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

Turkey
0.7228 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Uganda
0.6482 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Turkey rank
30th
Uganda rank
32nd

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

  • Turkey
  • Uganda
00.20.40.60.8196119922023

How they compare

Turkey currently reports 0.7228 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.6482 metric tons per square kilometre in Uganda, a difference of 0.0746 metric tons per square kilometre.

That makes Turkey's figure about 1.1 times Uganda's.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Turkey ahead.

Turkey ranks 30th and Uganda ranks 32nd of 215 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Turkey averaged higher in 6 and Uganda in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Turkey Uganda Difference Ahead
1960s 0.0003 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0003 metric tons per square kilometre Turkey
1970s 0.001 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0.001 metric tons per square kilometre Turkey
1980s 0.0034 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0001 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0033 metric tons per square kilometre Turkey
1990s 0.0352 metric tons per square kilometre 0.001 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0342 metric tons per square kilometre Turkey
2000s 0.1408 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1213 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0196 metric tons per square kilometre Turkey
2010s 0.3244 metric tons per square kilometre 0.5188 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1945 metric tons per square kilometre Uganda
2020s 0.638 metric tons per square kilometre 0.6157 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0223 metric tons per square kilometre Turkey

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square, Turkey or Uganda?
Turkey, at 0.7228 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.6482 metric tons per square kilometre in Uganda as of 2023.
What is the difference in seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square between Turkey and Uganda?
0.0746 metric tons per square kilometre, with Turkey ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Turkey and Uganda?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Turkey and Uganda rank globally for seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square?
Turkey ranks 30th 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

Turkey 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/turkiye/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/turkiye/uganda/">Turkey 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.