Kiribati vs Latvia: Jute — Import Quantity
Jute — Import Quantity over time
- Kiribati
- Latvia
How they compare
Kiribati currently reports 0 t against 0 t in Latvia, a difference of 0 t.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 22 shared years of data; in 1992 it was Latvia ahead.
Kiribati ranks 101st and Latvia ranks 101st of 154 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Kiribati averaged higher in 1 and Latvia in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Kiribati | Latvia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0 t | 0.5 t | 0.5 t | Latvia |
| 2000s | 32.4 t | 1.6 t | 30.8 t | Kiribati |
| 2010s | 0 t | 0.25 t | 0.25 t | Latvia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher jute — import quantity, Kiribati or Latvia?
- Kiribati, at 0 t against 0 t in Latvia as of 2013.
- What is the difference in jute — import quantity between Kiribati and Latvia?
- 0 t, with Kiribati ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kiribati and Latvia?
- 22 years are reported by both, from 1992 to 2013.
- How do Kiribati and Latvia rank globally for jute — import quantity?
- Kiribati ranks 101st and Latvia ranks 101st of 154 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Jute — Import Quantity. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Food Balance Sheet presents a comprehensive picture of the pattern of a country's food supply during a specified reference period. The food balance sheet shows for each food item - i.e. each primary commodity and a number of processed commodities potentially available for human consumption - the sources of supply and its utilization. The total quantity of foodstuffs produced in a country added to the total quantity imported and adjusted to any change in stocks that may have occurred since the beginning of the reference period gives the supply available during that period. On the utilization side a distinction is made between the quantities exported, fed to livestock, used for seed, put to manufacture for food use and non-food uses, losses during storage and transportation, and food supplies available for human consumption. The per caput supply of each such food item available for human consumption is then obtained by dividing the respective quantity by the related data on the population actually partaking of it. Data on per caput food supplies are expressed in terms of quantity and - by applying appropriate food composition factors for all primary and processed products - also in terms of caloric value and protein and fat content.