Australia vs Chad: Livestock — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$)

Australia
2.05 1000 USD per square kilometre
in 2023
Chad
2.17 1000 USD per square kilometre
in 2023
Australia rank
112th
Chad rank
111th

Livestock — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$) over time

  • Australia
  • Chad
00.511.52196119922023

How they compare

Chad currently reports 2.17 1000 USD per square kilometre against 2.05 1000 USD per square kilometre in Australia, a difference of 0.12 1000 USD per square kilometre.

That makes Chad's figure about 1.1 times Australia's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 55 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Australia ahead.

Australia ranks 112th and Chad ranks 111th of 135 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Australia averaged higher in 6 and Chad in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Australia Chad Difference Ahead
1960s 1.39 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.1947 1000 USD per square kilometre 1.19 1000 USD per square kilometre Australia
1970s 1.64 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.2107 1000 USD per square kilometre 1.43 1000 USD per square kilometre Australia
1980s 1.62 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.3172 1000 USD per square kilometre 1.3 1000 USD per square kilometre Australia
1990s 1.97 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.5121 1000 USD per square kilometre 1.45 1000 USD per square kilometre Australia
2000s 1.91 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.8328 1000 USD per square kilometre 1.08 1000 USD per square kilometre Australia
2010s 1.98 1000 USD per square kilometre 1.4 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.5796 1000 USD per square kilometre Australia
2020s 1.94 1000 USD per square kilometre 2 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.0625 1000 USD per square kilometre Chad

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher livestock — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand us$), Australia or Chad?
Chad, at 2.17 1000 USD per square kilometre against 2.05 1000 USD per square kilometre in Australia as of 2023.
What is the difference in livestock — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand us$) between Australia and Chad?
0.12 1000 USD per square kilometre, with Chad ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Chad?
55 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Australia and Chad rank globally for livestock — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand us$)?
Australia ranks 112th and Chad ranks 111th of 135 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Livestock — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$), 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

Australia vs Chad: Livestock — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 23 September 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/livestock-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-us-per-square-kilometre/australia/chad/

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/livestock-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-us-per-square-kilometre/australia/chad/">Australia vs Chad: Livestock — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Livestock — 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
136 places, 7,684 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Livestock — 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.