Namibia vs Sierra Leone: Food GHG emissions by system stage (Share of total) - LULUC

Namibia
49.05 Production
in 2015
Sierra Leone
48.74 Production
in 2015
Namibia rank
43rd
Sierra Leone rank
44th

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

  • Namibia
  • Sierra Leone
20406080199020022015

How they compare

Namibia currently reports 49.05 Production against 48.74 Production in Sierra Leone, a difference of 0.31 Production.

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

Namibia ranks 43rd and Sierra Leone ranks 44th of 179 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, Namibia averaged higher in 1 and Sierra Leone in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Namibia Sierra Leone Difference Ahead
1990s 60.13 Production 74.15 Production 14.02 Production Sierra Leone
2000s 53.77 Production 72.03 Production 18.26 Production Sierra Leone
2010s 50.41 Production 33.73 Production 16.68 Production Namibia

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, Namibia or Sierra Leone?
Namibia, at 49.05 Production against 48.74 Production in Sierra Leone as of 2015.
What is the difference in food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc between Namibia and Sierra Leone?
0.31 Production, with Namibia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Namibia and Sierra Leone?
26 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2015.
How do Namibia and Sierra Leone rank globally for food ghg emissions by system stage (share of total) - luluc?
Namibia ranks 43rd and Sierra Leone ranks 44th 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

Namibia vs Sierra Leone: 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 30 August 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/food-ghg-emissions-by-system-stage-share-of-total-luluc-production/namibia/sierra-leone/

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/namibia/sierra-leone/">Namibia vs Sierra Leone: 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).