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

Egypt
1.31 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Finland
1.22 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2017
Egypt rank
87th
Finland rank
90th

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

  • Egypt
  • Finland
0.511.52196119922023

How they compare

Egypt currently reports 1.31 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 1.22 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Finland, a difference of 0.09 1000 Int$ per square kilometre.

That makes Egypt's figure about 1.1 times Finland's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 57 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Finland ahead.

Egypt ranks 87th and Finland ranks 90th of 167 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Egypt averaged higher in 2 and Finland in 4.

Head to head by decade

Decade Egypt Finland Difference Ahead
1960s 0.3934 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.27 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.873 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Finland
1970s 0.5245 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.53 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.01 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Finland
1980s 0.4958 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.69 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.2 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Finland
1990s 1.04 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.48 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.4434 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Finland
2000s 1.45 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.25 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.1915 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Egypt
2010s 1.76 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.19 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.5725 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Egypt

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, Egypt or Finland?
Egypt, at 1.31 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 1.22 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Finland as of 2023.
What is the difference in meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — gross between Egypt and Finland?
0.09 1000 Int$ per square kilometre, with Egypt ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Egypt and Finland?
57 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2017.
How do Egypt and Finland rank globally for meat of cattle with the bone, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — gross?
Egypt ranks 87th and Finland ranks 90th 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

Egypt vs Finland: 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/egypt-arab-rep/finland/

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/egypt-arab-rep/finland/">Egypt vs Finland: 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.