Tuvalu vs Uganda: Per capita meat consumption by type
Tuvalu
0.6189 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Uganda
0.62 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Tuvalu rank
85th
Uganda rank
83rd
Per capita meat consumption by type over time
- Tuvalu
- Uganda
How they compare
Uganda currently reports 0.62 kilograms per year per capita against 0.6189 kilograms per year per capita in Tuvalu, a difference of 0.0011 kilograms per year per capita.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 5 shared years of data; in 2019 it was Uganda ahead.
Tuvalu ranks 85th and Uganda ranks 83rd of 191 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Tuvalu averaged higher in 1 and Uganda in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Tuvalu | Uganda | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 0.459 kilograms per year per capita | 0.67 kilograms per year per capita | 0.211 kilograms per year per capita | Uganda |
| 2020s | 0.721 kilograms per year per capita | 0.65 kilograms per year per capita | 0.071 kilograms per year per capita | Tuvalu |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher per capita meat consumption by type, Tuvalu or Uganda?
- Uganda, at 0.62 kilograms per year per capita against 0.6189 kilograms per year per capita in Tuvalu as of 2023.
- What is the difference in per capita meat consumption by type between Tuvalu and Uganda?
- 0.0011 kilograms per year per capita, with Uganda ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Tuvalu and Uganda?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2019 to 2023.
- How do Tuvalu and Uganda rank globally for per capita meat consumption by type?
- Tuvalu ranks 85th and Uganda ranks 83rd of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) β 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
About this data
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.