Cyprus vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Per capita meat consumption by type

Cyprus
0.34 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Tanzania, United Republic of
0.39 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Cyprus rank
110th
Tanzania, United Republic of rank
109th

Per capita meat consumption by type over time

  • Cyprus
  • Tanzania, United Republic of
01234196119922023

How they compare

Tanzania, United Republic of currently reports 0.39 kilograms per year per capita against 0.34 kilograms per year per capita in Cyprus, a difference of 0.05 kilograms per year per capita.

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

The two have swapped places 1 time across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Cyprus ahead.

Cyprus ranks 110th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 109th of 191 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Cyprus Tanzania, United Republic of Difference Ahead
1960s 0.7508 kilograms per year per capita 0.5176 kilograms per year per capita 0.2332 kilograms per year per capita Cyprus
1970s 1.13 kilograms per year per capita 0.4672 kilograms per year per capita 0.6662 kilograms per year per capita Cyprus
1980s 2.64 kilograms per year per capita 0.474 kilograms per year per capita 2.17 kilograms per year per capita Cyprus
1990s 1.87 kilograms per year per capita 0.4328 kilograms per year per capita 1.44 kilograms per year per capita Cyprus
2000s 1.88 kilograms per year per capita 0.4259 kilograms per year per capita 1.45 kilograms per year per capita Cyprus
2010s 1.3 kilograms per year per capita 0.452 kilograms per year per capita 0.849 kilograms per year per capita Cyprus
2020s 0.42 kilograms per year per capita 0.4025 kilograms per year per capita 0.0175 kilograms per year per capita Cyprus

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher per capita meat consumption by type, Cyprus or Tanzania, United Republic of?
Tanzania, United Republic of, at 0.39 kilograms per year per capita against 0.34 kilograms per year per capita in Cyprus as of 2023.
What is the difference in per capita meat consumption by type between Cyprus and Tanzania, United Republic of?
0.05 kilograms per year per capita, with Tanzania, United Republic of ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cyprus and Tanzania, United Republic of?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Cyprus and Tanzania, United Republic of rank globally for per capita meat consumption by type?
Cyprus ranks 110th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 109th of 191 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Per capita meat consumption by type. 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

Cyprus vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Per capita meat consumption by type. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data. Retrieved 01 September 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/per-capita-meat-consumption-by-type-kilograms-per-year/cyprus/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 CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/per-capita-meat-consumption-by-type-kilograms-per-year/cyprus/tanzania/">Cyprus vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Per capita meat consumption by type</a> β€” Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Per capita meat consumption by type
Unit
kilograms per year per capita
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
191 places, 10,208 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Quantity that is available for consumption at the end of the supply chain. It does not account for consumer waste, so the quantity that is actually consumed may be lower.