Panama vs Zimbabwe: Meat indigenous, total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)

Panama
10.06 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Zimbabwe
9.65 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Panama rank
55th
Zimbabwe rank
56th

Meat indigenous, total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016) over time

  • Panama
  • Zimbabwe
0246810196119922023

How they compare

Panama currently reports 10.06 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 9.65 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Zimbabwe, a difference of 0.41 1000 Int$ per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 4 times across 61 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Panama ahead.

Panama ranks 55th and Zimbabwe ranks 56th of 171 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Panama averaged higher in 5 and Zimbabwe in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Panama Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1960s 1.81 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.7985 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.01 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Panama
1970s 2.78 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.36 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.41 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Panama
1980s 4.03 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.17 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 2.85 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Panama
1990s 5.58 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 5.86 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.2821 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Zimbabwe
2000s 6.69 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 6.96 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.2759 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Zimbabwe
2010s 9.93 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 8.16 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.76 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Panama
2020s 9.99 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 9.12 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.8777 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Panama

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher meat indigenous, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016), Panama or Zimbabwe?
Panama, at 10.06 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 9.65 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Zimbabwe as of 2023.
What is the difference in meat indigenous, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016) between Panama and Zimbabwe?
0.41 1000 Int$ per square kilometre, with Panama ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Panama and Zimbabwe?
61 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Panama and Zimbabwe rank globally for meat indigenous, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016)?
Panama ranks 55th and Zimbabwe ranks 56th of 171 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Meat indigenous, total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), 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

Panama vs Zimbabwe: Meat indigenous, total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 05 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/meat-indigenous-total-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-square/panama/zimbabwe/

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/meat-indigenous-total-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-square/panama/zimbabwe/">Panama vs Zimbabwe: Meat indigenous, total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Meat indigenous, total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per square kilometre
Unit
1000 Int$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
172 places, 9,792 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Meat indigenous, total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$) 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.