Azerbaijan vs North Macedonia: SDG 2.a.1: highest government level — SDG 2.a.1: Agriculture value
SDG 2.a.1: highest government level — SDG 2.a.1: Agriculture value over time
- Azerbaijan
- North Macedonia
How they compare
North Macedonia currently reports 5.9 % against 5.69 % in Azerbaijan, a difference of 0.21 %.
Across all 20 years both countries report, North Macedonia has been ahead every year.
Azerbaijan ranks 91st and North Macedonia ranks 90th of 178 countries.
North Macedonia has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Azerbaijan | North Macedonia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 6.92 % | 9.89 % | 2.97 % | North Macedonia |
| 2010s | 5.47 % | 9.21 % | 3.74 % | North Macedonia |
| 2020s | 5.66 % | 7.09 % | 1.43 % | North Macedonia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher sdg 2.a.1: highest government level — sdg 2.a.1: agriculture value, Azerbaijan or North Macedonia?
- North Macedonia, at 5.9 % against 5.69 % in Azerbaijan as of 2024.
- What is the difference in sdg 2.a.1: highest government level — sdg 2.a.1: agriculture value between Azerbaijan and North Macedonia?
- 0.21 %, with North Macedonia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Azerbaijan and North Macedonia?
- 20 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2024.
- How do Azerbaijan and North Macedonia rank globally for sdg 2.a.1: highest government level — sdg 2.a.1: agriculture value?
- Azerbaijan ranks 91st and North Macedonia ranks 90th of 178 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as SDG 2.a.1: highest government level — SDG 2.a.1: Agriculture value added share of GDP. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Statistics Division of FAO collects annually data on Government Expenditure on Agriculture through a questionnaire, which was developed in partnership with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF is the responsible institution for the Government Finance Statistics (GFS) methodology and annually collects GFS data, including Expenditure by Functions of Government (COFOG). The Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) is an international classification developed by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and published by the United Nations Statistical Division (UNSD), with the aim of categorise governments' functions according to their purposes. The FAO questionnaire aligns with Table 7 of the IMF GFS questionnaire, replicates the relevant aggregates and drills down to request additional detail related to Agriculture. The FAO dataset consists of a time series, from 2001 onwards, of Total Government Expenditure and expenditure in: Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, along with its three disaggregated subsectors of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing; and Environmental Protection. In addition, expenditure in each detailed function are further disaggregated into Recurrent and Capital expenditure. Additional indicators include the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure, and the Agriculture Orientation Index (ratio between the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure and the Agriculture Value Added as Share of GDP). Data are reported for the highest level of government available (Consolidated general government, consolidated central government or budgetary central government) and are available for about 100 countries on a regular basis.