Latvia vs Zimbabwe: Other fruits, n.e.c. — Area harvested, per unit of GDP
Latvia
0 ha per US$ of GDP
in 2017
Zimbabwe
0 ha per US$ of GDP
in 2024
Latvia rank
104th
Zimbabwe rank
105th
Other fruits, n.e.c. — Area harvested, per unit of GDP over time
- Latvia
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Latvia currently reports 0 ha per US$ of GDP against 0 ha per US$ of GDP in Zimbabwe, a difference of 0 ha per US$ of GDP.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 12 shared years of data; in 2006 it was Zimbabwe ahead.
Latvia ranks 104th and Zimbabwe ranks 105th of 136 countries.
Zimbabwe has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Latvia | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0 ha per US$ of GDP | 0 ha per US$ of GDP | 0 ha per US$ of GDP | Zimbabwe |
| 2010s | 0 ha per US$ of GDP | 0 ha per US$ of GDP | 0 ha per US$ of GDP | Zimbabwe |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher other fruits, n.e.c. — area harvested, per unit of gdp, Latvia or Zimbabwe?
- Latvia, at 0 ha per US$ of GDP against 0 ha per US$ of GDP in Zimbabwe as of 2017.
- What is the difference in other fruits, n.e.c. — area harvested, per unit of gdp between Latvia and Zimbabwe?
- 0 ha per US$ of GDP, with Latvia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Zimbabwe?
- 12 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2017.
- How do Latvia and Zimbabwe rank globally for other fruits, n.e.c. — area harvested, per unit of gdp?
- Latvia ranks 104th and Zimbabwe ranks 105th of 136 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Other fruits, n.e.c. — Area harvested, per unit of GDP. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Other fruits, n.e.c. — Area harvested divided by GDP (current US$), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.