China, Hong Kong SAR vs Netherlands (Kingdom of the): Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape (general government)

China, Hong Kong SAR
1,400 million SLC
in 2023
Netherlands (Kingdom of the)
1,452 million SLC
in 2023
China, Hong Kong SAR rank
28th
Netherlands (Kingdom of the) rank
27th

Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape (general government) over time

  • China, Hong Kong SAR
  • Netherlands (Kingdom of the)
05001.0k1.5k200120122023

How they compare

Netherlands (Kingdom of the) currently reports 1,452 million SLC against 1,400 million SLC in China, Hong Kong SAR, a difference of 52 million SLC.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 22 shared years of data; in 2002 it was Netherlands (Kingdom of the) ahead.

China, Hong Kong SAR ranks 28th and Netherlands (Kingdom of the) ranks 27th of 79 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, China, Hong Kong SAR averaged higher in 1 and Netherlands (Kingdom of the) in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade China, Hong Kong SAR Netherlands (Kingdom of the) Difference Ahead
2000s 0 million SLC 733.5 million SLC 733.5 million SLC Netherlands (Kingdom of the)
2010s 350 million SLC 852.2 million SLC 502.2 million SLC Netherlands (Kingdom of the)
2020s 1,300 million SLC 1,241 million SLC 59.25 million SLC China, Hong Kong SAR

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher protection of biodiversity and landscape (general government), China, Hong Kong SAR or Netherlands (Kingdom of the)?
Netherlands (Kingdom of the), at 1,452 million SLC against 1,400 million SLC in China, Hong Kong SAR as of 2023.
What is the difference in protection of biodiversity and landscape (general government) between China, Hong Kong SAR and Netherlands (Kingdom of the)?
52 million SLC, with Netherlands (Kingdom of the) ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for China, Hong Kong SAR and Netherlands (Kingdom of the)?
22 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2023.
How do China, Hong Kong SAR and Netherlands (Kingdom of the) rank globally for protection of biodiversity and landscape (general government)?
China, Hong Kong SAR ranks 28th and Netherlands (Kingdom of the) ranks 27th of 79 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape (general government expenditure) — Value Standard Local Currency. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

China, Hong Kong SAR vs Netherlands (Kingdom of the): Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape (general government). Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved 18 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/protection-of-biodiversity-and-landscape-general-government-expenditure-value-standard/china-hong-kong-sar/netherlands-kingdom-of-the/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/protection-of-biodiversity-and-landscape-general-government-expenditure-value-standard/china-hong-kong-sar/netherlands-kingdom-of-the/">China, Hong Kong SAR vs Netherlands (Kingdom of the): Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape (general government)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape (general government expenditure) — Value Standard Local Currency
Unit
million SLC
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
82 places, 1,360 data points, 2001–2024
Last refreshed

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.