Brazil vs Equatorial Guinea: Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)

Brazil
0.0193 1000 Int$ per person
in 2024
Equatorial Guinea
0.0217 1000 Int$ per person
in 2024
Brazil rank
66th
Equatorial Guinea rank
63rd

Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016) over time

  • Brazil
  • Equatorial Guinea
0.020.030.040.050.06196119922024

How they compare

Equatorial Guinea currently reports 0.0217 1000 Int$ per person against 0.0193 1000 Int$ per person in Brazil, a difference of 0.0024 1000 Int$ per person.

That makes Equatorial Guinea's figure about 1.1 times Brazil's.

The two have swapped places 5 times across 64 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Brazil ahead.

Brazil ranks 66th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 63rd of 169 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Brazil averaged higher in 3 and Equatorial Guinea in 4.

Head to head by decade

Decade Brazil Equatorial Guinea Difference Ahead
1960s 0.0509 1000 Int$ per person 0.0372 1000 Int$ per person 0.0137 1000 Int$ per person Brazil
1970s 0.0445 1000 Int$ per person 0.0329 1000 Int$ per person 0.0116 1000 Int$ per person Brazil
1980s 0.0307 1000 Int$ per person 0.0299 1000 Int$ per person 0.0008 1000 Int$ per person Brazil
1990s 0.0251 1000 Int$ per person 0.0331 1000 Int$ per person 0.008 1000 Int$ per person Equatorial Guinea
2000s 0.0246 1000 Int$ per person 0.0285 1000 Int$ per person 0.0039 1000 Int$ per person Equatorial Guinea
2010s 0.0213 1000 Int$ per person 0.027 1000 Int$ per person 0.0057 1000 Int$ per person Equatorial Guinea
2020s 0.0186 1000 Int$ per person 0.0228 1000 Int$ per person 0.0042 1000 Int$ per person Equatorial Guinea

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016), Brazil or Equatorial Guinea?
Equatorial Guinea, at 0.0217 1000 Int$ per person against 0.0193 1000 Int$ per person in Brazil as of 2024.
What is the difference in roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016) between Brazil and Equatorial Guinea?
0.0024 1000 Int$ per person, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Brazil and Equatorial Guinea?
64 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2024.
How do Brazil and Equatorial Guinea rank globally for roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016)?
Brazil ranks 66th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 63rd of 169 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per capita. 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

Brazil vs Equatorial Guinea: Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 05 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/roots-and-tubers-total-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-capita/brazil/equatorial-guinea/

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/roots-and-tubers-total-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-capita/brazil/equatorial-guinea/">Brazil vs Equatorial Guinea: Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per capita
Unit
1000 Int$ per person
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
170 places, 9,784 data points, 1961–2024
Last refreshed

Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$) divided by Population, total, matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.