Finland vs Uruguay: Net food imports by crop - Rice, milled
Finland
-106,330
in 2019
Uruguay
-71,712
in 2019
Finland rank
156th
Uruguay rank
153rd
Net food imports by crop - Rice, milled over time
- Finland
- Uruguay
How they compare
Uruguay currently reports -71,712 against -106,330 in Finland, a difference of 34,618.
The two have swapped places 13 times across 59 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Finland ahead.
Finland ranks 156th and Uruguay ranks 153rd of 179 countries.
Across the 6 decades both report, Finland averaged higher in 1 and Uruguay in 5.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Finland | Uruguay | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 8,994 | -817.44 | 9,811 | Finland |
| 1970s | -50,032 | -1,139 | 48,892 | Uruguay |
| 1980s | -131,141 | -39,774 | 91,368 | Uruguay |
| 1990s | -218,682 | -47,511 | 171,171 | Uruguay |
| 2000s | -99,260 | -21,465 | 77,794 | Uruguay |
| 2010s | -183,683 | -41,955 | 141,728 | Uruguay |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher net food imports by crop - rice, milled, Finland or Uruguay?
- Uruguay, at -71,712 against -106,330 in Finland as of 2019.
- What is the difference in net food imports by crop - rice, milled between Finland and Uruguay?
- 34,618, with Uruguay ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Finland and Uruguay?
- 59 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2019.
- How do Finland and Uruguay rank globally for net food imports by crop - rice, milled?
- Finland ranks 156th and Uruguay ranks 153rd of 179 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- FAOSTAT. Available at: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data, published as Net food imports by crop - Rice, milled. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
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.