Chad vs Suriname: Tree Cover Loss
Tree Cover Loss over time
- Chad
- Suriname
How they compare
Suriname currently reports 14,442 hectares against 12,533 hectares in Chad, a difference of 1,909 hectares.
That makes Suriname's figure about 1.2 times Chad's.
Across all 25 years both countries report, Suriname has been ahead every year.
Chad ranks 79th and Suriname ranks 77th of 190 countries.
Suriname has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Chad | Suriname | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 1,380 hectares | 4,754 hectares | 3,375 hectares | Suriname |
| 2010s | 3,408 hectares | 14,142 hectares | 10,735 hectares | Suriname |
| 2020s | 8,444 hectares | 19,415 hectares | 10,971 hectares | Suriname |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher tree cover loss, Chad or Suriname?
- Suriname, at 14,442 hectares against 12,533 hectares in Chad as of 2025.
- What is the difference in tree cover loss between Chad and Suriname?
- 1,909 hectares, with Suriname ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Chad and Suriname?
- 25 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2025.
- How do Chad and Suriname rank globally for tree cover loss?
- Chad ranks 79th and Suriname ranks 77th 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.