Serbia vs Solomon Islands: Tree Cover Loss
Tree Cover Loss over time
- Serbia
- Solomon Islands
How they compare
Solomon Islands currently reports 7,865 hectares against 5,788 hectares in Serbia, a difference of 2,077 hectares.
That makes Solomon Islands's figure about 1.4 times Serbia's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 25 shared years of data; in 2001 it was Serbia ahead.
Serbia ranks 97th and Solomon Islands ranks 94th of 190 countries.
Solomon Islands has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Serbia | Solomon Islands | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 2,053 hectares | 4,829 hectares | 2,775 hectares | Solomon Islands |
| 2010s | 3,433 hectares | 13,460 hectares | 10,027 hectares | Solomon Islands |
| 2020s | 5,243 hectares | 11,601 hectares | 6,358 hectares | Solomon Islands |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher tree cover loss, Serbia or Solomon Islands?
- Solomon Islands, at 7,865 hectares against 5,788 hectares in Serbia as of 2025.
- What is the difference in tree cover loss between Serbia and Solomon Islands?
- 2,077 hectares, with Solomon Islands ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Serbia and Solomon Islands?
- 25 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2025.
- How do Serbia and Solomon Islands rank globally for tree cover loss?
- Serbia ranks 97th and Solomon Islands ranks 94th 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.