Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production, per in Sweden
Sweden: Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production, per was 0.0174 t per square kilometre in 2017. ▼ Falling
Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production, per in Sweden, 1961–2017
Source: Statizoid (derived). Measured in t per square kilometre.
Analysis
In 2017, edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per in Sweden stood at 0.0174 t per square kilometre.
Compared with earlier readings it is up 0.6% on the previous year and down 1.1% over ten years.
Over the whole period, edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per in Sweden peaked at 0.0292 t per square kilometre in 1966 and was at its lowest, 0.0165 t per square kilometre, in 2012.
Sweden ranks 130th of 167 countries on this measure, in the bottom quarter.
The long-run direction has been consistently falling across the 57 years of available data.
Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production, per in Sweden, year by year
| Year | t per square kilometre | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1961 | 0.0171 t per square kilometre | — |
| 1962 | 0.0204 t per square kilometre | +19.7% |
| 1963 | 0.0213 t per square kilometre | +4.2% |
| 1964 | 0.0199 t per square kilometre | -6.6% |
| 1965 | 0.0198 t per square kilometre | -0.6% |
| 1966 | 0.0292 t per square kilometre | +47.8% |
| 1967 | 0.0258 t per square kilometre | -11.8% |
| 1968 | 0.0255 t per square kilometre | -1.0% |
| 1969 | 0.0282 t per square kilometre | +10.6% |
| 1970 | 0.0268 t per square kilometre | -5.2% |
| 1971 | 0.0236 t per square kilometre | -11.9% |
| 1972 | 0.0191 t per square kilometre | -18.7% |
| 1973 | 0.0199 t per square kilometre | +3.8% |
| 1974 | 0.0228 t per square kilometre | +14.8% |
| 1975 | 0.0223 t per square kilometre | -2.2% |
| 1976 | 0.0228 t per square kilometre | +2.2% |
| 1977 | 0.0226 t per square kilometre | -1.1% |
| 1978 | 0.0223 t per square kilometre | -1.1% |
| 1979 | 0.0228 t per square kilometre | +2.2% |
| 1980 | 0.0238 t per square kilometre | +4.3% |
| 1981 | 0.0209 t per square kilometre | -12.4% |
| 1982 | 0.0212 t per square kilometre | +1.6% |
| 1983 | 0.0221 t per square kilometre | +4.2% |
| 1984 | 0.0205 t per square kilometre | -7.3% |
| 1985 | 0.0208 t per square kilometre | +1.5% |
| 1986 | 0.0194 t per square kilometre | -6.6% |
| 1987 | 0.0178 t per square kilometre | -8.5% |
| 1988 | 0.0168 t per square kilometre | -5.4% |
| 1989 | 0.0183 t per square kilometre | +8.8% |
| 1990 | 0.0192 t per square kilometre | +4.7% |
| 1991 | 0.0174 t per square kilometre | -9.1% |
| 1992 | 0.0165 t per square kilometre | -5.0% |
| 1993 | 0.018 t per square kilometre | +8.9% |
| 1994 | 0.018 t per square kilometre | +0.0% |
| 1995 | 0.0189 t per square kilometre | +4.8% |
| 1996 | 0.0181 t per square kilometre | -4.1% |
| 1997 | 0.0196 t per square kilometre | +8.3% |
| 1998 | 0.0188 t per square kilometre | -4.3% |
| 1999 | 0.019 t per square kilometre | +1.1% |
| 2000 | 0.0198 t per square kilometre | +4.0% |
| 2001 | 0.0189 t per square kilometre | -4.4% |
| 2002 | 0.0193 t per square kilometre | +2.3% |
| 2003 | 0.0185 t per square kilometre | -4.2% |
| 2004 | 0.0188 t per square kilometre | +1.4% |
| 2005 | 0.0179 t per square kilometre | -4.5% |
| 2006 | 0.0181 t per square kilometre | +1.1% |
| 2007 | 0.0176 t per square kilometre | -2.8% |
| 2008 | 0.017 t per square kilometre | -3.6% |
| 2009 | 0.0184 t per square kilometre | +8.6% |
| 2010 | 0.0182 t per square kilometre | -1.5% |
| 2011 | 0.0182 t per square kilometre | +0.1% |
| 2012 | 0.0165 t per square kilometre | -9.1% |
| 2013 | 0.0166 t per square kilometre | +0.4% |
| 2014 | 0.0174 t per square kilometre | +4.6% |
| 2015 | 0.019 t per square kilometre | +9.4% |
| 2016 | 0.0173 t per square kilometre | -8.8% |
| 2017 | 0.0174 t per square kilometre | +0.6% |
Biggest year-on-year movements
Years where Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production, per in Sweden changed far more than this series normally does. A large move can be a real event or a change in how the figure was measured — the source note below says who published it.
| Year | Change | From | To |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1966 | +47.8% | 0.0198 t per square kilometre | 0.0292 t per square kilometre |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 0.023 t per square kilometre | 0.0171 t per square kilometre | 0.0292 t per square kilometre | 9 |
| 1970s | 0.0225 t per square kilometre | 0.0191 t per square kilometre | 0.0268 t per square kilometre | 10 |
| 1980s | 0.0202 t per square kilometre | 0.0168 t per square kilometre | 0.0238 t per square kilometre | 10 |
| 1990s | 0.0184 t per square kilometre | 0.0165 t per square kilometre | 0.0196 t per square kilometre | 10 |
| 2000s | 0.0184 t per square kilometre | 0.017 t per square kilometre | 0.0198 t per square kilometre | 10 |
| 2010s | 0.0176 t per square kilometre | 0.0165 t per square kilometre | 0.019 t per square kilometre | 8 |
Countries ranked near Sweden
More agriculture & rural data for Sweden
- Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (current US$), annual 15.81 % change on previous year (2025)
- Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (current US$), per 0.015 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (current US$), per 949.09 current US$ per person (2025)
- Rural population, annual growth rate -1.74 % change on previous year (2025)
- Rural population, per unit of GDP 0 units per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Rural population, per capita 0.1092 units per person (2025)
- Share of GDP from agriculture 1.5% (2025)
- Agriculture as a share of GDP vs. GDP per capita 1.5% (2025)
- Agricultural raw materials exports 3.6% (2024)
- Agricultural raw materials imports 1.3% (2024)
Frequently asked questions
- What is edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per in Sweden?
- Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per in Sweden was 0.0174 t per square kilometre in 2017, according to Statizoid (derived).
- What is the highest edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per recorded in Sweden?
- The highest recorded value was 0.0292 t per square kilometre in 1966.
- What is the lowest edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per recorded in Sweden?
- The lowest recorded value was 0.0165 t per square kilometre in 2012.
- How does Sweden rank for edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per?
- Sweden ranks 130th out of 167 countries with data for 2017.
- Is edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per rising or falling in Sweden?
- Over the last ten years it is down 1.1%. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
- Where does this Sweden data come from?
- The figures come from Statizoid (derived), published as part of Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production, per square kilometre. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 57 observations, free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page.
How this figure is calculated
Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.
Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production ÷ Land area (sq. km)
Computed from
- Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
- Land area FAOSTAT, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
Statizoid computes this series; the underlying measurements belong to the publishers named above. The arithmetic is applied to every country and year where both inputs report, and nothing is estimated unless the page says so.
About this data
Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.