Angola vs Sweden: Tree Cover Loss
Tree Cover Loss over time
- Angola
- Sweden
How they compare
Angola currently reports 377,712 hectares against 291,434 hectares in Sweden, a difference of 86,278 hectares.
That makes Angola's figure about 1.3 times Sweden's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 25 shared years of data; in 2001 it was Sweden ahead.
Angola ranks 10th and Sweden ranks 11th of 190 countries.
Sweden has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Angola | Sweden | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 96,787 hectares | 207,767 hectares | 110,980 hectares | Sweden |
| 2010s | 199,437 hectares | 262,467 hectares | 63,030 hectares | Sweden |
| 2020s | 290,414 hectares | 320,624 hectares | 30,210 hectares | Sweden |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher tree cover loss, Angola or Sweden?
- Angola, at 377,712 hectares against 291,434 hectares in Sweden as of 2025.
- What is the difference in tree cover loss between Angola and Sweden?
- 86,278 hectares, with Angola ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Angola and Sweden?
- 25 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2025.
- How do Angola and Sweden rank globally for tree cover loss?
- Angola ranks 10th and Sweden ranks 11th of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Global Forest Watch. Tree Cover Loss (Hansen/UMD/Google/USGS/NASA), published as Tree Cover Loss (hectares). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Shows year-by-year tree cover loss, defined as stand level replacement of vegetation greater than 5 meters, within the selected area. The tree cover loss data set is a collaboration of the University of Maryland, Google, USGS, and NASA, and uses Landsat satellite images to map annual tree cover loss at a 30 × 30 meter resolution. Note that “tree cover loss” is not the same as “deforestation” – tree cover loss includes change in both natural and planted forest, and does not need to be human caused. The data from 2011 onward were produced with an updated methodology that may capture additional loss. Comparisons between the original 2001-2010 data and future years should be performed with caution.