Sri Lanka vs Suriname: Tree Cover Loss
Tree Cover Loss over time
- Sri Lanka
- Suriname
How they compare
Sri Lanka currently reports 15,243 hectares against 14,442 hectares in Suriname, a difference of 801 hectares.
That makes Sri Lanka's figure about 1.1 times Suriname's.
The two have swapped places 10 times across 25 shared years of data; in 2001 it was Sri Lanka ahead.
Sri Lanka ranks 76th and Suriname ranks 77th of 190 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Sri Lanka averaged higher in 1 and Suriname in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Sri Lanka | Suriname | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 6,563 hectares | 4,754 hectares | 1,808 hectares | Sri Lanka |
| 2010s | 11,813 hectares | 14,142 hectares | 2,330 hectares | Suriname |
| 2020s | 11,944 hectares | 19,415 hectares | 7,471 hectares | Suriname |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher tree cover loss, Sri Lanka or Suriname?
- Sri Lanka, at 15,243 hectares against 14,442 hectares in Suriname as of 2025.
- What is the difference in tree cover loss between Sri Lanka and Suriname?
- 801 hectares, with Sri Lanka ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Sri Lanka and Suriname?
- 25 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2025.
- How do Sri Lanka and Suriname rank globally for tree cover loss?
- Sri Lanka ranks 76th 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.