Tunisia vs Zimbabwe: Roots and Tubers, Total: Gross Production … square kilometre SLC

Tunisia
1.32 1000 SLC per square kilometre
in 2023
Zimbabwe
1.15 1000 SLC per square kilometre
in 2023
Tunisia rank
111th
Zimbabwe rank
113th

Roots and Tubers, Total: Gross Production … square kilometre SLC over time

  • Tunisia
  • Zimbabwe
00.511.5196119922023

How they compare

Tunisia currently reports 1.32 1000 SLC per square kilometre against 1.15 1000 SLC per square kilometre in Zimbabwe, a difference of 0.17 1000 SLC per square kilometre.

That makes Tunisia's figure about 1.1 times Zimbabwe's.

Across all 58 years both countries report, Tunisia has been ahead every year.

Tunisia ranks 111th and Zimbabwe ranks 113th of 141 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Tunisia Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1960s 0.1719 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.0351 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.1368 1000 SLC per square kilometre Tunisia
1970s 0.2774 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.0382 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.2392 1000 SLC per square kilometre Tunisia
1980s 0.4583 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.0431 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.4152 1000 SLC per square kilometre Tunisia
1990s 0.7465 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.057 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.6894 1000 SLC per square kilometre Tunisia
2000s 0.9996 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.2667 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.7328 1000 SLC per square kilometre Tunisia
2010s 1.27 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.9096 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.357 1000 SLC per square kilometre Tunisia
2020s 1.31 1000 SLC per square kilometre 1.09 1000 SLC per square kilometre 0.2229 1000 SLC per square kilometre Tunisia

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), Tunisia or Zimbabwe?
Tunisia, at 1.32 1000 SLC per square kilometre against 1.15 1000 SLC per square kilometre in Zimbabwe as of 2023.
What is the difference in roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016) between Tunisia and Zimbabwe?
0.17 1000 SLC per square kilometre, with Tunisia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Tunisia and Zimbabwe?
58 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Tunisia and Zimbabwe rank globally for roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016)?
Tunisia ranks 111th and Zimbabwe ranks 113th of 141 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand SLC), 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

Tunisia vs Zimbabwe: Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 12 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/roots-and-tubers-total-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-slc-per-square/tunisia/zimbabwe/

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-slc-per-square/tunisia/zimbabwe/">Tunisia vs Zimbabwe: 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 SLC), per square kilometre
Unit
1000 SLC per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
141 places, 7,928 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand SLC) 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.