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

Italy
0.8162 Production
in 2015
Kazakhstan
0.8623 Production
in 2015
Italy rank
138th
Kazakhstan rank
137th

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

  • Italy
  • Kazakhstan
02.557.510199020022015

How they compare

Kazakhstan currently reports 0.8623 Production against 0.8162 Production in Italy, a difference of 0.0461 Production.

That makes Kazakhstan's figure about 1.1 times Italy's.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 26 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Kazakhstan ahead.

Italy ranks 138th and Kazakhstan ranks 137th of 179 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Italy Kazakhstan Difference Ahead
1990s 0.8107 Production 2.51 Production 1.7 Production Kazakhstan
2000s 0.8055 Production 6.33 Production 5.52 Production Kazakhstan
2010s 0.8348 Production 0.5656 Production 0.2692 Production Italy

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, Italy or Kazakhstan?
Kazakhstan, at 0.8623 Production against 0.8162 Production in Italy as of 2015.
What is the difference in food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc between Italy and Kazakhstan?
0.0461 Production, with Kazakhstan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Italy and Kazakhstan?
26 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2015.
How do Italy and Kazakhstan rank globally for food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc?
Italy ranks 138th 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

Italy 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 06 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/food-ghg-emissions-by-system-stage-share-of-total-luluc-production/italy/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/italy/kazakhstan/">Italy 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).