Congo vs Papua New Guinea: Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)

Congo
0.0427 1000 Int$ per person
in 2024
Papua New Guinea
0.0432 1000 Int$ per person
in 2024
Congo rank
29th
Papua New Guinea rank
27th

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

  • Congo
  • Papua New Guinea
00.020.040.060.080.1196119922024

How they compare

Papua New Guinea currently reports 0.0432 1000 Int$ per person against 0.0427 1000 Int$ per person in Congo, a difference of 0.0005 1000 Int$ per person.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 64 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Papua New Guinea ahead.

Congo ranks 29th and Papua New Guinea ranks 27th of 169 countries.

Papua New Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Congo Papua New Guinea Difference Ahead
1960s 0.0701 1000 Int$ per person 0.088 1000 Int$ per person 0.0179 1000 Int$ per person Papua New Guinea
1970s 0.0573 1000 Int$ per person 0.0892 1000 Int$ per person 0.0319 1000 Int$ per person Papua New Guinea
1980s 0.0549 1000 Int$ per person 0.0838 1000 Int$ per person 0.0289 1000 Int$ per person Papua New Guinea
1990s 0.0431 1000 Int$ per person 0.0659 1000 Int$ per person 0.0228 1000 Int$ per person Papua New Guinea
2000s 0.0432 1000 Int$ per person 0.0564 1000 Int$ per person 0.0132 1000 Int$ per person Papua New Guinea
2010s 0.0454 1000 Int$ per person 0.0498 1000 Int$ per person 0.0043 1000 Int$ per person Papua New Guinea
2020s 0.0427 1000 Int$ per person 0.0448 1000 Int$ per person 0.0021 1000 Int$ per person Papua New 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), Congo or Papua New Guinea?
Papua New Guinea, at 0.0432 1000 Int$ per person against 0.0427 1000 Int$ per person in Congo as of 2024.
What is the difference in roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016) between Congo and Papua New Guinea?
0.0005 1000 Int$ per person, with Papua New Guinea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Congo and Papua New Guinea?
64 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2024.
How do Congo and Papua New Guinea rank globally for roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016)?
Congo ranks 29th and Papua New Guinea ranks 27th 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

Congo vs Papua New 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/congo-rep/papua-new-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/congo-rep/papua-new-guinea/">Congo vs Papua New 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.