El Salvador vs Uganda: Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square

El Salvador
0.6186 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Uganda
0.6482 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
El Salvador rank
35th
Uganda rank
32nd

Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square over time

  • El Salvador
  • Uganda
00.20.40.6196119922023

How they compare

Uganda currently reports 0.6482 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.6186 metric tons per square kilometre in El Salvador, a difference of 0.0296 metric tons per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 6 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Uganda ahead.

El Salvador ranks 35th and Uganda ranks 32nd of 215 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, El Salvador averaged higher in 2 and Uganda in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade El Salvador Uganda Difference Ahead
1960s 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre
1970s 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre
1980s 0.0177 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0001 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0176 metric tons per square kilometre El Salvador
1990s 0.025 metric tons per square kilometre 0.001 metric tons per square kilometre 0.024 metric tons per square kilometre El Salvador
2000s 0.1061 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1213 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0152 metric tons per square kilometre Uganda
2010s 0.3196 metric tons per square kilometre 0.5188 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1992 metric tons per square kilometre Uganda
2020s 0.5654 metric tons per square kilometre 0.6157 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0503 metric tons per square kilometre Uganda

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square, El Salvador or Uganda?
Uganda, at 0.6482 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.6186 metric tons per square kilometre in El Salvador as of 2023.
What is the difference in seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square between El Salvador and Uganda?
0.0296 metric tons per square kilometre, with Uganda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for El Salvador and Uganda?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do El Salvador and Uganda rank globally for seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square?
El Salvador ranks 35th and Uganda ranks 32nd of 215 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, 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

El Salvador vs Uganda: Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 21 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/seafood-production-wild-fish-catch-vs-aquaculture-per-square-kilometre/el-salvador/uganda/

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/seafood-production-wild-fish-catch-vs-aquaculture-per-square-kilometre/el-salvador/uganda/">El Salvador vs Uganda: Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, 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, 12,245 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture 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.