Mauritania vs Suriname: Protein supply from animal foods vs. GDP per capita

Mauritania
32.22 grams of protein per day per capita
in 2023
Suriname
32.34 grams of protein per day per capita
in 2023
Mauritania rank
122nd
Suriname rank
121st

Protein supply from animal foods vs. GDP per capita over time

  • Mauritania
  • Suriname
01020304050196119922023

How they compare

Suriname currently reports 32.34 grams of protein per day per capita against 32.22 grams of protein per day per capita in Mauritania, a difference of 0.12 grams of protein per day per capita.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Mauritania ahead.

Mauritania ranks 122nd and Suriname ranks 121st of 192 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Mauritania averaged higher in 5 and Suriname in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Mauritania Suriname Difference Ahead
1960s 45.31 grams of protein per day per capita 24.05 grams of protein per day per capita 21.26 grams of protein per day per capita Mauritania
1970s 36.68 grams of protein per day per capita 23.36 grams of protein per day per capita 13.32 grams of protein per day per capita Mauritania
1980s 35.53 grams of protein per day per capita 26.76 grams of protein per day per capita 8.76 grams of protein per day per capita Mauritania
1990s 30.08 grams of protein per day per capita 26.3 grams of protein per day per capita 3.78 grams of protein per day per capita Mauritania
2000s 33.18 grams of protein per day per capita 23.92 grams of protein per day per capita 9.25 grams of protein per day per capita Mauritania
2010s 32.73 grams of protein per day per capita 33.05 grams of protein per day per capita 0.3145 grams of protein per day per capita Suriname
2020s 31.76 grams of protein per day per capita 36.11 grams of protein per day per capita 4.36 grams of protein per day per capita Suriname

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher protein supply from animal foods vs. gdp per capita, Mauritania or Suriname?
Suriname, at 32.34 grams of protein per day per capita against 32.22 grams of protein per day per capita in Mauritania as of 2023.
What is the difference in protein supply from animal foods vs. gdp per capita between Mauritania and Suriname?
0.12 grams of protein per day per capita, with Suriname ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mauritania and Suriname?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Mauritania and Suriname rank globally for protein supply from animal foods vs. gdp per capita?
Mauritania ranks 122nd and Suriname ranks 121st of 192 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Protein supply from animal foods vs. GDP per capita. 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

Mauritania vs Suriname: Protein supply from animal foods vs. GDP per capita. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data. Retrieved 29 August 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/animal-protein-vs-gdp/mauritania/suriname/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/animal-protein-vs-gdp/mauritania/suriname/">Mauritania vs Suriname: Protein supply from animal foods vs. GDP per capita</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Protein supply from animal foods vs. GDP per capita
Unit
grams of protein per day per capita
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
192 places, 10,214 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Quantity that is available for consumption at the end of the supply chain. It does not account for consumer waste, so the quantity that is actually consumed may be lower.