Nigeria vs Rwanda: Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)

Nigeria
32.66 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Rwanda
31.1 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Nigeria rank
2nd
Rwanda rank
4th

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

  • Nigeria
  • Rwanda
010203040196119922023

How they compare

Nigeria currently reports 32.66 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 31.1 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Rwanda, a difference of 1.56 1000 Int$ per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 7 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Rwanda ahead.

Nigeria ranks 2nd and Rwanda ranks 4th of 169 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Nigeria Rwanda Difference Ahead
1960s 3.73 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 5.17 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.44 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
1970s 4.16 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 9.39 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 5.23 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
1980s 3.91 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 13.61 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 9.7 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
1990s 11.75 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 12 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.2458 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
2000s 16.81 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 26.01 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 9.2 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
2010s 24.36 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 30.68 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 6.32 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda
2020s 31.37 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 31.43 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0649 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Rwanda

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), Nigeria or Rwanda?
Nigeria, at 32.66 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 31.1 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Rwanda as of 2023.
What is the difference in roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016) between Nigeria and Rwanda?
1.56 1000 Int$ per square kilometre, with Nigeria ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Nigeria and Rwanda?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Nigeria and Rwanda rank globally for roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016)?
Nigeria ranks 2nd and Rwanda ranks 4th 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 square kilometre. 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

Nigeria vs Rwanda: Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 06 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/roots-and-tubers-total-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-square/nigeria/rwanda/

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-square/nigeria/rwanda/">Nigeria vs Rwanda: 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$), per square kilometre
Unit
1000 Int$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
170 places, 9,616 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

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