Mozambique vs Peru: Food GHG emissions by system stage (Share of total) - LULUC

Mozambique
77.33 Production
in 2015
Peru
70.98 Production
in 2015
Mozambique rank
20th
Peru rank
23rd

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

  • Mozambique
  • Peru
020406080199020022015

How they compare

Mozambique currently reports 77.33 Production against 70.98 Production in Peru, a difference of 6.35 Production.

That makes Mozambique's figure about 1.1 times Peru's.

Across all 26 years both countries report, Mozambique has been ahead every year.

Mozambique ranks 20th and Peru ranks 23rd of 179 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Mozambique Peru Difference Ahead
1990s 86.39 Production 78.41 Production 7.98 Production Mozambique
2000s 82.63 Production 69.25 Production 13.38 Production Mozambique
2010s 77.64 Production 71.55 Production 6.09 Production Mozambique

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, Mozambique or Peru?
Mozambique, at 77.33 Production against 70.98 Production in Peru as of 2015.
What is the difference in food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc between Mozambique and Peru?
6.35 Production, with Mozambique ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mozambique and Peru?
26 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2015.
How do Mozambique and Peru rank globally for food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc?
Mozambique ranks 20th and Peru ranks 23rd 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

Mozambique vs Peru: 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 02 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/food-ghg-emissions-by-system-stage-share-of-total-luluc-production/mozambique/peru/

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/mozambique/peru/">Mozambique vs Peru: 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).