Laos vs Latvia: Net food imports by crop - Maize

Laos
-179,115
in 2019
Latvia
-107,066
in 2019
Laos rank
165th
Latvia rank
164th

Net food imports by crop - Maize over time

  • Laos
  • Latvia
-200.0k-100.0k0100.0k196119902019

How they compare

Latvia currently reports -107,066 against -179,115 in Laos, a difference of 72,049.

The two have swapped places 16 times across 57 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Latvia ahead.

Laos ranks 165th and Latvia ranks 164th of 177 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Laos averaged higher in 2 and Latvia in 4.

Head to head by decade

Decade Laos Latvia Difference Ahead
1960s 67.67 0 67.67 Laos
1970s -1.5 0 1.5 Latvia
1980s 250 0 250 Laos
1990s -3,713 7,114 10,827 Latvia
2000s -58,307 -32,417 25,890 Latvia
2010s -136,738 -82,874 53,864 Latvia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher net food imports by crop - maize, Laos or Latvia?
Latvia, at -107,066 against -179,115 in Laos as of 2019.
What is the difference in net food imports by crop - maize between Laos and Latvia?
72,049, with Latvia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Laos and Latvia?
57 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2019.
How do Laos and Latvia rank globally for net food imports by crop - maize?
Laos ranks 165th and Latvia ranks 164th of 177 countries.
Where does this data come from?
FAOSTAT. Available at: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data, published as Net food imports by crop - Maize. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Net food imports by crop - Maize
Source
FAOSTAT. Available at: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
178 places, 7,874 data points, 1961–2019
Last refreshed

Net food imports are generated from FAOSTAT, taking Export level (tonnes) from the Import level (tonnes) [both under Trade: Crops and Livestock Products]. Net food imports are a proxy for the country's vulnerability to global food prices.