Finland vs Lower middle income: Forest area
Forest area over time
- Finland
- Lower middle income
How they compare
Lower middle income currently reports 5.71 million sq. km against 224,090 sq. km in Finland, a difference of 5.48 million sq. km.
That makes Lower middle income's figure about 25.5 times Finland's.
Across all 34 years both countries report, Lower middle income has been ahead every year.
Finland ranks 26th and Lower middle income ranks 23rd of 213 countries.
Lower middle income has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Finland | Lower middle income | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 221,320 sq. km | 6.39 million sq. km | 6.17 million sq. km | Lower middle income |
| 2000s | 223,540 sq. km | 6.16 million sq. km | 5.94 million sq. km | Lower middle income |
| 2010s | 223,589 sq. km | 5.92 million sq. km | 5.69 million sq. km | Lower middle income |
| 2020s | 224,090 sq. km | 5.74 million sq. km | 5.52 million sq. km | Lower middle income |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher forest area, Finland or Lower middle income?
- Lower middle income, at 5.71 million sq. km against 224,090 sq. km in Finland as of 2023.
- What is the difference in forest area between Finland and Lower middle income?
- 5.48 million sq. km, with Lower middle income ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Finland and Lower middle income?
- 34 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2023.
- How do Finland and Lower middle income rank globally for forest area?
- Finland ranks 26th and Lower middle income ranks 23rd of 213 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- FAOSTAT, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), published as Forest area (sq. km). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Forest area is land under natural or planted stands of trees of at least 5 meters in situ, whether productive or not, and excludes tree stands in agricultural production systems (for example, in fruit plantations and agroforestry systems) and trees in urban parks and gardens.