Barbados vs Bhutan: Environmental protection (central government expenditure) — Value
Environmental protection (central government expenditure) — Value over time
- Barbados
- Bhutan
How they compare
Barbados currently reports 93.7 million SLC against 74.72 million SLC in Bhutan, a difference of 18.98 million SLC.
That makes Barbados's figure about 1.3 times Bhutan's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 11 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Barbados ahead.
Barbados ranks 119th and Bhutan ranks 122nd of 155 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Barbados averaged higher in 2 and Bhutan in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Barbados | Bhutan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 131.2 million SLC | 0 million SLC | 131.2 million SLC | Barbados |
| 2010s | 115.41 million SLC | 87.37 million SLC | 28.04 million SLC | Barbados |
| 2020s | 74.35 million SLC | 74.72 million SLC | 0.37 million SLC | Bhutan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher environmental protection (central government expenditure) — value, Barbados or Bhutan?
- Barbados, at 93.7 million SLC against 74.72 million SLC in Bhutan as of 2024.
- What is the difference in environmental protection (central government expenditure) — value between Barbados and Bhutan?
- 18.98 million SLC, with Barbados ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Barbados and Bhutan?
- 11 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2020.
- How do Barbados and Bhutan rank globally for environmental protection (central government expenditure) — value?
- Barbados ranks 119th and Bhutan ranks 122nd of 155 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Environmental protection (central government expenditure) — Value Standard Local Currency. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Statistics Division of FAO collects annually data on Government Expenditure on Agriculture through a questionnaire, which was developed in partnership with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF is the responsible institution for the Government Finance Statistics (GFS) methodology and annually collects GFS data, including Expenditure by Functions of Government (COFOG). The Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) is an international classification developed by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and published by the United Nations Statistical Division (UNSD), with the aim of categorise governments' functions according to their purposes. The FAO questionnaire aligns with Table 7 of the IMF GFS questionnaire, replicates the relevant aggregates and drills down to request additional detail related to Agriculture. The FAO dataset consists of a time series, from 2001 onwards, of Total Government Expenditure and expenditure in: Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, along with its three disaggregated subsectors of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing; and Environmental Protection. In addition, expenditure in each detailed function are further disaggregated into Recurrent and Capital expenditure. Additional indicators include the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure, and the Agriculture Orientation Index (ratio between the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure and the Agriculture Value Added as Share of GDP). Data are reported for the highest level of government available (Consolidated general government, consolidated central government or budgetary central government) and are available for about 100 countries on a regular basis.