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

Iceland
0.0119 million USD per square kilometre
in 2023
New Caledonia
0.0109 million USD per square kilometre
in 2023
Iceland rank
139th
New Caledonia rank
141st

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

  • Iceland
  • New Caledonia
00.0030.0050.0070.010.013197019962023

How they compare

Iceland currently reports 0.0119 million USD per square kilometre against 0.0109 million USD per square kilometre in New Caledonia, a difference of 0.001 million USD per square kilometre.

That makes Iceland's figure about 1.1 times New Caledonia's.

The two have swapped places 9 times across 54 shared years of data; in 1970 it was New Caledonia ahead.

Iceland ranks 139th and New Caledonia ranks 141st of 180 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Iceland New Caledonia Difference Ahead
1970s 0.0015 million USD per square kilometre 0.0013 million USD per square kilometre 0.0002 million USD per square kilometre Iceland
1980s 0.0037 million USD per square kilometre 0.0013 million USD per square kilometre 0.0025 million USD per square kilometre Iceland
1990s 0.0065 million USD per square kilometre 0.0033 million USD per square kilometre 0.0031 million USD per square kilometre Iceland
2000s 0.0075 million USD per square kilometre 0.0054 million USD per square kilometre 0.0021 million USD per square kilometre Iceland
2010s 0.0096 million USD per square kilometre 0.0092 million USD per square kilometre 0.0003 million USD per square kilometre Iceland
2020s 0.0113 million USD per square kilometre 0.0106 million USD per square kilometre 0.0007 million USD per square kilometre Iceland

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, per, Iceland or New Caledonia?
Iceland, at 0.0119 million USD per square kilometre against 0.0109 million USD per square kilometre in New Caledonia as of 2023.
What is the difference in value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, per between Iceland and New Caledonia?
0.001 million USD per square kilometre, with Iceland ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Iceland and New Caledonia?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Iceland and New Caledonia rank globally for value added (agriculture, forestry and fishing) — value us$, per?
Iceland ranks 139th and New Caledonia ranks 141st of 180 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, 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

Iceland vs New Caledonia: 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-square-kilometre/iceland/new-caledonia/

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-square-kilometre/iceland/new-caledonia/">Iceland vs New Caledonia: Value Added (Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing) — Value US$, per</a> — Statizoid

About this data

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