Guatemala vs Zimbabwe: Soybeans: are they used for food, feed or fuel?, per square kilometre

Guatemala
0.0093 tonnes per square kilometre
in 2023
Zimbabwe
0.0078 tonnes per square kilometre
in 2023
Guatemala rank
60th
Zimbabwe rank
61st

Soybeans: are they used for food, feed or fuel?, per square kilometre over time

  • Guatemala
  • Zimbabwe
00.020.040.060.08196119922023

How they compare

Guatemala currently reports 0.0093 tonnes per square kilometre against 0.0078 tonnes per square kilometre in Zimbabwe, a difference of 0.0015 tonnes per square kilometre.

That makes Guatemala's figure about 1.2 times Zimbabwe's.

The two have swapped places 9 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Zimbabwe ahead.

Guatemala ranks 60th and Zimbabwe ranks 61st of 189 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Guatemala averaged higher in 5 and Zimbabwe in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Guatemala Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1960s 0 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0003 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0003 tonnes per square kilometre Zimbabwe
1970s 0 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0078 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0078 tonnes per square kilometre Zimbabwe
1980s 0.0112 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0111 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0001 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala
1990s 0.0392 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0165 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0226 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala
2000s 0.0401 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0233 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0169 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala
2010s 0.0103 tonnes per square kilometre 0.008 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0023 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala
2020s 0.014 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0084 tonnes per square kilometre 0.0056 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher soybeans: are they used for food, feed or fuel?, per square kilometre, Guatemala or Zimbabwe?
Guatemala, at 0.0093 tonnes per square kilometre against 0.0078 tonnes per square kilometre in Zimbabwe as of 2023.
What is the difference in soybeans: are they used for food, feed or fuel?, per square kilometre between Guatemala and Zimbabwe?
0.0015 tonnes per square kilometre, with Guatemala ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guatemala and Zimbabwe?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Guatemala and Zimbabwe rank globally for soybeans: are they used for food, feed or fuel?, per square kilometre?
Guatemala ranks 60th and Zimbabwe ranks 61st of 189 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Soybeans: are they used for food, feed or fuel?, 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

Guatemala vs Zimbabwe: Soybeans: are they used for food, feed or fuel?, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 22 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/soybeans-are-they-used-for-food-feed-or-fuel-per-square-kilometre/guatemala/zimbabwe/

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/soybeans-are-they-used-for-food-feed-or-fuel-per-square-kilometre/guatemala/zimbabwe/">Guatemala vs Zimbabwe: Soybeans: are they used for food, feed or fuel?, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Soybeans: are they used for food, feed or fuel?, per square kilometre
Unit
tonnes per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
189 places, 9,521 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Soybeans: are they used for food, feed or fuel? 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.