Mauritania vs New Zealand: Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square

Mauritania
632.01 current US$ per square kilometre
in 2021
New Zealand
707.42 current US$ per square kilometre
in 2021
Mauritania rank
62nd
New Zealand rank
61st

Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square over time

  • Mauritania
  • New Zealand
0200400600800197019952021

How they compare

New Zealand currently reports 707.42 current US$ per square kilometre against 632.01 current US$ per square kilometre in Mauritania, a difference of 75.41 current US$ per square kilometre.

That makes New Zealand's figure about 1.1 times Mauritania's.

The two have swapped places 9 times across 52 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Mauritania ahead.

Mauritania ranks 62nd and New Zealand ranks 61st of 216 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Mauritania averaged higher in 1 and New Zealand in 5.

Head to head by decade

Decade Mauritania New Zealand Difference Ahead
1970s 20.64 current US$ per square kilometre 8.28 current US$ per square kilometre 12.36 current US$ per square kilometre Mauritania
1980s 25.26 current US$ per square kilometre 25.66 current US$ per square kilometre 0.3976 current US$ per square kilometre New Zealand
1990s 5.73 current US$ per square kilometre 55.64 current US$ per square kilometre 49.91 current US$ per square kilometre New Zealand
2000s 148.8 current US$ per square kilometre 162.89 current US$ per square kilometre 14.09 current US$ per square kilometre New Zealand
2010s 215.4 current US$ per square kilometre 460.08 current US$ per square kilometre 244.68 current US$ per square kilometre New Zealand
2020s 326.8 current US$ per square kilometre 469.31 current US$ per square kilometre 142.5 current US$ per square kilometre New Zealand

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current us$), per square, Mauritania or New Zealand?
New Zealand, at 707.42 current US$ per square kilometre against 632.01 current US$ per square kilometre in Mauritania as of 2021.
What is the difference in adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current us$), per square between Mauritania and New Zealand?
75.41 current US$ per square kilometre, with New Zealand ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mauritania and New Zealand?
52 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2021.
How do Mauritania and New Zealand rank globally for adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current us$), per square?
Mauritania ranks 62nd and New Zealand ranks 61st of 216 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), 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

Mauritania vs New Zealand: Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 28 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/adjusted-savings-mineral-depletion-current-us-per-square-kilometre/mauritania/new-zealand/

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://economy.statizoid.com/compare/adjusted-savings-mineral-depletion-current-us-per-square-kilometre/mauritania/new-zealand/">Mauritania vs New Zealand: Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square kilometre
Unit
current US$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
217 places, 10,348 data points, 1970–2021
Last refreshed

Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$) 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.