India vs Kazakhstan: Food GHG emissions by system stage (Share of total) - LULUC

India
1.03 Production
in 2015
Kazakhstan
0.8623 Production
in 2015
India rank
136th
Kazakhstan rank
137th

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

  • India
  • Kazakhstan
02.557.510199020022015

How they compare

India currently reports 1.03 Production against 0.8623 Production in Kazakhstan, a difference of 0.1677 Production.

That makes India's figure about 1.2 times Kazakhstan's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 26 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Kazakhstan ahead.

India ranks 136th and Kazakhstan ranks 137th of 179 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, India averaged higher in 1 and Kazakhstan in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade India Kazakhstan Difference Ahead
1990s 1.34 Production 2.51 Production 1.17 Production Kazakhstan
2000s 1.2 Production 6.33 Production 5.13 Production Kazakhstan
2010s 1.44 Production 0.5656 Production 0.8746 Production India

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, India or Kazakhstan?
India, at 1.03 Production against 0.8623 Production in Kazakhstan as of 2015.
What is the difference in food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc between India and Kazakhstan?
0.1677 Production, with India ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for India and Kazakhstan?
26 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2015.
How do India and Kazakhstan rank globally for food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc?
India ranks 136th and Kazakhstan ranks 137th 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

India vs Kazakhstan: 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 04 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/food-ghg-emissions-by-system-stage-share-of-total-luluc-production/india/kazakhstan/

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/india/kazakhstan/">India vs Kazakhstan: 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).