Guinea vs Rwanda: Crops: Gross Production Value (constant) … square kilometre SLC

Guinea
63,306 1000 SLC per square kilometre
in 2023
Rwanda
108,501 1000 SLC per square kilometre
in 2023
Guinea rank
7th
Rwanda rank
5th

Crops: Gross Production Value (constant) … square kilometre SLC over time

  • Guinea
  • Rwanda
025.0k50.0k75.0k100.0k125.0k196119922023

How they compare

Rwanda currently reports 108,501 1000 SLC per square kilometre against 63,306 1000 SLC per square kilometre in Guinea, a difference of 45,195 1000 SLC per square kilometre.

That makes Rwanda's figure about 1.7 times Guinea's.

Across all 63 years both countries report, Rwanda has been ahead every year.

Guinea ranks 7th and Rwanda ranks 5th of 142 countries.

Rwanda has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Guinea Rwanda Difference Ahead
1960s 10,367 1000 SLC per square kilometre 37,934 1000 SLC per square kilometre 27,567 1000 SLC per square kilometre Rwanda
1970s 11,612 1000 SLC per square kilometre 54,741 1000 SLC per square kilometre 43,129 1000 SLC per square kilometre Rwanda
1980s 13,485 1000 SLC per square kilometre 71,886 1000 SLC per square kilometre 58,401 1000 SLC per square kilometre Rwanda
1990s 19,083 1000 SLC per square kilometre 69,426 1000 SLC per square kilometre 50,343 1000 SLC per square kilometre Rwanda
2000s 25,782 1000 SLC per square kilometre 92,295 1000 SLC per square kilometre 66,512 1000 SLC per square kilometre Rwanda
2010s 38,888 1000 SLC per square kilometre 102,201 1000 SLC per square kilometre 63,314 1000 SLC per square kilometre Rwanda
2020s 57,300 1000 SLC per square kilometre 105,639 1000 SLC per square kilometre 48,339 1000 SLC per square kilometre Rwanda

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher crops — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand slc), per, Guinea or Rwanda?
Rwanda, at 108,501 1000 SLC per square kilometre against 63,306 1000 SLC per square kilometre in Guinea as of 2023.
What is the difference in crops — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand slc), per between Guinea and Rwanda?
45,195 1000 SLC per square kilometre, with Rwanda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guinea and Rwanda?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Guinea and Rwanda rank globally for crops — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand slc), per?
Guinea ranks 7th and Rwanda ranks 5th of 142 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand SLC), 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

Guinea vs Rwanda: Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand SLC), per. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 11 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/crops-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-slc-per-square-kilometre/guinea/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-slc-per-square-kilometre/guinea/rwanda/">Guinea vs Rwanda: Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand SLC), per</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Crops — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand SLC), per square kilometre
Unit
1000 SLC per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
142 places, 8,030 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

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