Namibia vs New Zealand: Land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre

Namibia
0.4119 hectares per square kilometre
in 2023
New Zealand
0.4416 hectares per square kilometre
in 2023
Namibia rank
145th
New Zealand rank
144th

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

  • Namibia
  • New Zealand
00.20.40.60.81196119922023

How they compare

New Zealand currently reports 0.4416 hectares per square kilometre against 0.4119 hectares per square kilometre in Namibia, a difference of 0.0297 hectares per square kilometre.

That makes New Zealand's figure about 1.1 times Namibia's.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was New Zealand ahead.

Namibia ranks 145th and New Zealand ranks 144th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Namibia New Zealand Difference Ahead
1960s 0.1391 hectares per square kilometre 0.5781 hectares per square kilometre 0.439 hectares per square kilometre New Zealand
1970s 0.2104 hectares per square kilometre 0.8034 hectares per square kilometre 0.593 hectares per square kilometre New Zealand
1980s 0.2476 hectares per square kilometre 0.7839 hectares per square kilometre 0.5362 hectares per square kilometre New Zealand
1990s 0.3454 hectares per square kilometre 0.5727 hectares per square kilometre 0.2273 hectares per square kilometre New Zealand
2000s 0.351 hectares per square kilometre 0.5026 hectares per square kilometre 0.1516 hectares per square kilometre New Zealand
2010s 0.3546 hectares per square kilometre 0.5029 hectares per square kilometre 0.1483 hectares per square kilometre New Zealand
2020s 0.4 hectares per square kilometre 0.4349 hectares per square kilometre 0.0348 hectares per square kilometre New Zealand

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre, Namibia or New Zealand?
New Zealand, at 0.4416 hectares per square kilometre against 0.4119 hectares per square kilometre in Namibia as of 2023.
What is the difference in land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre between Namibia and New Zealand?
0.0297 hectares per square kilometre, with New Zealand ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Namibia and New Zealand?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Namibia and New Zealand rank globally for land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre?
Namibia ranks 145th and New Zealand ranks 144th of 181 countries.
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

Namibia vs New Zealand: Land under cereal production (hectares), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 06 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/land-under-cereal-production-hectares-per-square-kilometre/namibia/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 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/namibia/new-zealand/">Namibia vs New Zealand: 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.