Ecuador vs Latvia: Sugar beet — Feed

Ecuador
4 1000 t
in 2023
Latvia
5 1000 t
in 2018
Ecuador rank
28th
Latvia rank
26th

Sugar beet — Feed over time

  • Ecuador
  • Latvia
012345201020162023

How they compare

Latvia currently reports 5 1000 t against 4 1000 t in Ecuador, a difference of 1 1000 t.

That makes Latvia's figure about 1.2 times Ecuador's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 6 shared years of data; in 2010 it was Ecuador ahead.

Ecuador ranks 28th and Latvia ranks 26th of 78 countries.

Ecuador has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher sugar beet — feed, Ecuador or Latvia?
Latvia, at 5 1000 t against 4 1000 t in Ecuador as of 2018.
What is the difference in sugar beet — feed between Ecuador and Latvia?
1 1000 t, with Latvia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Latvia?
6 years are reported by both, from 2010 to 2018.
How do Ecuador and Latvia rank globally for sugar beet — feed?
Ecuador ranks 28th and Latvia ranks 26th of 78 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Sugar beet — Feed. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Sugar beet — Feed
Unit
1000 t
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
108 places, 1,242 data points, 2010–2023
Last refreshed

A 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 capita 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.