How many years of comparable data are there for Belgium and Nepal?

55 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2024.

Where does this data come from?

Statizoid (derived), published as Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015 prices, per capita. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Belgium vs Nepal: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015

Belgium

0.0003 million USD per person

in 2024

Nepal

0.0003 million USD per person

in 2024

Belgium rank

117th

Nepal rank

120th

Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015 over time

Belgium
Nepal

How they compare

Belgium currently reports 0.0003 million USD per person against 0.0003 million USD per person in Nepal, a difference of 0 million USD per person.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 55 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Nepal ahead.

Belgium ranks 117th and Nepal ranks 120th of 180 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Belgium averaged higher in 5 and Nepal in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade	Belgium	Nepal	Difference	Ahead
1970s	0.0001 million USD per person	0.0001 million USD per person	0 million USD per person	Nepal
1980s	0.0002 million USD per person	0.0001 million USD per person	0 million USD per person	Belgium
1990s	0.0002 million USD per person	0.0001 million USD per person	0.0001 million USD per person	Belgium
2000s	0.0002 million USD per person	0.0002 million USD per person	0.0001 million USD per person	Belgium
2010s	0.0003 million USD per person	0.0002 million USD per person	0.0001 million USD per person	Belgium
2020s	0.0003 million USD per person	0.0003 million USD per person	0 million USD per person	Belgium

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, 2015, Belgium or Nepal?: Belgium, at 0.0003 million USD per person against 0.0003 million USD per person in Nepal as of 2024.
What is the difference in value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, 2015 between Belgium and Nepal?: 0 million USD per person, with Belgium ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Belgium and Nepal?: 55 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2024.
How do Belgium and Nepal rank globally for value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, 2015?: Belgium ranks 117th and Nepal ranks 120th of 180 countries.
Where does this data come from?: Statizoid (derived), published as Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015 prices, 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

Belgium vs Nepal: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 11 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/value-added-agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-us-2015-prices-per-capita/belgium/nepal/

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-us-2015-prices-per-capita/belgium/nepal/">Belgium vs Nepal: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015 prices, per capita
Unit: million USD per person
Source: Statizoid (derived)
Licence: Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage: 181 places, 9,366 data points, 1970–2024
Last refreshed: 11 September 2026

Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015 prices divided by Population, total, matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.