Samoa vs Suriname: Fruit consumption by type
Samoa
0 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Suriname
0.01 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Samoa rank
140th
Suriname rank
138th
Fruit consumption by type over time
- Samoa
- Suriname
How they compare
Suriname currently reports 0.01 kilograms per year per capita against 0 kilograms per year per capita in Samoa, a difference of 0.01 kilograms per year per capita.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Suriname has been ahead every year.
Samoa ranks 140th and Suriname ranks 138th of 184 countries.
Suriname has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Samoa | Suriname | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 0.01 kilograms per year per capita | 0.02 kilograms per year per capita | 0.01 kilograms per year per capita | Suriname |
| 2020s | 0.005 kilograms per year per capita | 0.0175 kilograms per year per capita | 0.0125 kilograms per year per capita | Suriname |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher fruit consumption by type, Samoa or Suriname?
- Suriname, at 0.01 kilograms per year per capita against 0 kilograms per year per capita in Samoa as of 2023.
- What is the difference in fruit consumption by type between Samoa and Suriname?
- 0.01 kilograms per year per capita, with Suriname ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Samoa and Suriname?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2018 to 2023.
- How do Samoa and Suriname rank globally for fruit consumption by type?
- Samoa ranks 140th and Suriname ranks 138th of 184 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Fruit consumption by type. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
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.