Botswana vs Solomon Islands: Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), per square kilometre

Botswana
334,743 current LCU per square kilometre
in 2023
Solomon Islands
472,647 current LCU per square kilometre
in 2023
Botswana rank
169th
Solomon Islands rank
166th

Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), per square kilometre over time

  • Botswana
  • Solomon Islands
0100.0k200.0k300.0k400.0k500.0k196119922023

How they compare

Solomon Islands currently reports 472,647 current LCU per square kilometre against 334,743 current LCU per square kilometre in Botswana, a difference of 137,904 current LCU per square kilometre.

That makes Solomon Islands's figure about 1.4 times Botswana's.

Across all 44 years both countries report, Solomon Islands has been ahead every year.

Botswana ranks 169th and Solomon Islands ranks 166th of 185 countries.

Solomon Islands has averaged higher in every one of the 5 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Botswana Solomon Islands Difference Ahead
1980s 2,551 current LCU per square kilometre 18,096 current LCU per square kilometre 15,544 current LCU per square kilometre Solomon Islands
1990s 15,509 current LCU per square kilometre 58,442 current LCU per square kilometre 42,934 current LCU per square kilometre Solomon Islands
2000s 56,085 current LCU per square kilometre 137,815 current LCU per square kilometre 81,730 current LCU per square kilometre Solomon Islands
2010s 178,279 current LCU per square kilometre 328,699 current LCU per square kilometre 150,420 current LCU per square kilometre Solomon Islands
2020s 292,411 current LCU per square kilometre 421,075 current LCU per square kilometre 128,664 current LCU per square kilometre Solomon Islands

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher final consumption expenditure (current lcu), per square kilometre, Botswana or Solomon Islands?
Solomon Islands, at 472,647 current LCU per square kilometre against 334,743 current LCU per square kilometre in Botswana as of 2023.
What is the difference in final consumption expenditure (current lcu), per square kilometre between Botswana and Solomon Islands?
137,904 current LCU per square kilometre, with Solomon Islands ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and Solomon Islands?
44 years are reported by both, from 1980 to 2023.
How do Botswana and Solomon Islands rank globally for final consumption expenditure (current lcu), per square kilometre?
Botswana ranks 169th and Solomon Islands ranks 166th of 185 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Final consumption expenditure (current 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

Botswana vs Solomon Islands: Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 22 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/final-consumption-expenditure-current-lcu-per-square-kilometre/botswana/solomon-islands/

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/final-consumption-expenditure-current-lcu-per-square-kilometre/botswana/solomon-islands/">Botswana vs Solomon Islands: Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), per square kilometre
Unit
current LCU per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
185 places, 8,200 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Final consumption expenditure (current 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.