How many years of comparable data are there for Iceland and Zambia?

30 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 1990.

Where does this data come from?

Statizoid (derived), published as Fruit Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$), per square kilometre. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Iceland vs Zambia: Fruit Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand)

Iceland

0.0001 1000 USD per square kilometre

in 1990

Zambia

0.007 1000 USD per square kilometre

in 2023

Iceland rank

138th

Zambia rank

136th

Fruit Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand) over time

Iceland
Zambia

How they compare

Zambia currently reports 0.007 1000 USD per square kilometre against 0.0001 1000 USD per square kilometre in Iceland, a difference of 0.0069 1000 USD per square kilometre.

That makes Zambia's figure about 63.7 times Iceland's.

Across all 30 years both countries report, Zambia has been ahead every year.

Iceland ranks 138th and Zambia ranks 136th of 138 countries.

Zambia has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade	Iceland	Zambia	Difference	Ahead
1960s	0.0001 1000 USD per square kilometre	0.0037 1000 USD per square kilometre	0.0036 1000 USD per square kilometre	Zambia
1970s	0.0001 1000 USD per square kilometre	0.0052 1000 USD per square kilometre	0.0051 1000 USD per square kilometre	Zambia
1980s	0.0001 1000 USD per square kilometre	0.0057 1000 USD per square kilometre	0.0056 1000 USD per square kilometre	Zambia
1990s	0.0001 1000 USD per square kilometre	0.0066 1000 USD per square kilometre	0.0065 1000 USD per square kilometre	Zambia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher fruit primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand), Iceland or Zambia?: Zambia, at 0.007 1000 USD per square kilometre against 0.0001 1000 USD per square kilometre in Iceland as of 2023.
What is the difference in fruit primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand) between Iceland and Zambia?: 0.0069 1000 USD per square kilometre, with Zambia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Iceland and Zambia?: 30 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 1990.
How do Iceland and Zambia rank globally for fruit primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand)?: Iceland ranks 138th and Zambia ranks 136th of 138 countries.
Where does this data come from?: Statizoid (derived), published as Fruit Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$), 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

Iceland vs Zambia: Fruit Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 24 September 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/fruit-primary-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-us-per-square-kilometre/iceland/zambia/

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/fruit-primary-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-us-per-square-kilometre/iceland/zambia/">Iceland vs Zambia: Fruit Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator: Fruit Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$), per square kilometre
Unit: 1000 USD per square kilometre
Source: Statizoid (derived)
Licence: Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage: 139 places, 7,689 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed: 24 September 2026

Fruit Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$) 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.