Ecuador vs Libya: Per capita meat and fish consumption
Ecuador
31.51 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Libya
31.28 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Ecuador rank
63rd
Libya rank
64th
Per capita meat and fish consumption over time
- Ecuador
- Libya
How they compare
Ecuador currently reports 31.51 kilograms per year per capita against 31.28 kilograms per year per capita in Libya, a difference of 0.23 kilograms per year per capita.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 14 shared years of data; in 2010 it was Ecuador ahead.
Ecuador ranks 63rd and Libya ranks 64th of 191 countries.
Libya has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Ecuador | Libya | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 20.88 kilograms per year per capita | 26.78 kilograms per year per capita | 5.9 kilograms per year per capita | Libya |
| 2020s | 28.59 kilograms per year per capita | 32.98 kilograms per year per capita | 4.39 kilograms per year per capita | Libya |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher per capita meat and fish consumption, Ecuador or Libya?
- Ecuador, at 31.51 kilograms per year per capita against 31.28 kilograms per year per capita in Libya as of 2023.
- What is the difference in per capita meat and fish consumption between Ecuador and Libya?
- 0.23 kilograms per year per capita, with Ecuador ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Libya?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 2010 to 2023.
- How do Ecuador and Libya rank globally for per capita meat and fish consumption?
- Ecuador ranks 63rd and Libya ranks 64th 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 and fish consumption. 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.