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

Denmark
13.36 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2017
Uruguay
14.73 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Denmark rank
10th
Uruguay rank
7th

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

  • Denmark
  • Uruguay
510152025196119922023

How they compare

Uruguay currently reports 14.73 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 13.36 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Denmark, a difference of 1.37 1000 Int$ per square kilometre.

That makes Uruguay's figure about 1.1 times Denmark's.

The two have swapped places 5 times across 57 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Denmark ahead.

Denmark ranks 10th and Uruguay ranks 7th of 167 countries.

Denmark has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Denmark Uruguay Difference Ahead
1960s 19.41 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 7.37 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 12.04 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Denmark
1970s 23.58 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 8 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 15.58 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Denmark
1980s 25.11 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 8.56 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 16.55 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Denmark
1990s 20.19 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 9.25 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 10.94 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Denmark
2000s 15.15 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 11.89 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 3.27 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Denmark
2010s 13.73 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 12.99 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.7471 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Denmark

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, Denmark or Uruguay?
Uruguay, at 14.73 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 13.36 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Denmark as of 2023.
What is the difference in meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — gross between Denmark and Uruguay?
1.37 1000 Int$ per square kilometre, with Uruguay ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Denmark and Uruguay?
57 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2017.
How do Denmark and Uruguay rank globally for meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — gross?
Denmark ranks 10th and Uruguay ranks 7th 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

Denmark vs Uruguay: 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/denmark/uruguay/

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/denmark/uruguay/">Denmark vs Uruguay: 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.