Belarus vs Suriname: Total Expenditure (central government) — Value Standard Local Currency
Total Expenditure (central government) — Value Standard Local Currency over time
- Belarus
- Suriname
How they compare
Suriname currently reports 43,285 million SLC against 41,842 million SLC in Belarus, a difference of 1,443 million SLC.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 23 shared years of data; in 2001 it was Suriname ahead.
Belarus ranks 119th and Suriname ranks 117th of 174 countries.
Belarus has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Belarus | Suriname | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 1,716 million SLC | 1,525 million SLC | 190.85 million SLC | Belarus |
| 2010s | 14,501 million SLC | 7,364 million SLC | 7,138 million SLC | Belarus |
| 2020s | 34,973 million SLC | 22,101 million SLC | 12,872 million SLC | Belarus |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher total expenditure (central government) — value standard local currency, Belarus or Suriname?
- Suriname, at 43,285 million SLC against 41,842 million SLC in Belarus as of 2024.
- What is the difference in total expenditure (central government) — value standard local currency between Belarus and Suriname?
- 1,443 million SLC, with Suriname ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Belarus and Suriname?
- 23 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2023.
- How do Belarus and Suriname rank globally for total expenditure (central government) — value standard local currency?
- Belarus ranks 119th and Suriname ranks 117th of 174 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Total Expenditure (central government) — 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.