Armenia vs Tunisia: Food GHG emissions by system stage (Share of total) - LULUC

Armenia
0.0337 Production
in 2015
Tunisia
0.0316 Production
in 2015
Armenia rank
156th
Tunisia rank
157th

Food GHG emissions by system stage (Share of total) - LULUC over time

  • Armenia
  • Tunisia
051015199020022015

How they compare

Armenia currently reports 0.0337 Production against 0.0316 Production in Tunisia, a difference of 0.0021 Production.

That makes Armenia's figure about 1.1 times Tunisia's.

The two have swapped places 5 times across 26 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Tunisia ahead.

Armenia ranks 156th and Tunisia ranks 157th of 179 countries.

Armenia has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Armenia Tunisia Difference Ahead
1990s 2.15 Production 1.21 Production 0.945 Production Armenia
2000s 6.04 Production 0.1523 Production 5.88 Production Armenia
2010s 2.28 Production 0.0637 Production 2.22 Production Armenia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc, Armenia or Tunisia?
Armenia, at 0.0337 Production against 0.0316 Production in Tunisia as of 2015.
What is the difference in food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc between Armenia and Tunisia?
0.0021 Production, with Armenia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Armenia and Tunisia?
26 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2015.
How do Armenia and Tunisia rank globally for food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc?
Armenia ranks 156th and Tunisia ranks 157th of 179 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Tubiello, F.N. and Leip, A. EDGAR-FOOD data. Figshare, doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13476666 (2021), published as Food GHG emissions by system stage (Share of total) - LULUC (Production). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Armenia vs Tunisia: Food GHG emissions by system stage (Share of total) - LULUC. Statizoid, drawing on Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Tubiello, F.N. and Leip, A. EDGAR-FOOD data. Figshare, doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13476666 (2021). Retrieved 05 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/food-ghg-emissions-by-system-stage-share-of-total-luluc-production/armenia/tunisia/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/food-ghg-emissions-by-system-stage-share-of-total-luluc-production/armenia/tunisia/">Armenia vs Tunisia: Food GHG emissions by system stage (Share of total) - LULUC</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Food GHG emissions by system stage (Share of total) - LULUC (Production)
Unit
Production
Source
Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Tubiello, F.N. and Leip, A. EDGAR-FOOD data. Figshare, doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13476666 (2021)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
179 places, 4,654 data points, 1990–2015
Last refreshed

Food GHG emissions disaggregated by system stage are generated from EDGAR-FOOD, a global emission inventory of GHGs from the food systems. EDGAR-FOOD has been developed to aid the understanding of the activities underlying the energy demand and use, agriculture and land use change emissions associated with the production, distribution, consumption and disposal of food through the various stages and sectors of the composite global food system. These data were complemented with data from the FAOSTAT database on GHG emissions from land use related to agriculture (FAO, 2020). EDGAR-FOOD represents the first database consistently covering each stage of the food chain for all countries with yearly frequency for the period 1990-2015. Details regarding the methodology applied are available in Crippa et al. (2021).