Philippines vs United Republic of Tanzania: Expenditure in Agricultural R&D as Share of Agricultural Value Added

Philippines
0.24 %
in 2015
United Republic of Tanzania
0.24 %
in 2023
Philippines rank
68th
United Republic of Tanzania rank
68th

Expenditure in Agricultural R&D as Share of Agricultural Value Added over time

  • Philippines
  • United Republic of Tanzania
0.10.20.30.40.5200420132023

How they compare

Philippines currently reports 0.24 % against 0.24 % in United Republic of Tanzania, a difference of 0 %.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 6 shared years of data; in 2005 it was United Republic of Tanzania ahead.

Philippines ranks 68th and United Republic of Tanzania ranks 68th of 96 countries.

United Republic of Tanzania has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Philippines United Republic of Tanzania Difference Ahead
2000s 0.11 % 0.3767 % 0.2667 % United Republic of Tanzania
2010s 0.1833 % 0.2733 % 0.09 % United Republic of Tanzania

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher expenditure in agricultural r&d as share of agricultural value added, Philippines or United Republic of Tanzania?
Philippines, at 0.24 % against 0.24 % in United Republic of Tanzania as of 2015.
What is the difference in expenditure in agricultural r&d as share of agricultural value added between Philippines and United Republic of Tanzania?
0 %, with Philippines ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Philippines and United Republic of Tanzania?
6 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2015.
How do Philippines and United Republic of Tanzania rank globally for expenditure in agricultural r&d as share of agricultural value added?
Philippines ranks 68th and United Republic of Tanzania ranks 68th of 96 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Expenditure in Agricultural R&D as Share of Agricultural Value Added (Standard Local Currency) — Government, Higher Education and Private Non-profit. 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

Philippines vs United Republic of Tanzania: Expenditure in Agricultural R&D as Share of Agricultural Value Added. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved 18 September 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/expenditure-in-agricultural-r-and-d-as-share-of-agricultural-value-added-standard-local/philippines/united-republic-of-tanzania/

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-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/expenditure-in-agricultural-r-and-d-as-share-of-agricultural-value-added-standard-local/philippines/united-republic-of-tanzania/">Philippines vs United Republic of Tanzania: Expenditure in Agricultural R&D as Share of Agricultural Value Added</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Expenditure in Agricultural R&D as Share of Agricultural Value Added (Standard Local Currency) — Government, Higher Education and Private Non-profit
Unit
%
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
97 places, 1,321 data points, 2004–2023
Last refreshed

The dataset contains a set of financial indicators describing national expenditures on agricultural research and development (R&D). The indicators are derived primarily from responses to the financial resources section of the ASTI questionnaire, complemented with selected external macroeconomic indicators required to ensure comparability across countries and over time.The dataset includes both directly reported financial aggregates and derived indicators, reflecting different dimensions of agricultural R&D investment. Reported expenditure data are collected in current local currency units (LCU) and refer to total institutional expenditures, as provided by national respondents. Coverage of the private for-profit sector remains limited and is therefore excluded from the dataset. To support temporal analysis and international comparability, expenditure indicators are also expressed in constant local currency units, using country-specific GDP deflators sourced from FAOSTAT. In addition, selected indicators relate agricultural R&D expenditures to key structural variables, such as agricultural value added, allowing for meaningful cross-country comparisons of research intensity and resource allocation.