Hong Kong vs Low & middle income: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$)

Hong Kong
157,071 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Low & middle income
41,412 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Hong Kong rank
14th
Low & middle income rank
12th

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

  • Hong Kong
  • Low & middle income
0100.0k200.0k300.0k196119922023

How they compare

Hong Kong currently reports 157,071 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 41,412 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Low & middle income, a difference of 115,659 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre.

That makes Hong Kong's figure about 3.8 times Low & middle income's.

Across all 24 years both countries report, Hong Kong has been ahead every year.

Hong Kong ranks 14th and Low & middle income ranks 12th of 191 countries.

Hong Kong has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Hong Kong Low & middle income Difference Ahead
2000s 282,006 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 22,838 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 259,167 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Hong Kong
2010s 205,706 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 31,658 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 174,048 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Hong Kong
2020s 170,993 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 39,465 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 131,528 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Hong Kong

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$), Hong Kong or Low & middle income?
Hong Kong, at 157,071 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 41,412 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Low & middle income as of 2023.
What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$) between Hong Kong and Low & middle income?
115,659 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre, with Hong Kong ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Hong Kong and Low & middle income?
24 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2023.
How do Hong Kong and Low & middle income rank globally for agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$)?
Hong Kong ranks 14th and Low & middle income ranks 12th of 191 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$), 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

Hong Kong vs Low & middle income: 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/hong-kong-sar-china/low-and-middle-income/

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/hong-kong-sar-china/low-and-middle-income/">Hong Kong vs Low & middle income: 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.