How many years of comparable data are there for Malta and New Zealand?

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$, per capita. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Malta vs New Zealand: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, per

Malta

0.0156 million USD per person

in 2024

New Zealand

0.0027 million USD per person

in 2024

Malta rank

1st

New Zealand rank

4th

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

Malta
New Zealand

How they compare

Malta currently reports 0.0156 million USD per person against 0.0027 million USD per person in New Zealand, a difference of 0.0129 million USD per person.

That makes Malta's figure about 5.9 times New Zealand's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 55 shared years of data; in 1970 it was New Zealand ahead.

Malta ranks 1st and New Zealand ranks 4th of 180 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Malta averaged higher in 1 and New Zealand in 5.

Head to head by decade

Decade	Malta	New Zealand	Difference	Ahead
1970s	0.0001 million USD per person	0.0005 million USD per person	0.0004 million USD per person	New Zealand
1980s	0.0002 million USD per person	0.0007 million USD per person	0.0005 million USD per person	New Zealand
1990s	0.0002 million USD per person	0.001 million USD per person	0.0008 million USD per person	New Zealand
2000s	0.0003 million USD per person	0.0013 million USD per person	0.0011 million USD per person	New Zealand
2010s	0.0002 million USD per person	0.0023 million USD per person	0.0021 million USD per person	New Zealand
2020s	0.0033 million USD per person	0.0026 million USD per person	0.0008 million USD per person	Malta

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, per, Malta or New Zealand?: Malta, at 0.0156 million USD per person against 0.0027 million USD per person in New Zealand as of 2024.
What is the difference in value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, per between Malta and New Zealand?: 0.0129 million USD per person, with Malta ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Malta and New Zealand?: 55 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2024.
How do Malta and New Zealand rank globally for value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, per?: Malta ranks 1st and New Zealand ranks 4th of 180 countries.
Where does this data come from?: Statizoid (derived), published as Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 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

Malta vs New Zealand: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, per. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 12 September 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/value-added-agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-us-per-capita/malta/new-zealand/

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-per-capita/malta/new-zealand/">Malta vs New Zealand: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, per</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 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: 12 September 2026

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