That makes Israel's figure about 1.4 times Lithuania's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 8 shared years of data; in 2016 it was Israel ahead.
Israel ranks 8th and Lithuania ranks 11th of 63 countries.
Israel has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Israel | Lithuania | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 17.74 million USD | 9.21 million USD | 8.54 million USD | Israel |
| 2020s | 18.64 million USD | 18.01 million USD | 0.6325 million USD | Israel |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protection of biodiversity and landscape, capital (central government), Israel or Lithuania?
- Israel, at 39.52 million USD against 27.5 million USD in Lithuania as of 2024.
- What is the difference in protection of biodiversity and landscape, capital (central government) between Israel and Lithuania?
- 12.02 million USD, with Israel ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Israel and Lithuania?
- 8 years are reported by both, from 2016 to 2023.
- How do Israel and Lithuania rank globally for protection of biodiversity and landscape, capital (central government)?
- Israel ranks 8th and Lithuania ranks 11th of 63 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape, Capital (central government expenditure) — Value US$. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Statistics Division of FAO collects annually data on Government Expenditure on Agriculture through a questionnaire, which was developed in partnership with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF is the responsible institution for the Government Finance Statistics (GFS) methodology and annually collects GFS data, including Expenditure by Functions of Government (COFOG). The Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) is an international classification developed by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and published by the United Nations Statistical Division (UNSD), with the aim of categorise governments' functions according to their purposes. The FAO questionnaire aligns with Table 7 of the IMF GFS questionnaire, replicates the relevant aggregates and drills down to request additional detail related to Agriculture. The FAO dataset consists of a time series, from 2001 onwards, of Total Government Expenditure and expenditure in: Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, along with its three disaggregated subsectors of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing; and Environmental Protection. In addition, expenditure in each detailed function are further disaggregated into Recurrent and Capital expenditure. Additional indicators include the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure, and the Agriculture Orientation Index (ratio between the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure and the Agriculture Value Added as Share of GDP). Data are reported for the highest level of government available (Consolidated general government, consolidated central government or budgetary central government) and are available for about 100 countries on a regular basis.