Sao Tome and Principe vs Uruguay: Inequality in per capita calorie intake
Sao Tome and Principe
0.22
in 2020
Uruguay
0.22
in 2020
Sao Tome and Principe rank
133rd
Uruguay rank
133rd
Inequality in per capita calorie intake over time
- Sao Tome and Principe
- Uruguay
How they compare
Sao Tome and Principe currently reports 0.22 against 0.22 in Uruguay, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 21 shared years of data; in 2000 it was Sao Tome and Principe ahead.
Sao Tome and Principe ranks 133rd and Uruguay 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 | Sao Tome and Principe | Uruguay | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.227 | 0.21 | 0.017 | Sao Tome and Principe |
| 2010s | 0.22 | 0.21 | 0.01 | Sao Tome and Principe |
| 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, Sao Tome and Principe or Uruguay?
- Sao Tome and Principe, at 0.22 against 0.22 in Uruguay as of 2020.
- What is the difference in inequality in per capita calorie intake between Sao Tome and Principe and Uruguay?
- 0, with Sao Tome and Principe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Sao Tome and Principe and Uruguay?
- 21 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2020.
- How do Sao Tome and Principe and Uruguay rank globally for inequality in per capita calorie intake?
- Sao Tome and Principe ranks 133rd and Uruguay 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.