Saint Lucia vs Zimbabwe: Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)
Saint Lucia
0.7361 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 1965
Zimbabwe
0.7585 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Saint Lucia rank
50th
Zimbabwe rank
48th
Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016) over time
- Saint Lucia
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Zimbabwe currently reports 0.7585 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 0.7361 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Saint Lucia, a difference of 0.0224 1000 Int$ per square kilometre.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Saint Lucia has been ahead every year.
Saint Lucia ranks 50th and Zimbabwe ranks 48th of 134 countries.
Saint Lucia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher sugar crops primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016), Saint Lucia or Zimbabwe?
- Zimbabwe, at 0.7585 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 0.7361 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Saint Lucia as of 2023.
- What is the difference in sugar crops primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016) between Saint Lucia and Zimbabwe?
- 0.0224 1000 Int$ per square kilometre, with Zimbabwe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Saint Lucia and Zimbabwe?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 1965.
- How do Saint Lucia and Zimbabwe rank globally for sugar crops primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016)?
- Saint Lucia ranks 50th and Zimbabwe ranks 48th of 134 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per square kilometre. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$) 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.