Sudan vs Zimbabwe: Gross public investment
Gross public investment over time
- Sudan
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Zimbabwe currently reports 3.7% against 3.0% in Sudan, a difference of 0.7%.
That makes Zimbabwe's figure about 1.2 times Sudan's.
The two have swapped places 5 times across 30 shared years of data; in 1979 it was Sudan ahead.
Sudan ranks 48th and Zimbabwe ranks 45th of 49 countries.
Across the 5 decades both report, Sudan averaged higher in 3 and Zimbabwe in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Sudan | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1970s | 6.1% | 1.8% | 4.3% | Sudan |
| 1980s | 4.3% | 2.8% | 1.5% | Sudan |
| 1990s | 0.7% | 2.9% | 2.2% | Zimbabwe |
| 2000s | 4.6% | 1.9% | 2.8% | Sudan |
| 2010s | 3.5% | 4.6% | 1.1% | Zimbabwe |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher gross public investment, Sudan or Zimbabwe?
- Zimbabwe, at 3.7% against 3.0% in Sudan as of 2011.
- What is the difference in gross public investment between Sudan and Zimbabwe?
- 0.7%, with Zimbabwe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Sudan and Zimbabwe?
- 30 years are reported by both, from 1979 to 2011.
- How do Sudan and Zimbabwe rank globally for gross public investment?
- Sudan ranks 48th and Zimbabwe ranks 45th of 49 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- World Bank national accounts data, and OECD National Accounts data files, published as Gross public investment (% of GDP). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Gross public investment (see definition below) as a percentage of GDP (%) . Public sectors’ gross domestic fixed investment (gross fixed capital formation) comprises all additions to the stocks of fixed assets (purchases and own-account capital formation), less any sales of second-hand and scrapped fixed assets measured at constant prices, done by government units and non-financial public enterprises. Most outlays by government on military equipment are excluded. According to 1993 SNA are outlays on weapons and equipment with no alternative civil use treated as intermediate consumption, and part of governments consumption expenditure.