Australia vs Estonia: Subnational government climate finance — Climate significant

Australia
0.705 Percentage of GDP
in 2023
Estonia
0.617 Percentage of GDP
in 2023
Australia rank
14th
Estonia rank
17th

Subnational government climate finance — Climate significant over time

  • Australia
  • Estonia
0.20.40.60.8200120122023

How they compare

Australia currently reports 0.705 Percentage of GDP against 0.617 Percentage of GDP in Estonia, a difference of 0.088 Percentage of GDP.

That makes Australia's figure about 1.1 times Estonia's.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 23 shared years of data; in 2001 it was Estonia ahead.

Australia ranks 14th and Estonia ranks 17th of 31 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, Australia averaged higher in 2 and Estonia in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Australia Estonia Difference Ahead
2000s 0.2323 Percentage of GDP 0.5559 Percentage of GDP 0.3236 Percentage of GDP Estonia
2010s 0.4157 Percentage of GDP 0.4057 Percentage of GDP 0.01 Percentage of GDP Australia
2020s 0.6285 Percentage of GDP 0.5415 Percentage of GDP 0.087 Percentage of GDP Australia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher subnational government climate finance — climate significant, Australia or Estonia?
Australia, at 0.705 Percentage of GDP against 0.617 Percentage of GDP in Estonia as of 2023.
What is the difference in subnational government climate finance — climate significant between Australia and Estonia?
0.088 Percentage of GDP, with Australia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Estonia?
23 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2023.
How do Australia and Estonia rank globally for subnational government climate finance — climate significant?
Australia ranks 14th and Estonia ranks 17th of 31 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, published as Subnational government climate finance — Climate significant investment. 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 vs Estonia: Subnational government climate finance — Climate significant. Statizoid, drawing on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved 15 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/subnational-government-climate-finance-climate-significant-investment/australia/estonia/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/subnational-government-climate-finance-climate-significant-investment/australia/estonia/">Australia vs Estonia: Subnational government climate finance — Climate significant</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Subnational government climate finance — Climate significant investment
Unit
Percentage of GDP
Source
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Licence
OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required)
Coverage
32 places, 716 data points, 2001–2023
Last refreshed

The Subnational Government Climate Finance database provides comparable data on subnational public climate-significant expenditure and investment, covering the years from 2001 to 2023, for 33 OECD and EU countries. This database was built using a pioneer methodology developed in the framework of the project “Financing Climate Action in Regions and Cities”, a joint 2022 project between the OECD and the European Commission Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy (DG REGIO). The methodology relies on a refined approach to the COFOG classification from the System of National Accounts. Using the EU taxonomy for sustainability activities, three first-level COFOG functions (economic affairs and housing and community amenities) and 13 second-level COFOG functions (e.g. transport and energy, environmental protection, waste, water management, housing development) were identified as being “climate-significant”, meaning that expenditure and investment in these areas contributes, to some extent, to climate adaptation or mitigation objectives. For more information on the methodology used and related work on climate finance tracking, please visit: Tracking subnational government climate expenditure