South Korea vs Sao Tome and Principe: Inequality in per capita calorie intake
South Korea
0.22
in 2020
Sao Tome and Principe
0.22
in 2020
South Korea rank
133rd
Sao Tome and Principe rank
133rd
Inequality in per capita calorie intake over time
- South Korea
- Sao Tome and Principe
How they compare
South Korea currently reports 0.22 against 0.22 in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 0.
Across all 21 years both countries report, Sao Tome and Principe has been ahead every year.
South Korea ranks 133rd and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 133rd of 185 countries.
Sao Tome and Principe has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | South Korea | Sao Tome and Principe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.22 | 0.227 | 0.007 | Sao Tome and Principe |
| 2010s | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0 | — |
| 2020s | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher inequality in per capita calorie intake, South Korea or Sao Tome and Principe?
- South Korea, at 0.22 against 0.22 in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2020.
- What is the difference in inequality in per capita calorie intake between South Korea and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 0, with South Korea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for South Korea and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 21 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2020.
- How do South Korea and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for inequality in per capita calorie intake?
- South Korea ranks 133rd and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 133rd of 185 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- FAO (2017) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Inequality in per capita calorie intake. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The inequality in dietary calorie intake is measured as the coefficient of variation in energy intake. It represents the spread of intakes around the mean. Higher values represent larger levels of dietary inequality.