Mongolia vs Zimbabwe: Tree Cover Loss
Tree Cover Loss over time
- Mongolia
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Zimbabwe currently reports 8,529 hectares against 7,879 hectares in Mongolia, a difference of 650 hectares.
That makes Zimbabwe's figure about 1.1 times Mongolia's.
The two have swapped places 7 times across 25 shared years of data; in 2001 it was Mongolia ahead.
Mongolia ranks 93rd and Zimbabwe ranks 90th of 189 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Mongolia averaged higher in 1 and Zimbabwe in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Mongolia | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 37,568 hectares | 10,297 hectares | 27,271 hectares | Mongolia |
| 2010s | 9,667 hectares | 11,581 hectares | 1,914 hectares | Zimbabwe |
| 2020s | 2,032 hectares | 7,245 hectares | 5,214 hectares | Zimbabwe |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher tree cover loss, Mongolia or Zimbabwe?
- Zimbabwe, at 8,529 hectares against 7,879 hectares in Mongolia as of 2025.
- What is the difference in tree cover loss between Mongolia and Zimbabwe?
- 650 hectares, with Zimbabwe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Mongolia and Zimbabwe?
- 25 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2025.
- How do Mongolia and Zimbabwe rank globally for tree cover loss?
- Mongolia ranks 93rd and Zimbabwe ranks 90th of 189 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.