Land locked developing countries vs New Zealand: Jute β€” Stock Variation

Land locked developing countries
0 t
in 2013
New Zealand
0 t
in 2013
Land locked developing countries rank
3rd
New Zealand rank
3rd

Jute β€” Stock Variation over time

  • Land locked developing countries
  • New Zealand
-20.0k-10.0k010.0k196119872013

How they compare

Land locked developing countries currently reports 0 t against 0 t in New Zealand, a difference of 0 t.

The two have swapped places 16 times across 53 shared years of data; in 1961 it was New Zealand ahead.

Land locked developing countries ranks 3rd and New Zealand ranks 3rd of 10 regions.

Across the 6 decades both report, Land locked developing countries averaged higher in 2 and New Zealand in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Land locked developing countries New Zealand Difference Ahead
1960s 0 t 0 t 0 t β€”
1970s 0 t 0 t 0 t β€”
1980s -1,000 t -1 t 999 t New Zealand
1990s 989 t 1 t 988 t Land locked developing countries
2000s -23.5 t 0 t 23.5 t New Zealand
2010s 86.25 t 0 t 86.25 t Land locked developing countries

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher jute β€” stock variation, Land locked developing countries or New Zealand?
Land locked developing countries, at 0 t against 0 t in New Zealand as of 2013.
What is the difference in jute β€” stock variation between Land locked developing countries and New Zealand?
0 t, with Land locked developing countries ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Land locked developing countries and New Zealand?
53 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2013.
How do Land locked developing countries and New Zealand rank globally for jute β€” stock variation?
Land locked developing countries ranks 3rd and New Zealand ranks 3rd of 10 regions.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Jute β€” Stock Variation. 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

Land locked developing countries vs New Zealand: Jute β€” Stock Variation. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved 21 August 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/jute-stock-variation/land-locked-developing-countries/new-zealand/

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/jute-stock-variation/land-locked-developing-countries/new-zealand/">Land locked developing countries vs New Zealand: Jute β€” Stock Variation</a> β€” Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Jute β€” Stock Variation
Unit
t
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
73 places, 3,638 data points, 1961–2013
Last refreshed

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.