Finland vs Malta: R&D Environmental Protection, Recurrent (general government)
R&D Environmental Protection, Recurrent (general government) over time
- Finland
- Malta
How they compare
Finland currently reports 70.78 million USD against 17.18 million USD in Malta, a difference of 53.6 million USD.
That makes Finland's figure about 4.1 times Malta's.
Across all 23 years both countries report, Finland has been ahead every year.
Finland ranks 6th and Malta ranks 9th of 34 countries.
Finland has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Finland | Malta | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 65.01 million USD | 0.0233 million USD | 64.99 million USD | Finland |
| 2010s | 61.93 million USD | 0.088 million USD | 61.84 million USD | Finland |
| 2020s | 65.37 million USD | 11.46 million USD | 53.91 million USD | Finland |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher r&d environmental protection, recurrent (general government), Finland or Malta?
- Finland, at 70.78 million USD against 17.18 million USD in Malta as of 2023.
- What is the difference in r&d environmental protection, recurrent (general government) between Finland and Malta?
- 53.6 million USD, with Finland ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Finland and Malta?
- 23 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2023.
- How do Finland and Malta rank globally for r&d environmental protection, recurrent (general government)?
- Finland ranks 6th and Malta ranks 9th of 34 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as R&D Environmental Protection, Recurrent (general government expenditure) — Value US$, 2015 prices. 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.