Papua New Guinea vs Serbia: Nonrenewable natural capital, metals and minerals: copper

Papua New Guinea
2.86 billion current US$
in 2020
Serbia
3.08 billion current US$
in 2020
Papua New Guinea rank
25th
Serbia rank
24th

Nonrenewable natural capital, metals and minerals: copper over time

  • Papua New Guinea
  • Serbia
05.0B10.0B15.0B199520072020

How they compare

Serbia currently reports 3.08 billion current US$ against 2.86 billion current US$ in Papua New Guinea, a difference of 212.92 million current US$.

That makes Serbia's figure about 1.1 times Papua New Guinea's.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 14 shared years of data; in 2007 it was Papua New Guinea ahead.

Papua New Guinea ranks 25th and Serbia ranks 24th of 55 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, Papua New Guinea averaged higher in 2 and Serbia in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Papua New Guinea Serbia Difference Ahead
2000s 11.21 billion current US$ 613.30 million current US$ 10.59 billion current US$ Papua New Guinea
2010s 5.21 billion current US$ 2.73 billion current US$ 2.48 billion current US$ Papua New Guinea
2020s 2.86 billion current US$ 3.08 billion current US$ 212.92 million current US$ Serbia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher nonrenewable natural capital, metals and minerals: copper, Papua New Guinea or Serbia?
Serbia, at 3.08 billion current US$ against 2.86 billion current US$ in Papua New Guinea as of 2020.
What is the difference in nonrenewable natural capital, metals and minerals: copper between Papua New Guinea and Serbia?
212.92 million current US$, with Serbia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Papua New Guinea and Serbia?
14 years are reported by both, from 2007 to 2020.
How do Papua New Guinea and Serbia rank globally for nonrenewable natural capital, metals and minerals: copper?
Papua New Guinea ranks 25th and Serbia ranks 24th of 55 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Nonrenewable natural capital, metals and minerals: copper (current US$). 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

Papua New Guinea vs Serbia: Nonrenewable natural capital, metals and minerals: copper. Statizoid. Retrieved 01 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/nonrenewable-natural-capital-metals-and-minerals-copper-current-us/papua-new-guinea/serbia/

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/nonrenewable-natural-capital-metals-and-minerals-copper-current-us/papua-new-guinea/serbia/">Papua New Guinea vs Serbia: Nonrenewable natural capital, metals and minerals: copper</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Nonrenewable natural capital, metals and minerals: copper (current US$)
Unit
current US$
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
55 places, 1,195 data points, 1995–2020
Last refreshed