Jordan vs Zimbabwe: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant LCU), per

Jordan
22,242 constant LCU per square kilometre
in 2023
Zimbabwe
20,074 constant LCU per square kilometre
in 2023
Jordan rank
164th
Zimbabwe rank
166th

Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant LCU), per over time

  • Jordan
  • Zimbabwe
5.0k10.0k15.0k20.0k25.0k196919962023

How they compare

Jordan currently reports 22,242 constant LCU per square kilometre against 20,074 constant LCU per square kilometre in Zimbabwe, a difference of 2,168 constant LCU per square kilometre.

That makes Jordan's figure about 1.1 times Zimbabwe's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 48 shared years of data; in 1976 it was Zimbabwe ahead.

Jordan ranks 164th and Zimbabwe ranks 166th of 194 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Jordan averaged higher in 2 and Zimbabwe in 4.

Head to head by decade

Decade Jordan Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1970s 4,338 constant LCU per square kilometre 11,982 constant LCU per square kilometre 7,644 constant LCU per square kilometre Zimbabwe
1980s 5,341 constant LCU per square kilometre 13,803 constant LCU per square kilometre 8,462 constant LCU per square kilometre Zimbabwe
1990s 7,232 constant LCU per square kilometre 18,524 constant LCU per square kilometre 11,292 constant LCU per square kilometre Zimbabwe
2000s 9,223 constant LCU per square kilometre 16,209 constant LCU per square kilometre 6,985 constant LCU per square kilometre Zimbabwe
2010s 17,264 constant LCU per square kilometre 12,269 constant LCU per square kilometre 4,995 constant LCU per square kilometre Jordan
2020s 20,539 constant LCU per square kilometre 17,973 constant LCU per square kilometre 2,566 constant LCU per square kilometre Jordan

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant lcu), per, Jordan or Zimbabwe?
Jordan, at 22,242 constant LCU per square kilometre against 20,074 constant LCU per square kilometre in Zimbabwe as of 2023.
What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant lcu), per between Jordan and Zimbabwe?
2,168 constant LCU per square kilometre, with Jordan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Jordan and Zimbabwe?
48 years are reported by both, from 1976 to 2023.
How do Jordan and Zimbabwe rank globally for agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant lcu), per?
Jordan ranks 164th and Zimbabwe ranks 166th of 194 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant LCU), 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

Jordan vs Zimbabwe: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant LCU), per. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 17 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-added-constant-lcu-per-square-kilometre/jordan/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-lcu-per-square-kilometre/jordan/zimbabwe/">Jordan vs Zimbabwe: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant LCU), per</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant LCU), per square kilometre
Unit
constant LCU per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
195 places, 7,966 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant LCU) 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.