China vs Cuba: Meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross

China
3.1 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Cuba
2.9 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
China rank
50th
Cuba rank
52nd

Meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross over time

  • China
  • Cuba
0246810196119922023

How they compare

China currently reports 3.1 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 2.9 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Cuba, a difference of 0.2 1000 Int$ per square kilometre.

That makes China's figure about 1.1 times Cuba's.

The two have swapped places 9 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Cuba ahead.

China ranks 50th and Cuba ranks 52nd of 167 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade China Cuba Difference Ahead
1960s 0.045 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 6.96 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 6.91 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Cuba
1970s 0.0782 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 6.4 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 6.33 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Cuba
1980s 0.2019 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 5.71 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 5.5 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Cuba
1990s 1.18 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 3.18 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.99 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Cuba
2000s 2.34 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 2.52 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.1751 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Cuba
2010s 2.58 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 3.03 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.4519 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Cuba
2020s 2.92 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 3.11 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.1897 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Cuba

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — gross, China or Cuba?
China, at 3.1 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 2.9 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Cuba as of 2023.
What is the difference in meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — gross between China and Cuba?
0.2 1000 Int$ per square kilometre, with China ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for China and Cuba?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do China and Cuba rank globally for meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — gross?
China ranks 50th and Cuba ranks 52nd of 167 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — 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

China vs Cuba: Meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 06 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/meat-of-cattle-with-the-bone-fresh-or-chilled-indigenous-gross-production-value-constant-6/china/cuba/

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-of-cattle-with-the-bone-fresh-or-chilled-indigenous-gross-production-value-constant-6/china/cuba/">China vs Cuba: Meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — 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
168 places, 9,322 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — 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.