Guatemala vs Rwanda: Food GHG emissions by system stage (Share of total) - LULUC

Guatemala
43.78 Production
in 2015
Rwanda
46.02 Production
in 2015
Guatemala rank
53rd
Rwanda rank
51st

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

  • Guatemala
  • Rwanda
0204060199020022015

How they compare

Rwanda currently reports 46.02 Production against 43.78 Production in Guatemala, a difference of 2.24 Production.

That makes Rwanda's figure about 1.1 times Guatemala's.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 26 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Guatemala ahead.

Guatemala ranks 53rd and Rwanda ranks 51st of 179 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Guatemala Rwanda Difference Ahead
1990s 63.78 Production 58.83 Production 4.96 Production Guatemala
2000s 55.88 Production 46.48 Production 9.4 Production Guatemala
2010s 45.41 Production 38.73 Production 6.68 Production Guatemala

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, Guatemala or Rwanda?
Rwanda, at 46.02 Production against 43.78 Production in Guatemala as of 2015.
What is the difference in food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc between Guatemala and Rwanda?
2.24 Production, with Rwanda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guatemala and Rwanda?
26 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2015.
How do Guatemala and Rwanda rank globally for food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc?
Guatemala ranks 53rd and Rwanda ranks 51st 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

Guatemala vs Rwanda: 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 01 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/food-ghg-emissions-by-system-stage-share-of-total-luluc-production/guatemala/rwanda/

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/guatemala/rwanda/">Guatemala vs Rwanda: 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).