Ecuador vs Madagascar: Net food imports by crop - Rice, paddy

Ecuador
-45
in 2018
Madagascar
-52
in 2019
Ecuador rank
88th
Madagascar rank
89th

Net food imports by crop - Rice, paddy over time

  • Ecuador
  • Madagascar
-50.0k050.0k100.0k196119902019

How they compare

Ecuador currently reports -45 against -52 in Madagascar, a difference of 7.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 19 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Ecuador ahead.

Ecuador ranks 88th and Madagascar ranks 89th of 168 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Ecuador Madagascar Difference Ahead
1990s 30,852 -3,186 34,038 Ecuador
2000s 516 -375.4 891.4 Ecuador
2010s 10 -2,181 2,191 Ecuador

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher net food imports by crop - rice, paddy, Ecuador or Madagascar?
Ecuador, at -45 against -52 in Madagascar as of 2018.
What is the difference in net food imports by crop - rice, paddy between Ecuador and Madagascar?
7, with Ecuador ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Madagascar?
19 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2014.
How do Ecuador and Madagascar rank globally for net food imports by crop - rice, paddy?
Ecuador ranks 88th and Madagascar ranks 89th of 168 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, paddy. 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 - Rice, paddy
Source
FAOSTAT. Available at: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
168 places, 6,315 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.