Greenland vs Zambia: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015

Greenland
0.0017 million USD per square kilometre
in 2023
Zambia
0.0013 million USD per square kilometre
in 2023
Greenland rank
172nd
Zambia rank
174th

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

  • Greenland
  • Zambia
0.0010.0010.0020.002197019962023

How they compare

Greenland currently reports 0.0017 million USD per square kilometre against 0.0013 million USD per square kilometre in Zambia, a difference of 0.0004 million USD per square kilometre.

That makes Greenland's figure about 1.3 times Zambia's.

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

Greenland ranks 172nd and Zambia ranks 174th of 180 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Greenland Zambia Difference Ahead
1970s 0.0007 million USD per square kilometre 0.001 million USD per square kilometre 0.0003 million USD per square kilometre Zambia
1980s 0.0009 million USD per square kilometre 0.0011 million USD per square kilometre 0.0002 million USD per square kilometre Zambia
1990s 0.0009 million USD per square kilometre 0.0015 million USD per square kilometre 0.0006 million USD per square kilometre Zambia
2000s 0.0011 million USD per square kilometre 0.0016 million USD per square kilometre 0.0005 million USD per square kilometre Zambia
2010s 0.0012 million USD per square kilometre 0.0015 million USD per square kilometre 0.0003 million USD per square kilometre Zambia
2020s 0.0015 million USD per square kilometre 0.0015 million USD per square kilometre 0 million USD per square kilometre Zambia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, 2015, Greenland or Zambia?
Greenland, at 0.0017 million USD per square kilometre against 0.0013 million USD per square kilometre in Zambia as of 2023.
What is the difference in value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, 2015 between Greenland and Zambia?
0.0004 million USD per square kilometre, with Greenland ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Greenland and Zambia?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Greenland and Zambia rank globally for value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, 2015?
Greenland ranks 172nd and Zambia ranks 174th of 180 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 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

Greenland vs Zambia: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 23 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/value-added-agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-us-2015-prices-per-square-kilometre/greenland/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-us-2015-prices-per-square-kilometre/greenland/zambia/">Greenland vs Zambia: 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 square kilometre
Unit
million USD per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
181 places, 9,031 data points, 1970–2023
Last refreshed

Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 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.