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

Bahamas
6,876 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Zimbabwe
7,000 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Bahamas rank
163rd
Zimbabwe rank
161st

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

  • Bahamas
  • Zimbabwe
5.0k10.0k15.0k196919962023

How they compare

Zimbabwe currently reports 7,000 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 6,876 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Bahamas, a difference of 124 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 35 shared years of data; in 1989 it was Bahamas ahead.

Bahamas ranks 163rd and Zimbabwe ranks 161st of 191 countries.

Across the 5 decades both report, Bahamas averaged higher in 4 and Zimbabwe in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Bahamas Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1980s 12,663 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 5,338 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 7,325 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Bahamas
1990s 14,089 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 6,459 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 7,630 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Bahamas
2000s 14,061 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 5,652 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 8,409 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Bahamas
2010s 10,189 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 4,278 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 5,912 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Bahamas
2020s 6,209 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 6,267 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 57.29 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Zimbabwe

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$), Bahamas or Zimbabwe?
Zimbabwe, at 7,000 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 6,876 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Bahamas as of 2023.
What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$) between Bahamas and Zimbabwe?
124 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre, with Zimbabwe ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Bahamas and Zimbabwe?
35 years are reported by both, from 1989 to 2023.
How do Bahamas and Zimbabwe rank globally for agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$)?
Bahamas ranks 163rd and Zimbabwe ranks 161st of 191 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$), 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 Zimbabwe: 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/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://economy.statizoid.com/compare/agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-added-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/bahamas-the/zimbabwe/">Bahamas vs Zimbabwe: 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.