Ecuador vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Cocoa bean consumption per person

Ecuador
0.21 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Saint Kitts and Nevis
0.2199 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Ecuador rank
143rd
Saint Kitts and Nevis rank
141st

Cocoa bean consumption per person over time

  • Ecuador
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis
00.511.52196119922023

How they compare

Saint Kitts and Nevis currently reports 0.2199 kilograms per year per capita against 0.21 kilograms per year per capita in Ecuador, a difference of 0.0099 kilograms per year per capita.

The two have swapped places 16 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Saint Kitts and Nevis ahead.

Ecuador ranks 143rd and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 141st of 192 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Ecuador averaged higher in 5 and Saint Kitts and Nevis in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Ecuador Saint Kitts and Nevis Difference Ahead
1960s 0.3078 kilograms per year per capita 0.5315 kilograms per year per capita 0.2238 kilograms per year per capita Saint Kitts and Nevis
1970s 0.7049 kilograms per year per capita 0.4841 kilograms per year per capita 0.2209 kilograms per year per capita Ecuador
1980s 0.4309 kilograms per year per capita 0.2949 kilograms per year per capita 0.1361 kilograms per year per capita Ecuador
1990s 0.9989 kilograms per year per capita 0.4131 kilograms per year per capita 0.5857 kilograms per year per capita Ecuador
2000s 0.5665 kilograms per year per capita 0.495 kilograms per year per capita 0.0715 kilograms per year per capita Ecuador
2010s 0.163 kilograms per year per capita 0.086 kilograms per year per capita 0.077 kilograms per year per capita Ecuador
2020s 0.205 kilograms per year per capita 0.2474 kilograms per year per capita 0.0424 kilograms per year per capita Saint Kitts and Nevis

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher cocoa bean consumption per person, Ecuador or Saint Kitts and Nevis?
Saint Kitts and Nevis, at 0.2199 kilograms per year per capita against 0.21 kilograms per year per capita in Ecuador as of 2023.
What is the difference in cocoa bean consumption per person between Ecuador and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
0.0099 kilograms per year per capita, with Saint Kitts and Nevis ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Ecuador and Saint Kitts and Nevis rank globally for cocoa bean consumption per person?
Ecuador ranks 143rd and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 141st 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 Cocoa bean consumption per person. 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

Ecuador vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Cocoa bean consumption per person. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data. Retrieved 28 August 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/chocolate-consumption-per-person/ecuador/st-kitts-and-nevis/

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/chocolate-consumption-per-person/ecuador/st-kitts-and-nevis/">Ecuador vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Cocoa bean consumption per person</a> β€” Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Cocoa bean consumption per person
Unit
kilograms per year 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, 10,203 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.