Edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)
Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs): Edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. was 979,599 1000 USD in 2024. ▲ Rising
Edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs), 1961–2024
Source: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Measured in 1000 USD.
Analysis
In 2024, edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) stood at 979,599 1000 USD.
Compared with earlier readings it is up 0.2% on the previous year and down 4.8% over ten years.
Over the whole period, edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) peaked at 1.03 million 1000 USD in 2014 and was at its lowest, 82,650 1000 USD, in 1991.
Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) ranks 4th of 22 groups on this measure, in the top quarter.
The long-run direction has been consistently rising across the 64 years of available data.
Edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs), year by year
| Year | 1000 USD | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1961 | 380,759 1000 USD | — |
| 1962 | 386,536 1000 USD | +1.5% |
| 1963 | 387,553 1000 USD | +0.3% |
| 1964 | 388,497 1000 USD | +0.2% |
| 1965 | 389,829 1000 USD | +0.3% |
| 1966 | 390,847 1000 USD | +0.3% |
| 1967 | 392,106 1000 USD | +0.3% |
| 1968 | 436,827 1000 USD | +11.4% |
| 1969 | 393,934 1000 USD | -9.8% |
| 1970 | 394,825 1000 USD | +0.2% |
| 1971 | 351,759 1000 USD | -10.9% |
| 1972 | 396,544 1000 USD | +12.7% |
| 1973 | 353,478 1000 USD | -10.9% |
| 1974 | 354,702 1000 USD | +0.3% |
| 1975 | 311,689 1000 USD | -12.1% |
| 1976 | 312,117 1000 USD | +0.1% |
| 1977 | 487,580 1000 USD | +56.2% |
| 1978 | 399,191 1000 USD | -18.1% |
| 1979 | 482,565 1000 USD | +20.9% |
| 1980 | 483,348 1000 USD | +0.2% |
| 1981 | 396,353 1000 USD | -18.0% |
| 1982 | 397,650 1000 USD | +0.3% |
| 1983 | 488,237 1000 USD | +22.8% |
| 1984 | 423,810 1000 USD | -13.2% |
| 1985 | 467,622 1000 USD | +10.3% |
| 1986 | 496,879 1000 USD | +6.3% |
| 1987 | 513,989 1000 USD | +3.4% |
| 1988 | 515,104 1000 USD | +0.2% |
| 1989 | 525,749 1000 USD | +2.1% |
| 1990 | 537,766 1000 USD | +2.3% |
| 1991 | 82,650 1000 USD | -84.6% |
| 1992 | 84,650 1000 USD | +2.4% |
| 1993 | 229,397 1000 USD | +171.0% |
| 1994 | 233,092 1000 USD | +1.6% |
| 1995 | 229,625 1000 USD | -1.5% |
| 1996 | 226,896 1000 USD | -1.2% |
| 1997 | 231,322 1000 USD | +2.0% |
| 1998 | 779,248 1000 USD | +236.9% |
| 1999 | 799,524 1000 USD | +2.6% |
| 2000 | 799,755 1000 USD | +0.0% |
| 2001 | 811,953 1000 USD | +1.5% |
| 2002 | 829,653 1000 USD | +2.2% |
| 2003 | 853,234 1000 USD | +2.8% |
| 2004 | 867,506 1000 USD | +1.7% |
| 2005 | 907,249 1000 USD | +4.6% |
| 2006 | 885,374 1000 USD | -2.4% |
| 2007 | 873,279 1000 USD | -1.4% |
| 2008 | 864,443 1000 USD | -1.0% |
| 2009 | 863,571 1000 USD | -0.1% |
| 2010 | 745,847 1000 USD | -13.6% |
| 2011 | 738,002 1000 USD | -1.1% |
| 2012 | 790,153 1000 USD | +7.1% |
| 2013 | 818,421 1000 USD | +3.6% |
| 2014 | 1.03 million 1000 USD | +25.8% |
| 2015 | 955,456 1000 USD | -7.2% |
| 2016 | 925,090 1000 USD | -3.2% |
| 2017 | 973,196 1000 USD | +5.2% |
| 2018 | 969,874 1000 USD | -0.3% |
| 2019 | 973,367 1000 USD | +0.4% |
| 2020 | 975,967 1000 USD | +0.3% |
| 2021 | 990,194 1000 USD | +1.5% |
| 2022 | 976,498 1000 USD | -1.4% |
| 2023 | 978,026 1000 USD | +0.2% |
| 2024 | 979,599 1000 USD | +0.2% |
Biggest year-on-year movements
Years where Edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1998 | +236.9% | 231,322 1000 USD | 779,248 1000 USD |
| 1993 | +171.0% | 84,650 1000 USD | 229,397 1000 USD |
| 1991 | -84.6% | 537,766 1000 USD | 82,650 1000 USD |
| 1977 | +56.2% | 312,117 1000 USD | 487,580 1000 USD |
| 2014 | +25.8% | 818,421 1000 USD | 1.03 million 1000 USD |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 394,099 1000 USD | 380,759 1000 USD | 436,827 1000 USD | 9 |
| 1970s | 384,445 1000 USD | 311,689 1000 USD | 487,580 1000 USD | 10 |
| 1980s | 470,874 1000 USD | 396,353 1000 USD | 525,749 1000 USD | 10 |
| 1990s | 343,417 1000 USD | 82,650 1000 USD | 799,524 1000 USD | 10 |
| 2000s | 855,602 1000 USD | 799,755 1000 USD | 907,249 1000 USD | 10 |
| 2010s | 891,860 1000 USD | 738,002 1000 USD | 1.03 million 1000 USD | 10 |
| 2020s | 980,057 1000 USD | 975,967 1000 USD | 990,194 1000 USD | 5 |
Countries ranked near Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)
- 1 Guinea-Bissau 766,570 1000 USD compare
- 1 Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) 1.07 million 1000 USD compare
- 2 Pakistan 226,419 1000 USD compare
- 3 Japan 151,883 1000 USD compare
- 4 Colombia 96,788 1000 USD compare
- 5 Eritrea 93,675 1000 USD compare
- 6 Peru 79,581 1000 USD compare
- 6 Melanesia 20,945 1000 USD compare
- 7 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 11,848 1000 USD compare
- 7 Namibia 62,202 1000 USD compare
More agriculture & rural data for Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)
- Oilcrops, Oil Equivalent — Yield, annual growth rate 0.8325 % change on previous year (2024)
- Milk, Total — Milk Animals, annual growth rate 1.22 % change on previous year (2024)
- Oilcrops, Cake Equivalent — Area harvested, annual growth rate 0.3055 % change on previous year (2024)
- Oilcrops, Cake Equivalent — Yield, annual growth rate 0.9219 % change on previous year (2024)
- Oilcrops, Cake Equivalent — Production, annual growth rate 1.24 % change on previous year (2024)
- Oilcrops, Oil Equivalent — Area harvested, annual growth rate 0.2261 % change on previous year (2024)
- Poultry Birds — Stocks, annual growth rate 2.66 % change on previous year (2024)
- Pulses, Total — Yield, annual growth rate 4.33 % change on previous year (2024)
- Pulses, Total — Area harvested, annual growth rate -0.9081 % change on previous year (2024)
- Milk, Total — Production, annual growth rate 3.02 % change on previous year (2024)
Frequently asked questions
- What is edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)?
- Edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) was 979,599 1000 USD in 2024, according to Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
- What is the highest edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. recorded in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)?
- The highest recorded value was 1.03 million 1000 USD in 2014.
- What is the lowest edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. recorded in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)?
- The lowest recorded value was 82,650 1000 USD in 1991.
- How does Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) rank for edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c.?
- Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) ranks 4th out of 22 groups with data for 2024.
- Is edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c. rising or falling in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)?
- Over the last ten years it is down 4.8%. The long-run trend across the full record is rising.
- Where does this Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) data come from?
- The figures come from Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as part of Edible roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.c., fresh — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand US$). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 64 observations, free to reuse under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO).
About this data
The domain provides detailed data on the value of agricultural production that is calculated by the agricultural production data and the price data at farm gate. Thus, the value of production measures the agricultural production in monetary terms at the farm gate level.