Guinea-Bissau vs Mauritius: Fishing, Capital (general government expenditure) — Value US$
Fishing, Capital (general government expenditure) — Value US$ over time
- Guinea-Bissau
- Mauritius
How they compare
Mauritius currently reports 1.05 million USD against 0.5 million USD in Guinea-Bissau, a difference of 0.55 million USD.
That makes Mauritius's figure about 2.1 times Guinea-Bissau's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 7 shared years of data; in 2009 it was Guinea-Bissau ahead.
Guinea-Bissau ranks 16th and Mauritius ranks 13th of 25 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Guinea-Bissau averaged higher in 1 and Mauritius in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Guinea-Bissau | Mauritius | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.48 million USD | 0.19 million USD | 0.29 million USD | Guinea-Bissau |
| 2010s | 0.6067 million USD | 0.79 million USD | 0.1833 million USD | Mauritius |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher fishing, capital (general government expenditure) — value us$, Guinea-Bissau or Mauritius?
- Mauritius, at 1.05 million USD against 0.5 million USD in Guinea-Bissau as of 2024.
- What is the difference in fishing, capital (general government expenditure) — value us$ between Guinea-Bissau and Mauritius?
- 0.55 million USD, with Mauritius ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Guinea-Bissau and Mauritius?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2009 to 2015.
- How do Guinea-Bissau and Mauritius rank globally for fishing, capital (general government expenditure) — value us$?
- Guinea-Bissau ranks 16th and Mauritius ranks 13th of 25 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Fishing, Capital (general government expenditure) — Value US$. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Statistics Division of FAO collects annually data on Government Expenditure on Agriculture through a questionnaire, which was developed in partnership with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF is the responsible institution for the Government Finance Statistics (GFS) methodology and annually collects GFS data, including Expenditure by Functions of Government (COFOG). The Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) is an international classification developed by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and published by the United Nations Statistical Division (UNSD), with the aim of categorise governments' functions according to their purposes. The FAO questionnaire aligns with Table 7 of the IMF GFS questionnaire, replicates the relevant aggregates and drills down to request additional detail related to Agriculture. The FAO dataset consists of a time series, from 2001 onwards, of Total Government Expenditure and expenditure in: Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, along with its three disaggregated subsectors of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing; and Environmental Protection. In addition, expenditure in each detailed function are further disaggregated into Recurrent and Capital expenditure. Additional indicators include the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure, and the Agriculture Orientation Index (ratio between the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure and the Agriculture Value Added as Share of GDP). Data are reported for the highest level of government available (Consolidated general government, consolidated central government or budgetary central government) and are available for about 100 countries on a regular basis.