Cuba vs Finland: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard

Cuba
0.0166 million SLC per square kilometre
in 2023
Finland
0.0151 million SLC per square kilometre
in 2023
Cuba rank
159th
Finland rank
160th

Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard over time

  • Cuba
  • Finland
0.010.020.030.040.05197019962023

How they compare

Cuba currently reports 0.0166 million SLC per square kilometre against 0.0151 million SLC per square kilometre in Finland, a difference of 0.0015 million SLC per square kilometre.

That makes Cuba's figure about 1.1 times Finland's.

Across all 54 years both countries report, Cuba has been ahead every year.

Cuba ranks 159th and Finland ranks 160th of 180 countries.

Cuba has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Cuba Finland Difference Ahead
1970s 0.0259 million SLC per square kilometre 0.011 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0149 million SLC per square kilometre Cuba
1980s 0.0428 million SLC per square kilometre 0.012 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0308 million SLC per square kilometre Cuba
1990s 0.0281 million SLC per square kilometre 0.012 million SLC per square kilometre 0.016 million SLC per square kilometre Cuba
2000s 0.0283 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0125 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0158 million SLC per square kilometre Cuba
2010s 0.0311 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0141 million SLC per square kilometre 0.017 million SLC per square kilometre Cuba
2020s 0.02 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0157 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0043 million SLC per square kilometre Cuba

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard, Cuba or Finland?
Cuba, at 0.0166 million SLC per square kilometre against 0.0151 million SLC per square kilometre in Finland as of 2023.
What is the difference in value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard between Cuba and Finland?
0.0015 million SLC per square kilometre, with Cuba ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cuba and Finland?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Cuba and Finland rank globally for value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard?
Cuba ranks 159th and Finland ranks 160th of 180 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard Local Currency, 2015 prices, per square kilometre. 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

Cuba vs Finland: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 12 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/value-added-agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-standard-local-currency-2015-prices-4/cuba/finland/

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/value-added-agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-standard-local-currency-2015-prices-4/cuba/finland/">Cuba vs Finland: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard Local Currency, 2015 prices, per square kilometre
Unit
million SLC per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
180 places, 8,977 data points, 1970–2023
Last refreshed

Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard Local Currency, 2015 prices divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.