India vs Rwanda: Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per

India
121.63 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Rwanda
115.09 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
India rank
3rd
Rwanda rank
4th

Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per over time

  • India
  • Rwanda
255075100125196119922023

How they compare

India currently reports 121.63 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 115.09 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Rwanda, a difference of 6.54 1000 Int$ per square kilometre.

That makes India's figure about 1.1 times Rwanda's.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Rwanda ahead.

India ranks 3rd and Rwanda ranks 4th of 172 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, India averaged higher in 1 and Rwanda in 6.

Head to head by decade

Decade India Rwanda Difference Ahead
1960s 24.23 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 31.68 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 7.45 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
1970s 30.71 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 46.8 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 16.1 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
1980s 40.07 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 64.89 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 24.82 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
1990s 56.38 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 63.54 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 7.16 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
2000s 68.25 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 89.92 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 21.67 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
2010s 95.48 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 106.95 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 11.47 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
2020s 115.99 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 112.38 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 3.61 1000 Int$ per square kilometre India

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher crops — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand i$), per, India or Rwanda?
India, at 121.63 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 115.09 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Rwanda as of 2023.
What is the difference in crops — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand i$), per between India and Rwanda?
6.54 1000 Int$ per square kilometre, with India ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for India and Rwanda?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do India and Rwanda rank globally for crops — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand i$), per?
India ranks 3rd and Rwanda ranks 4th of 172 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), 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

India vs Rwanda: Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 05 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/crops-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-square-kilometre/india/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://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/crops-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-square-kilometre/india/rwanda/">India vs Rwanda: Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per square kilometre
Unit
1000 Int$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
173 places, 9,829 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$) 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.