Equatorial Guinea vs Zimbabwe: How have things changed?, per square kilometre

Equatorial Guinea
0.2577 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Zimbabwe
0.2563 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Equatorial Guinea rank
156th
Zimbabwe rank
157th

How have things changed?, per square kilometre over time

  • Equatorial Guinea
  • Zimbabwe
00.10.20.30.40.5196519942023

How they compare

Equatorial Guinea currently reports 0.2577 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.2563 metric tons per square kilometre in Zimbabwe, a difference of 0.0014 metric tons per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 8 times across 59 shared years of data; in 1965 it was Equatorial Guinea ahead.

Equatorial Guinea ranks 156th and Zimbabwe ranks 157th of 215 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Equatorial Guinea averaged higher in 4 and Zimbabwe in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade Equatorial Guinea Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1960s 0.072 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0052 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0668 metric tons per square kilometre Equatorial Guinea
1970s 0.1426 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0114 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1312 metric tons per square kilometre Equatorial Guinea
1980s 0.1189 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0546 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0643 metric tons per square kilometre Equatorial Guinea
1990s 0.1633 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1577 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0057 metric tons per square kilometre Equatorial Guinea
2000s 0.154 metric tons per square kilometre 0.226 metric tons per square kilometre 0.072 metric tons per square kilometre Zimbabwe
2010s 0.2409 metric tons per square kilometre 0.3684 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1276 metric tons per square kilometre Zimbabwe
2020s 0.2332 metric tons per square kilometre 0.2895 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0564 metric tons per square kilometre Zimbabwe

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher how have things changed?, per square kilometre, Equatorial Guinea or Zimbabwe?
Equatorial Guinea, at 0.2577 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.2563 metric tons per square kilometre in Zimbabwe as of 2023.
What is the difference in how have things changed?, per square kilometre between Equatorial Guinea and Zimbabwe?
0.0014 metric tons per square kilometre, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Zimbabwe?
59 years are reported by both, from 1965 to 2023.
How do Equatorial Guinea and Zimbabwe rank globally for how have things changed?, per square kilometre?
Equatorial Guinea ranks 156th and Zimbabwe ranks 157th of 215 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as How have things changed?, per square kilometre. 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

Equatorial Guinea vs Zimbabwe: How have things changed?, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 28 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/how-have-things-changed-per-square-kilometre/equatorial-guinea/zimbabwe/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/how-have-things-changed-per-square-kilometre/equatorial-guinea/zimbabwe/">Equatorial Guinea vs Zimbabwe: How have things changed?, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
How have things changed?, per square kilometre
Unit
metric tons per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
215 places, 11,549 data points, 1965–2023
Last refreshed

How have things changed? divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.