Saint Kitts and Nevis vs Zambia: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard

Saint Kitts and Nevis
0.0007 million SLC per person
in 2024
Zambia
0.0008 million SLC per person
in 2024
Saint Kitts and Nevis rank
139th
Zambia rank
136th

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

  • Saint Kitts and Nevis
  • Zambia
000.0010.0010.001197019972024

How they compare

Zambia currently reports 0.0008 million SLC per person against 0.0007 million SLC per person in Saint Kitts and Nevis, a difference of 0.0001 million SLC per person.

That makes Zambia's figure about 1.1 times Saint Kitts and Nevis's.

The two have swapped places 5 times across 55 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Saint Kitts and Nevis ahead.

Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 139th and Zambia ranks 136th of 180 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Saint Kitts and Nevis averaged higher in 4 and Zambia in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Saint Kitts and Nevis Zambia Difference Ahead
1970s 0.0002 million SLC per person 0 million SLC per person 0.0002 million SLC per person Saint Kitts and Nevis
1980s 0.0004 million SLC per person 0 million SLC per person 0.0004 million SLC per person Saint Kitts and Nevis
1990s 0.0006 million SLC per person 0.0001 million SLC per person 0.0005 million SLC per person Saint Kitts and Nevis
2000s 0.0005 million SLC per person 0.0004 million SLC per person 0.0001 million SLC per person Saint Kitts and Nevis
2010s 0.0005 million SLC per person 0.0007 million SLC per person 0.0002 million SLC per person Zambia
2020s 0.0007 million SLC per person 0.0007 million SLC per person 0 million SLC per person Zambia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard, Saint Kitts and Nevis or Zambia?
Zambia, at 0.0008 million SLC per person against 0.0007 million SLC per person in Saint Kitts and Nevis as of 2024.
What is the difference in value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard between Saint Kitts and Nevis and Zambia?
0.0001 million SLC per person, with Zambia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Saint Kitts and Nevis and Zambia?
55 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2024.
How do Saint Kitts and Nevis and Zambia rank globally for value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard?
Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 139th and Zambia ranks 136th of 180 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard Local Currency, per capita. 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

Saint Kitts and Nevis vs Zambia: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 15 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/value-added-agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-standard-local-currency-per-capita/st-kitts-and-nevis/zambia/

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-per-capita/st-kitts-and-nevis/zambia/">Saint Kitts and Nevis vs Zambia: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard Local Currency, per capita
Unit
million SLC per person
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
180 places, 9,311 data points, 1970–2024
Last refreshed

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