Kazakhstan vs Kenya: Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape, Recurrent (central)
Protection of Biodiversity and Landscape, Recurrent (central) over time
- Kazakhstan
- Kenya
How they compare
Kenya currently reports 7,429 million SLC against 2,258 million SLC in Kazakhstan, a difference of 5,171 million SLC.
That makes Kenya's figure about 3.3 times Kazakhstan's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 7 shared years of data; in 2009 it was Kazakhstan ahead.
Kazakhstan ranks 13th and Kenya ranks 10th of 70 countries.
Kazakhstan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Kazakhstan | Kenya | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 6,921 million SLC | 1,139 million SLC | 5,782 million SLC | Kazakhstan |
| 2010s | 7,081 million SLC | 2,994 million SLC | 4,087 million SLC | Kazakhstan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protection of biodiversity and landscape, recurrent (central), Kazakhstan or Kenya?
- Kenya, at 7,429 million SLC against 2,258 million SLC in Kazakhstan as of 2024.
- What is the difference in protection of biodiversity and landscape, recurrent (central) between Kazakhstan and Kenya?
- 5,171 million SLC, with Kenya ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kazakhstan and Kenya?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2009 to 2015.
- How do Kazakhstan and Kenya rank globally for protection of biodiversity and landscape, recurrent (central)?
- Kazakhstan ranks 13th and Kenya ranks 10th 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.