Low & middle income vs Malawi: Land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre

Low & middle income
7.03 hectares per square kilometre
in 2023
Malawi
21.68 hectares per square kilometre
in 2023
Low & middle income rank
14th
Malawi rank
15th

Land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre over time

  • Low & middle income
  • Malawi
5101520196119922023

How they compare

Malawi currently reports 21.68 hectares per square kilometre against 7.03 hectares per square kilometre in Low & middle income, a difference of 14.65 hectares per square kilometre.

That makes Malawi's figure about 3.1 times Low & middle income's.

Across all 63 years both countries report, Malawi has been ahead every year.

Low & middle income ranks 14th and Malawi ranks 15th of 47 groups.

Malawi has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Low & middle income Malawi Difference Ahead
1960s 5.43 hectares per square kilometre 10.74 hectares per square kilometre 5.31 hectares per square kilometre Malawi
1970s 5.86 hectares per square kilometre 12.89 hectares per square kilometre 7.03 hectares per square kilometre Malawi
1980s 6.06 hectares per square kilometre 13.07 hectares per square kilometre 7.01 hectares per square kilometre Malawi
1990s 6.32 hectares per square kilometre 14.96 hectares per square kilometre 8.64 hectares per square kilometre Malawi
2000s 6.39 hectares per square kilometre 17.84 hectares per square kilometre 11.45 hectares per square kilometre Malawi
2010s 6.76 hectares per square kilometre 20.16 hectares per square kilometre 13.39 hectares per square kilometre Malawi
2020s 6.98 hectares per square kilometre 21.83 hectares per square kilometre 14.86 hectares per square kilometre Malawi

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre, Low & middle income or Malawi?
Malawi, at 21.68 hectares per square kilometre against 7.03 hectares per square kilometre in Low & middle income as of 2023.
What is the difference in land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre between Low & middle income and Malawi?
14.65 hectares per square kilometre, with Malawi ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Low & middle income and Malawi?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Low & middle income and Malawi rank globally for land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre?
Low & middle income ranks 14th and Malawi ranks 15th of 47 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Land under cereal production (hectares), 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

Low & middle income vs Malawi: Land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 05 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/land-under-cereal-production-hectares-per-square-kilometre/low-and-middle-income/malawi/

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/land-under-cereal-production-hectares-per-square-kilometre/low-and-middle-income/malawi/">Low & middle income vs Malawi: Land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre
Unit
hectares per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
228 places, 13,192 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Land under cereal production (hectares) 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.