New Caledonia vs Zimbabwe: Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)

New Caledonia
1.07 1000 USD per square kilometre
in 2023
Zimbabwe
1.15 1000 USD per square kilometre
in 2023
New Caledonia rank
80th
Zimbabwe rank
77th

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

  • New Caledonia
  • Zimbabwe
0246196119922023

How they compare

Zimbabwe currently reports 1.15 1000 USD per square kilometre against 1.07 1000 USD per square kilometre in New Caledonia, a difference of 0.08 1000 USD per square kilometre.

That makes Zimbabwe's figure about 1.1 times New Caledonia's.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 44 shared years of data; in 1961 it was New Caledonia ahead.

New Caledonia ranks 80th and Zimbabwe ranks 77th of 139 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, New Caledonia averaged higher in 5 and Zimbabwe in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade New Caledonia Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1960s 4.81 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.0351 1000 USD per square kilometre 4.77 1000 USD per square kilometre New Caledonia
1970s 4.74 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.0382 1000 USD per square kilometre 4.7 1000 USD per square kilometre New Caledonia
1980s 5.2 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.0431 1000 USD per square kilometre 5.15 1000 USD per square kilometre New Caledonia
1990s 4.93 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.0515 1000 USD per square kilometre 4.87 1000 USD per square kilometre New Caledonia
2010s 1.03 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.8104 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.2209 1000 USD per square kilometre New Caledonia
2020s 1.07 1000 USD per square kilometre 1.09 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.019 1000 USD per square kilometre Zimbabwe

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), New Caledonia or Zimbabwe?
Zimbabwe, at 1.15 1000 USD per square kilometre against 1.07 1000 USD per square kilometre in New Caledonia as of 2023.
What is the difference in roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016) between New Caledonia and Zimbabwe?
0.08 1000 USD per square kilometre, with Zimbabwe ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for New Caledonia and Zimbabwe?
44 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do New Caledonia and Zimbabwe rank globally for roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016)?
New Caledonia ranks 80th and Zimbabwe ranks 77th of 139 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$), 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

New Caledonia vs Zimbabwe: Roots and Tubers, Total — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 23 September 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/roots-and-tubers-total-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-us-per-square/new-caledonia/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-us-per-square/new-caledonia/zimbabwe/">New Caledonia 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 US$), per square kilometre
Unit
1000 USD per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
140 places, 7,839 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

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