Bahamas vs Guyana: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$)

Bahamas
6,876 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Guyana
6,195 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Bahamas rank
163rd
Guyana rank
165th

Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$) over time

  • Bahamas
  • Guyana
05.0k10.0k15.0k196119922023

How they compare

Bahamas currently reports 6,876 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 6,195 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Guyana, a difference of 681 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre.

That makes Bahamas's figure about 1.1 times Guyana's.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 35 shared years of data; in 1989 it was Bahamas ahead.

Bahamas ranks 163rd and Guyana ranks 165th of 191 countries.

Bahamas has averaged higher in every one of the 5 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Bahamas Guyana Difference Ahead
1980s 12,663 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 2,409 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 10,254 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Bahamas
1990s 14,089 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 3,441 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 10,648 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Bahamas
2000s 14,061 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 4,306 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 9,755 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Bahamas
2010s 10,189 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 5,199 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 4,990 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Bahamas
2020s 6,209 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 5,723 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 486.95 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Bahamas

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$), Bahamas or Guyana?
Bahamas, at 6,876 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 6,195 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Guyana as of 2023.
What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$) between Bahamas and Guyana?
681 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre, with Bahamas ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Bahamas and Guyana?
35 years are reported by both, from 1989 to 2023.
How do Bahamas and Guyana rank globally for agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$)?
Bahamas ranks 163rd and Guyana ranks 165th of 191 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$), 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

Bahamas vs Guyana: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 17 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-added-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/bahamas-the/guyana/

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/agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-added-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/bahamas-the/guyana/">Bahamas vs Guyana: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$), per square kilometre
Unit
constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
237 places, 10,015 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 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.