Brazil vs Sweden: Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape, Recurrent (central)
Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape, Recurrent (central) over time
- Brazil
- Sweden
How they compare
Sweden currently reports 2,077 million SLC against 1,850 million SLC in Brazil, a difference of 227 million SLC.
That makes Sweden's figure about 1.1 times Brazil's.
The two have swapped places 5 times across 15 shared years of data; in 2010 it was Brazil ahead.
Brazil ranks 15th and Sweden ranks 14th of 70 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Brazil averaged higher in 1 and Sweden in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Brazil | Sweden | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 1,427 million SLC | 1,292 million SLC | 135.35 million SLC | Brazil |
| 2020s | 1,539 million SLC | 2,042 million SLC | 503.6 million SLC | Sweden |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protection of biodiversity and landscape, recurrent (central), Brazil or Sweden?
- Sweden, at 2,077 million SLC against 1,850 million SLC in Brazil as of 2024.
- What is the difference in protection of biodiversity and landscape, recurrent (central) between Brazil and Sweden?
- 227 million SLC, with Sweden ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Brazil and Sweden?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2010 to 2024.
- How do Brazil and Sweden rank globally for protection of biodiversity and landscape, recurrent (central)?
- Brazil ranks 15th and Sweden ranks 14th of 70 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape, Recurrent (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.