Pakistan vs Rwanda: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 2015

Pakistan
0.1103 million USD per square kilometre
in 2023
Rwanda
0.1115 million USD per square kilometre
in 2023
Pakistan rank
28th
Rwanda rank
26th

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

  • Pakistan
  • Rwanda
0.020.040.060.080.10.12197019962023

How they compare

Rwanda currently reports 0.1115 million USD per square kilometre against 0.1103 million USD per square kilometre in Pakistan, a difference of 0.0012 million USD per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 4 times across 54 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Rwanda ahead.

Pakistan ranks 28th and Rwanda ranks 26th of 180 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Pakistan averaged higher in 3 and Rwanda in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade Pakistan Rwanda Difference Ahead
1970s 0.0196 million USD per square kilometre 0.0241 million USD per square kilometre 0.0045 million USD per square kilometre Rwanda
1980s 0.0276 million USD per square kilometre 0.0369 million USD per square kilometre 0.0093 million USD per square kilometre Rwanda
1990s 0.0434 million USD per square kilometre 0.0303 million USD per square kilometre 0.0131 million USD per square kilometre Pakistan
2000s 0.0689 million USD per square kilometre 0.0497 million USD per square kilometre 0.0192 million USD per square kilometre Pakistan
2010s 0.0878 million USD per square kilometre 0.0813 million USD per square kilometre 0.0064 million USD per square kilometre Pakistan
2020s 0.1054 million USD per square kilometre 0.1077 million USD per square kilometre 0.0024 million USD per square kilometre Rwanda

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, 2015, Pakistan or Rwanda?
Rwanda, at 0.1115 million USD per square kilometre against 0.1103 million USD per square kilometre in Pakistan as of 2023.
What is the difference in value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, 2015 between Pakistan and Rwanda?
0.0012 million USD per square kilometre, with Rwanda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Pakistan and Rwanda?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Pakistan and Rwanda rank globally for value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, 2015?
Pakistan ranks 28th and Rwanda ranks 26th of 180 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 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

Pakistan vs Rwanda: 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/pakistan/rwanda/

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/pakistan/rwanda/">Pakistan vs Rwanda: 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.