Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) vs Namibia: Sawnwood, non-coniferous — Import value, annual growth rate

Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)
-17.91 % change on previous year
in 2024
Namibia
46.22 % change on previous year
in 2024
Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) rank
35th
Namibia rank
33rd

Sawnwood, non-coniferous — Import value, annual growth rate over time

  • Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)
  • Namibia
-1000100200196219932024

How they compare

Namibia currently reports 46.22 % change on previous year against -17.91 % change on previous year in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs), a difference of 64.13 % change on previous year.

That makes Namibia's figure about 2.6 times Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)'s.

The two have swapped places 9 times across 24 shared years of data; in 2001 it was Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) ahead.

Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) ranks 35th and Namibia ranks 33rd of 39 groups.

Across the 3 decades both report, Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) averaged higher in 1 and Namibia in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) Namibia Difference Ahead
2000s 16.02 % change on previous year 24.32 % change on previous year 8.29 % change on previous year Namibia
2010s 4.25 % change on previous year 15.1 % change on previous year 10.85 % change on previous year Namibia
2020s -6.74 % change on previous year -9.47 % change on previous year 2.73 % change on previous year Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher sawnwood, non-coniferous — import value, annual growth rate, Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) or Namibia?
Namibia, at 46.22 % change on previous year against -17.91 % change on previous year in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) as of 2024.
What is the difference in sawnwood, non-coniferous — import value, annual growth rate between Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) and Namibia?
64.13 % change on previous year, with Namibia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) and Namibia?
24 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2024.
How do Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) and Namibia rank globally for sawnwood, non-coniferous — import value, annual growth rate?
Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) ranks 35th and Namibia ranks 33rd of 39 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Sawnwood, non-coniferous — Import value, annual growth rate. 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

Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) vs Namibia: Sawnwood, non-coniferous — Import value, annual growth rate. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 08 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/sawnwood-non-coniferous-import-value-annual-growth-rate/low-income-food-deficit-countries-lifdcs/namibia/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/sawnwood-non-coniferous-import-value-annual-growth-rate/low-income-food-deficit-countries-lifdcs/namibia/">Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) vs Namibia: Sawnwood, non-coniferous — Import value, annual growth rate</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Sawnwood, non-coniferous — Import value, annual growth rate
Unit
% change on previous year
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
266 places, 11,283 data points, 1962–2024
Last refreshed

The year-on-year percentage change in Sawnwood, non-coniferous — Import value. Computed from consecutive annual observations; years either side of a gap are skipped rather than bridged.