Serbia vs United Republic of Tanzania: Meat of chickens, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross Production

Serbia
10.32 % change on previous year
in 2024
United Republic of Tanzania
11.33 % change on previous year
in 2024
Serbia rank
30th
United Republic of Tanzania rank
28th

Meat of chickens, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross Production over time

  • Serbia
  • United Republic of Tanzania
-100-50050100196219932024

How they compare

United Republic of Tanzania currently reports 11.33 % change on previous year against 10.32 % change on previous year in Serbia, a difference of 1.01 % change on previous year.

That makes United Republic of Tanzania's figure about 1.1 times Serbia's.

The two have swapped places 4 times across 17 shared years of data; in 2007 it was United Republic of Tanzania ahead.

Serbia ranks 30th and United Republic of Tanzania ranks 28th of 211 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, Serbia averaged higher in 1 and United Republic of Tanzania in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Serbia United Republic of Tanzania Difference Ahead
2000s 2.03 % change on previous year 3.97 % change on previous year 1.94 % change on previous year United Republic of Tanzania
2010s -0.0504 % change on previous year -4.18 % change on previous year 4.13 % change on previous year Serbia
2020s 4.33 % change on previous year 34.28 % change on previous year 29.95 % change on previous year United Republic of Tanzania

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher meat of chickens, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — gross production, Serbia or United Republic of Tanzania?
United Republic of Tanzania, at 11.33 % change on previous year against 10.32 % change on previous year in Serbia as of 2024.
What is the difference in meat of chickens, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — gross production between Serbia and United Republic of Tanzania?
1.01 % change on previous year, with United Republic of Tanzania ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Serbia and United Republic of Tanzania?
17 years are reported by both, from 2007 to 2024.
How do Serbia and United Republic of Tanzania rank globally for meat of chickens, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — gross production?
Serbia ranks 30th and United Republic of Tanzania ranks 28th of 211 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Meat of chickens, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), annual growth rate. 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

Serbia vs United Republic of Tanzania: Meat of chickens, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross Production. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 28 September 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/meat-of-chickens-fresh-or-chilled-indigenous-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-7/serbia/united-republic-of-tanzania/

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-chickens-fresh-or-chilled-indigenous-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-7/serbia/united-republic-of-tanzania/">Serbia vs United Republic of Tanzania: Meat of chickens, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross Production</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Meat of chickens, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), annual growth rate
Unit
% change on previous year
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
241 places, 13,483 data points, 1962–2024
Last refreshed

The year-on-year percentage change in Meat of chickens, fresh or chilled (indigenous) — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$). Computed from consecutive annual observations; years either side of a gap are skipped rather than bridged.