Belgium vs Seychelles: R&D Environmental Protection (general government expenditure) — Value
R&D Environmental Protection (general government expenditure) — Value over time
- Belgium
- Seychelles
How they compare
Belgium currently reports 90.46 million SLC against 24.54 million SLC in Seychelles, a difference of 65.92 million SLC.
That makes Belgium's figure about 3.7 times Seychelles's.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Belgium has been ahead every year.
Belgium ranks 32nd and Seychelles ranks 35th of 69 countries.
Belgium has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Belgium | Seychelles | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 71.58 million SLC | 7.23 million SLC | 64.35 million SLC | Belgium |
| 2020s | 85.93 million SLC | 6.18 million SLC | 79.75 million SLC | Belgium |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher r&d environmental protection (general government expenditure) — value, Belgium or Seychelles?
- Belgium, at 90.46 million SLC against 24.54 million SLC in Seychelles as of 2023.
- What is the difference in r&d environmental protection (general government expenditure) — value between Belgium and Seychelles?
- 65.92 million SLC, with Belgium ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Belgium and Seychelles?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2023.
- How do Belgium and Seychelles rank globally for r&d environmental protection (general government expenditure) — value?
- Belgium ranks 32nd and Seychelles ranks 35th of 69 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as R&D Environmental Protection (general 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.