Ecuador vs Malawi: Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)

Ecuador
1.13 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Malawi
1.26 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Ecuador rank
39th
Malawi rank
36th

Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016) over time

  • Ecuador
  • Malawi
00.511.52196119922023

How they compare

Malawi currently reports 1.26 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 1.13 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Ecuador, a difference of 0.13 1000 Int$ per square kilometre.

That makes Malawi's figure about 1.1 times Ecuador's.

The two have swapped places 9 times across 53 shared years of data; in 1966 it was Ecuador ahead.

Ecuador ranks 39th and Malawi ranks 36th of 134 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Ecuador Malawi Difference Ahead
1960s 1.34 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0869 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.25 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Ecuador
1970s 1.05 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.315 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.7349 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Ecuador
1980s 0.9156 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.7848 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.1309 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Ecuador
1990s 0.9059 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.8855 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0204 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Ecuador
2000s 1.23 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.13 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.1017 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Ecuador
2010s 1.52 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.41 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.1009 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Ecuador
2020s 1.64 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 1.37 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.2791 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Ecuador

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher sugar crops primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016), Ecuador or Malawi?
Malawi, at 1.26 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 1.13 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Ecuador as of 2023.
What is the difference in sugar crops primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016) between Ecuador and Malawi?
0.13 1000 Int$ per square kilometre, with Malawi ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Malawi?
53 years are reported by both, from 1966 to 2023.
How do Ecuador and Malawi rank globally for sugar crops primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016)?
Ecuador ranks 39th and Malawi ranks 36th of 134 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), 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

Ecuador vs Malawi: Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 05 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/sugar-crops-primary-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-square/ecuador/malawi/

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/sugar-crops-primary-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-square/ecuador/malawi/">Ecuador vs Malawi: Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per square kilometre
Unit
1000 Int$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
135 places, 6,910 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$) 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.