Norway vs Sweden: Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape (central government)
Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape (central government) over time
- Norway
- Sweden
How they compare
Norway currently reports 2,405 million SLC against 2,145 million SLC in Sweden, a difference of 260 million SLC.
That makes Norway's figure about 1.1 times Sweden's.
The two have swapped places 8 times across 24 shared years of data; in 2001 it was Norway ahead.
Norway ranks 26th and Sweden ranks 27th of 118 countries.
Sweden has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Norway | Sweden | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 808 million SLC | 908.56 million SLC | 100.56 million SLC | Sweden |
| 2010s | 1,575 million SLC | 1,608 million SLC | 32.8 million SLC | Sweden |
| 2020s | 2,079 million SLC | 2,197 million SLC | 118 million SLC | Sweden |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protection of biodiversity and landscape (central government), Norway or Sweden?
- Norway, at 2,405 million SLC against 2,145 million SLC in Sweden as of 2024.
- What is the difference in protection of biodiversity and landscape (central government) between Norway and Sweden?
- 260 million SLC, with Norway ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Norway and Sweden?
- 24 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2024.
- How do Norway and Sweden rank globally for protection of biodiversity and landscape (central government)?
- Norway ranks 26th and Sweden ranks 27th of 118 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape (central government expenditure) — Value Standard Local Currency. 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.