Maldives vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Tree Cover Loss
Tree Cover Loss over time
- Maldives
- Saint Kitts and Nevis
How they compare
Maldives currently reports 12 hectares against 9 hectares in Saint Kitts and Nevis, a difference of 3 hectares.
That makes Maldives's figure about 1.3 times Saint Kitts and Nevis's.
Across all 20 years both countries report, Saint Kitts and Nevis has been ahead every year.
Maldives ranks 153rd and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 155th of 190 countries.
Saint Kitts and Nevis has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Maldives | Saint Kitts and Nevis | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 4.38 hectares | 23.12 hectares | 18.75 hectares | Saint Kitts and Nevis |
| 2010s | 2.3 hectares | 7.8 hectares | 5.5 hectares | Saint Kitts and Nevis |
| 2020s | 0 hectares | 9.5 hectares | 9.5 hectares | Saint Kitts and Nevis |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher tree cover loss, Maldives or Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- Maldives, at 12 hectares against 9 hectares in Saint Kitts and Nevis as of 2025.
- What is the difference in tree cover loss between Maldives and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 3 hectares, with Maldives ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Maldives and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 20 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2021.
- How do Maldives and Saint Kitts and Nevis rank globally for tree cover loss?
- Maldives ranks 153rd and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 155th 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.