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

Pakistan
3.78 1000 USD per square kilometre
in 2023
Zambia
4.3 1000 USD per square kilometre
in 2023
Pakistan rank
41st
Zambia rank
38th

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

  • Pakistan
  • Zambia
01234196119922023

How they compare

Zambia currently reports 4.3 1000 USD per square kilometre against 3.78 1000 USD per square kilometre in Pakistan, a difference of 0.52 1000 USD per square kilometre.

That makes Zambia's figure about 1.1 times Pakistan's.

The two have swapped places 6 times across 49 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Zambia ahead.

Pakistan ranks 41st and Zambia ranks 38th of 139 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Pakistan Zambia Difference Ahead
1960s 0.0664 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.1663 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.0999 1000 USD per square kilometre Zambia
1970s 0.115 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.231 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.116 1000 USD per square kilometre Zambia
1980s 0.3048 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.3868 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.0819 1000 USD per square kilometre Zambia
1990s 0.4441 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.6283 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.1841 1000 USD per square kilometre Zambia
2000s 1.06 1000 USD per square kilometre 1.09 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.0329 1000 USD per square kilometre Zambia
2010s 1.74 1000 USD per square kilometre 2.01 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.27 1000 USD per square kilometre Zambia
2020s 3.04 1000 USD per square kilometre 3.73 1000 USD per square kilometre 0.695 1000 USD per square kilometre Zambia

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), Pakistan or Zambia?
Zambia, at 4.3 1000 USD per square kilometre against 3.78 1000 USD per square kilometre in Pakistan as of 2023.
What is the difference in roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016) between Pakistan and Zambia?
0.52 1000 USD per square kilometre, with Zambia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Pakistan and Zambia?
49 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Pakistan and Zambia rank globally for roots and tubers, total — gross production value (constant 2014-2016)?
Pakistan ranks 41st and Zambia ranks 38th 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

Pakistan vs Zambia: 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/pakistan/zambia/

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/pakistan/zambia/">Pakistan vs Zambia: 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.