Eritrea vs Libya: Cereal production index

Eritrea
102.03 gross, 1999-2001 = 100
in 2011
Libya
99.14 gross, 1999-2001 = 100
in 2011
Eritrea rank
37th
Libya rank
39th

Cereal production index over time

  • Eritrea
  • Libya
050100150200196119862011

How they compare

Eritrea currently reports 102.03 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 against 99.14 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 in Libya, a difference of 2.89 gross, 1999-2001 = 100.

The two have swapped places 7 times across 19 shared years of data; in 1993 it was Libya ahead.

Eritrea ranks 37th and Libya ranks 39th of 51 countries.

Libya has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Eritrea Libya Difference Ahead
1990s 74.15 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 86.72 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 12.57 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 Libya
2000s 78.25 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 98.55 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 20.31 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 Libya
2010s 97.73 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 98.21 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 0.48 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 Libya

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher cereal production index, Eritrea or Libya?
Eritrea, at 102.03 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 against 99.14 gross, 1999-2001 = 100 in Libya as of 2011.
What is the difference in cereal production index between Eritrea and Libya?
2.89 gross, 1999-2001 = 100, with Eritrea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Eritrea and Libya?
19 years are reported by both, from 1993 to 2011.
How do Eritrea and Libya rank globally for cereal production index?
Eritrea ranks 37th and Libya ranks 39th of 51 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization, electronic files and web site, published as Cereal production index (gross, 1999-2001 = 100). 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

Eritrea vs Libya: Cereal production index. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization, electronic files and web site. Retrieved 24 August 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/cereal-production-index-gross-1999-2001-100/eritrea/libya/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/cereal-production-index-gross-1999-2001-100/eritrea/libya/">Eritrea vs Libya: Cereal production index</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Cereal production index (gross, 1999-2001 = 100)
Unit
gross, 1999-2001 = 100
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization, electronic files and web site
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
52 places, 2,567 data points, 1961–2011
Last refreshed

Cereal production index covers cereals that are considered edible and that contain nutrients. The FAO indices of agricultural production show the relative level of the aggregate volume of agricultural production for each year in comparison with the base period 2004-2006. They are based on the sum of price-weighted quantities of different agricultural commodities produced after deductions of quantities used as seed and feed weighted in a similar manner. The resulting aggregate represents, therefore, disposable production for any use except as seed and feed. All the indices at the country, regional and world levels are calculated by the Laspeyres formula. Production quantities of each commodity are weighted by 2004-2006 average international commodity prices and summed for each year. To obtain the index, the aggregate for a given year is divided by the average aggregate for the base period 2004-2006. Since the FAO indices are based on the concept of agriculture as a single enterprise, amounts of seed and feed are subtracted from the production data to avoid double counting them, once in the production data and once with the crops or livestock produced from them. Deductions for seed (in the case of eggs, for hatching) and for livestock and poultry feed apply to both domestically produced and imported commodities. They cover only primary agricultural products destined to animal feed (e.g. maize, potatoes, milk, etc.). Processed and semi-processed feed items such as bran, oilcakes, meals and molasses have been completely excluded from the calculations at all stages. should be noted that when calculating indices of agricultural, food and nonfood production, all intermediate primary inputs of agricultural origin are deducted. However, for indices of any other commodity group, only inputs originating from within the same group are deducted; thus, only seed is removed from the group “crops” and from all crop subgroups, such as cereals, oil crops, etc.; and both feed and seed originating from within the livestock sector (e.g. milk feed, hatching eggs) are removed from the group “livestock products”. For the main two livestock subgroups, namely, meat and milk, only feed originating from the respective subgroup is removed. The ”international commodity prices” are used in order to avoid the use of exchange rates for obtaining continental and world aggregates, and also to improve and facilitate international comparative analysis of productivity at the national level. These” international prices”, expressed in so-called ""international dollars”, are derived using a Geary-Khamis formula for the agricultural sector. This method assigns a single “price” to each commodity. For example, one metric ton of wheat has the same price regardless of the country where it was produced. The currency unit in which the prices are expressed has no influence on the indices published. The commodities covered in the computation of indices of agricultural production are all crops and livestock products originating in each country. Practically all products are covered, with the main exception of fodder crops. The category of food production includes commodities that are considered edible and that contain nutrients. Accordingly, coffee and tea are excluded along with inedible commodities because, although edible, they have practically no nutritive value. Aggregates are the sum of available data.