Brazil vs El Salvador: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard

Brazil
0.0789 million SLC per square kilometre
in 2023
El Salvador
0.0756 million SLC per square kilometre
in 2023
Brazil rank
128th
El Salvador rank
131st

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

  • Brazil
  • El Salvador
00.020.040.060.08197019962023

How they compare

Brazil currently reports 0.0789 million SLC per square kilometre against 0.0756 million SLC per square kilometre in El Salvador, a difference of 0.0033 million SLC per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 54 shared years of data; in 1970 it was El Salvador ahead.

Brazil ranks 128th and El Salvador ranks 131st of 180 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Brazil El Salvador Difference Ahead
1970s 0 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0223 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0223 million SLC per square kilometre El Salvador
1980s 0 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0346 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0346 million SLC per square kilometre El Salvador
1990s 0.0029 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0448 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0418 million SLC per square kilometre El Salvador
2000s 0.0124 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0455 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0331 million SLC per square kilometre El Salvador
2010s 0.0303 million SLC per square kilometre 0.065 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0348 million SLC per square kilometre El Salvador
2020s 0.0678 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0699 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0021 million SLC per square kilometre El Salvador

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard, Brazil or El Salvador?
Brazil, at 0.0789 million SLC per square kilometre against 0.0756 million SLC per square kilometre in El Salvador as of 2023.
What is the difference in value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard between Brazil and El Salvador?
0.0033 million SLC per square kilometre, with Brazil ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Brazil and El Salvador?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Brazil and El Salvador rank globally for value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard?
Brazil ranks 128th and El Salvador ranks 131st of 180 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard Local Currency, 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

Brazil vs El Salvador: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 13 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/value-added-agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-standard-local-currency-per-square/brazil/el-salvador/

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-square/brazil/el-salvador/">Brazil vs El Salvador: 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 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 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.