Australia and New Zealand vs Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs): Material footprint per unit of GDP, by type of raw material

Australia and New Zealand
0.5612
in 2022
Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)
3.13
in 2022
Australia and New Zealand rank
2nd
Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) rank
4th

Material footprint per unit of GDP, by type of raw material over time

  • Australia and New Zealand
  • Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)
1234200020112022

How they compare

Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) currently reports 3.13 against 0.5612 in Australia and New Zealand, a difference of 2.57.

That makes Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)'s figure about 5.6 times Australia and New Zealand's.

Across all 23 years both countries report, Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) has been ahead every year.

Australia and New Zealand ranks 2nd and Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) ranks 4th of 2 countries.

Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Australia and New Zealand Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) Difference Ahead
2000s 0.7877 3.82 3.04 Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)
2010s 0.6484 3.39 2.74 Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)
2020s 0.5744 3.3 2.72 Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher material footprint per unit of gdp, by type of raw material, Australia and New Zealand or Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)?
Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs), at 3.13 against 0.5612 in Australia and New Zealand as of 2022.
What is the difference in material footprint per unit of gdp, by type of raw material between Australia and New Zealand and Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)?
2.57, with Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and New Zealand and Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)?
23 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2022.
How do Australia and New Zealand and Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) rank globally for material footprint per unit of gdp, by type of raw material?
Australia and New Zealand ranks 2nd and Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) ranks 4th of 2 countries.
Where does this data come from?
United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database, published as Material footprint per unit of GDP, by type of raw material (kilograms per constant 2020 United States dollar). 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

Australia and New Zealand vs Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs): Material footprint per unit of GDP, by type of raw material. Statizoid, drawing on United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database. Retrieved 17 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/material-footprint-per-unit-of-gdp-by-type-of-raw-material-kilograms-per-constant-2020/australia-and-new-zealand/landlocked-developing-countries-lldcs/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under UN SDG Global Database (open, attribution requested); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/material-footprint-per-unit-of-gdp-by-type-of-raw-material-kilograms-per-constant-2020/australia-and-new-zealand/landlocked-developing-countries-lldcs/">Australia and New Zealand vs Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs): Material footprint per unit of GDP, by type of raw material</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Material footprint per unit of GDP, by type of raw material (kilograms per constant 2020 United States dollar)
Source
United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database
Licence
UN SDG Global Database (open, attribution requested)
Coverage
36 places, 828 data points, 2000–2022
Last refreshed