Australia vs Liberia: Tomatoes — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$)

Australia
0.0199 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Liberia
0.0176 1000 Int$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Australia rank
131st
Liberia rank
133rd

Tomatoes — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$) over time

  • Australia
  • Liberia
00.010.020.03196119922023

How they compare

Australia currently reports 0.0199 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 0.0176 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Liberia, a difference of 0.0023 1000 Int$ per square kilometre.

That makes Australia's figure about 1.1 times Liberia's.

Across all 45 years both countries report, Australia has been ahead every year.

Australia ranks 131st and Liberia ranks 133rd of 148 countries.

Australia has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Australia Liberia Difference Ahead
1970s 0.0107 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0007 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.01 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Australia
1980s 0.0156 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0039 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0117 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Australia
1990s 0.0217 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0024 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0193 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Australia
2000s 0.026 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.007 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.019 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Australia
2010s 0.0236 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0148 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0088 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Australia
2020s 0.0237 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0176 1000 Int$ per square kilometre 0.0061 1000 Int$ per square kilometre Australia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher tomatoes — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand i$), Australia or Liberia?
Australia, at 0.0199 1000 Int$ per square kilometre against 0.0176 1000 Int$ per square kilometre in Liberia as of 2023.
What is the difference in tomatoes — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand i$) between Australia and Liberia?
0.0023 1000 Int$ per square kilometre, with Australia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Liberia?
45 years are reported by both, from 1979 to 2023.
How do Australia and Liberia rank globally for tomatoes — gross production value (constant 2014-2016 thousand i$)?
Australia ranks 131st and Liberia ranks 133rd of 148 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Tomatoes — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), 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

Australia vs Liberia: Tomatoes — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 24 September 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/tomatoes-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-square-kilometre/australia/liberia/

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/tomatoes-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-square-kilometre/australia/liberia/">Australia vs Liberia: Tomatoes — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Tomatoes — 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
149 places, 7,554 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Tomatoes — 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.