Latvia vs Mauritius: Rubber — Import Quantity
Rubber — Import Quantity over time
- Latvia
- Mauritius
How they compare
Mauritius currently reports 93 t against 92 t in Latvia, a difference of 1 t.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 22 shared years of data; in 1992 it was Mauritius ahead.
Latvia ranks 102nd and Mauritius ranks 101st of 158 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Latvia averaged higher in 1 and Mauritius in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Latvia | Mauritius | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 74.5 t | 225 t | 150.5 t | Mauritius |
| 2000s | 91.6 t | 137 t | 45.4 t | Mauritius |
| 2010s | 136.5 t | 58.75 t | 77.75 t | Latvia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher rubber — import quantity, Latvia or Mauritius?
- Mauritius, at 93 t against 92 t in Latvia as of 2013.
- What is the difference in rubber — import quantity between Latvia and Mauritius?
- 1 t, with Mauritius ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Mauritius?
- 22 years are reported by both, from 1992 to 2013.
- How do Latvia and Mauritius rank globally for rubber — import quantity?
- Latvia ranks 102nd and Mauritius ranks 101st of 158 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Rubber — Import Quantity. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Food Balance Sheet presents a comprehensive picture of the pattern of a country's food supply during a specified reference period. The food balance sheet shows for each food item - i.e. each primary commodity and a number of processed commodities potentially available for human consumption - the sources of supply and its utilization. The total quantity of foodstuffs produced in a country added to the total quantity imported and adjusted to any change in stocks that may have occurred since the beginning of the reference period gives the supply available during that period. On the utilization side a distinction is made between the quantities exported, fed to livestock, used for seed, put to manufacture for food use and non-food uses, losses during storage and transportation, and food supplies available for human consumption. The per caput supply of each such food item available for human consumption is then obtained by dividing the respective quantity by the related data on the population actually partaking of it. Data on per caput food supplies are expressed in terms of quantity and - by applying appropriate food composition factors for all primary and processed products - also in terms of caloric value and protein and fat content.