2.5.2 Proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk in Eastern Europe
Eastern Europe: 2.5.2 Proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk was 40 % in 2025. ▲ Rising
2.5.2 Proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk in Eastern Europe, 2000–2025
Source: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Measured in %.
Analysis
In 2025, 2.5.2 proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk in Eastern Europe stood at 40 %.
That represents a change of up 2.6% on the previous year and down 2.4% over ten years.
Over the whole period, 2.5.2 proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk in Eastern Europe peaked at 41 % in 2008 and was at its lowest, 26 %, in 2000.
Eastern Europe ranks 8th of 29 groups on this measure, in the top quarter.
The long-run direction has been consistently rising across the 26 years of available data.
2.5.2 Proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk in Eastern Europe, year by year
| Year | % | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 26 % | — |
| 2001 | 27 % | +3.8% |
| 2002 | 28 % | +3.7% |
| 2003 | 31 % | +10.7% |
| 2004 | 33 % | +6.5% |
| 2005 | 32 % | -3.0% |
| 2006 | 33 % | +3.1% |
| 2007 | 39 % | +18.2% |
| 2008 | 41 % | +5.1% |
| 2009 | 40 % | -2.4% |
| 2010 | 40 % | +0.0% |
| 2011 | 40 % | +0.0% |
| 2012 | 40 % | +0.0% |
| 2013 | 41 % | +2.5% |
| 2014 | 41 % | +0.0% |
| 2015 | 41 % | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 41 % | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 41 % | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 41 % | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 41 % | +0.0% |
| 2020 | 41 % | +0.0% |
| 2021 | 41 % | +0.0% |
| 2022 | 41 % | +0.0% |
| 2023 | 39 % | -4.9% |
| 2024 | 39 % | +0.0% |
| 2025 | 40 % | +2.6% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 33 % | 26 % | 41 % | 10 |
| 2010s | 40.7 % | 40 % | 41 % | 10 |
| 2020s | 40.17 % | 39 % | 41 % | 6 |
Countries ranked near Eastern Europe
- 5 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 0 % compare
- 5 Djibouti 67 % compare
- 5 Republic of Moldova 0 %
- 5 Sweden 67 % compare
- 5 Syrian Arab Republic 0 %
- 5 United Republic of Tanzania 0 % compare
- 5 Viet Nam 0 %
- 7 Belgium 63 % compare
- 8 Zimbabwe 60 % compare
- 9 El Salvador 50 % compare
- 9 Turkmenistan 50 % compare
- 11 New Zealand 48 % compare
More economy & growth data for Eastern Europe
- Gross Domestic Product, GDP in millions constant 2021 international $ 11.27 million (2027)
- Gross Domestic Product — Value US$ 4.49 million million USD (2024)
- Gross Fixed Capital Formation — Share of GDP US$ 21.57 % (2024)
- Gross Domestic Product — Value US$ per capita 15,743 USD (2024)
- Gross Domestic Product — Value US$ per capita, 2015 prices 11,251 USD (2024)
- Gross Domestic Product — Value US$, 2015 prices 3.21 million million USD (2024)
- Gross Domestic Product — Annual growth US$ 6.16 % (2024)
- Gross Domestic Product — Annual growth US$ per capita 6.54 % (2024)
- Gross Fixed Capital Formation — Annual growth US$ 3.38 % (2024)
- Gross Fixed Capital Formation — Share of GDP US$, 2015 prices 23.07 % (2024)
Frequently asked questions
- What is 2.5.2 proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk in Eastern Europe?
- 2.5.2 proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk in Eastern Europe was 40 % in 2025, according to Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
- What is the highest 2.5.2 proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk recorded in Eastern Europe?
- The highest recorded value was 41 % in 2008.
- What is the lowest 2.5.2 proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk recorded in Eastern Europe?
- The lowest recorded value was 26 % in 2000.
- How does Eastern Europe rank for 2.5.2 proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk?
- Eastern Europe ranks 8th out of 29 groups with data for 2025.
- Is 2.5.2 proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk rising or falling in Eastern Europe?
- Over the last ten years it is down 2.4%. The long-run trend across the full record is rising.
- Where does this Eastern Europe data come from?
- The figures come from Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as part of 2.5.2 Proportion of transboundary breeds classified as being at risk of extinction — Value. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 26 observations, free to reuse under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO).
About this data
As the custodian agency of 22 SDG indicators, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) is responsible for curating and refining the methodologies of these indicators, collecting data from national sources, ensuring their quality and compatibility with applicable standards and classifications, and disseminating data at global level. This FAOSTAT domain complements the global SDG database administered by the United Nations Statistical Division (UNSD), as well as FAO’s SDG indicators portal, by providing access to the available data for all SDG Indicators under FAO custodianship. While this metadata page provides summary information on all SDG indicators data disseminated through FAOSTAT, indicator-specific metadata can be accessed from the link on the right hand navigation column. This additional metadata file provides details on the methodology used to compile each indicators, their data sources and the contact information of the relevant FAO focal point. It includes the links to the official SDG Indicator metadata documents accessible from the UNSD global SDG database.SDG Indicators under FAO custodianship, consisting of 22 indicators and 66 series that fall under six goals: • Goal 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture.• Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls.• Goal 6: Clean water and sanitation: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.• Goal 12: Responsible consumption and production.• Goal 14: Life below water: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources.• Goal 15: Life on land: Sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, halt and reverse land degradation, halt biodiversity loss.