Chile vs Norway: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$)

Chile
13,521 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Norway
14,424 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Chile rank
140th
Norway rank
137th

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

  • Chile
  • Norway
05.0k10.0k15.0k20.0k196119922023

How they compare

Norway currently reports 14,424 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 13,521 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Chile, a difference of 903 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre.

That makes Norway's figure about 1.1 times Chile's.

Across all 54 years both countries report, Norway has been ahead every year.

Chile ranks 140th and Norway ranks 137th of 191 countries.

Norway has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Chile Norway Difference Ahead
1970s 1,702 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 6,728 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 5,026 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Norway
1980s 2,492 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 7,281 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 4,789 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Norway
1990s 4,696 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 9,348 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 4,652 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Norway
2000s 8,084 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 11,001 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 2,917 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Norway
2010s 12,243 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 14,805 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 2,562 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Norway
2020s 13,379 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 16,100 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 2,721 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Norway

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$), Chile or Norway?
Norway, at 14,424 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 13,521 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Chile as of 2023.
What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$) between Chile and Norway?
903 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre, with Norway ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Chile and Norway?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Chile and Norway rank globally for agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$)?
Chile ranks 140th and Norway ranks 137th of 191 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$), 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

Chile vs Norway: 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/chile/norway/

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/chile/norway/">Chile vs Norway: 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.