Kenya vs Palestine: Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square

Kenya
0.1 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Palestine
0.1047 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Kenya rank
77th
Palestine rank
74th

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

  • Kenya
  • Palestine
00.0250.050.0750.10.125196119922023

How they compare

Palestine currently reports 0.1047 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.1 metric tons per square kilometre in Kenya, a difference of 0.0047 metric tons per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 7 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Kenya ahead.

Kenya ranks 77th and Palestine ranks 74th of 215 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Kenya averaged higher in 4 and Palestine in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade Kenya Palestine Difference Ahead
1960s 0.0006 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0006 metric tons per square kilometre Kenya
1970s 0.0003 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0003 metric tons per square kilometre Kenya
1980s 0.0005 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0005 metric tons per square kilometre Kenya
1990s 0.0015 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0015 metric tons per square kilometre Kenya
2000s 0.0035 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0041 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0005 metric tons per square kilometre Palestine
2010s 0.0331 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0601 metric tons per square kilometre 0.027 metric tons per square kilometre Palestine
2020s 0.0604 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1141 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0538 metric tons per square kilometre Palestine

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square, Kenya or Palestine?
Palestine, at 0.1047 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.1 metric tons per square kilometre in Kenya as of 2023.
What is the difference in seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square between Kenya and Palestine?
0.0047 metric tons per square kilometre, with Palestine ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Kenya and Palestine?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Kenya and Palestine rank globally for seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square?
Kenya ranks 77th and Palestine ranks 74th 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

Kenya vs Palestine: Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 22 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/seafood-production-wild-fish-catch-vs-aquaculture-per-square-kilometre/kenya/west-bank-and-gaza/

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/kenya/west-bank-and-gaza/">Kenya vs Palestine: 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.