Kenya vs United Republic of Tanzania: Sisal — Other uses

Kenya
12,481 t
in 2013
United Republic of Tanzania
34,875 t
in 2013
Kenya rank
4th
United Republic of Tanzania rank
1st

Sisal — Other uses over time

  • Kenya
  • United Republic of Tanzania
010.0k20.0k30.0k196119872013

How they compare

United Republic of Tanzania currently reports 34,875 t against 12,481 t in Kenya, a difference of 22,394 t.

That makes United Republic of Tanzania's figure about 2.8 times Kenya's.

The two have swapped places 13 times across 53 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Kenya ahead.

Kenya ranks 4th and United Republic of Tanzania ranks 1st of 122 countries.

United Republic of Tanzania has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Kenya United Republic of Tanzania Difference Ahead
1960s 6,967 t 7,502 t 535 t United Republic of Tanzania
1970s 7,724 t 23,618 t 15,894 t United Republic of Tanzania
1980s 7,814 t 19,420 t 11,607 t United Republic of Tanzania
1990s 5,570 t 18,129 t 12,558 t United Republic of Tanzania
2000s 9,267 t 11,753 t 2,485 t United Republic of Tanzania
2010s 22,958 t 27,940 t 4,982 t United Republic of Tanzania

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher sisal — other uses, Kenya or United Republic of Tanzania?
United Republic of Tanzania, at 34,875 t against 12,481 t in Kenya as of 2013.
What is the difference in sisal — other uses between Kenya and United Republic of Tanzania?
22,394 t, with United Republic of Tanzania ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Kenya and United Republic of Tanzania?
53 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2013.
How do Kenya and United Republic of Tanzania rank globally for sisal — other uses?
Kenya ranks 4th and United Republic of Tanzania ranks 1st of 122 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Sisal — Other uses (non-food). 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

Kenya vs United Republic of Tanzania: Sisal — Other uses. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved 06 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/sisal-other-uses-non-food/kenya/united-republic-of-tanzania/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/sisal-other-uses-non-food/kenya/united-republic-of-tanzania/">Kenya vs United Republic of Tanzania: Sisal — Other uses</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Sisal — Other uses (non-food)
Unit
t
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
159 places, 7,934 data points, 1961–2013
Last refreshed

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.