Singapore vs Tuvalu: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value Standard

Singapore
0.2726 million SLC per square kilometre
in 2023
Tuvalu
0.2928 million SLC per square kilometre
in 2023
Singapore rank
102nd
Tuvalu rank
99th

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

  • Singapore
  • Tuvalu
00.20.40.6197019962023

How they compare

Tuvalu currently reports 0.2928 million SLC per square kilometre against 0.2726 million SLC per square kilometre in Singapore, a difference of 0.0202 million SLC per square kilometre.

That makes Tuvalu's figure about 1.1 times Singapore's.

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

Singapore ranks 102nd and Tuvalu ranks 99th of 180 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Singapore averaged higher in 3 and Tuvalu in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade Singapore Tuvalu Difference Ahead
1970s 0.3836 million SLC per square kilometre 0.014 million SLC per square kilometre 0.3696 million SLC per square kilometre Singapore
1980s 0.5295 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0326 million SLC per square kilometre 0.4969 million SLC per square kilometre Singapore
1990s 0.2776 million SLC per square kilometre 0.1149 million SLC per square kilometre 0.1628 million SLC per square kilometre Singapore
2000s 0.1739 million SLC per square kilometre 0.2072 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0333 million SLC per square kilometre Tuvalu
2010s 0.1938 million SLC per square kilometre 0.2477 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0539 million SLC per square kilometre Tuvalu
2020s 0.2491 million SLC per square kilometre 0.2532 million SLC per square kilometre 0.0041 million SLC per square kilometre Tuvalu

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard, Singapore or Tuvalu?
Tuvalu, at 0.2928 million SLC per square kilometre against 0.2726 million SLC per square kilometre in Singapore as of 2023.
What is the difference in value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard between Singapore and Tuvalu?
0.0202 million SLC per square kilometre, with Tuvalu ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Singapore and Tuvalu?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Singapore and Tuvalu rank globally for value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value standard?
Singapore ranks 102nd and Tuvalu ranks 99th 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

Singapore vs Tuvalu: 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-per-square/singapore/tuvalu/

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/singapore/tuvalu/">Singapore vs Tuvalu: 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.