Equatorial Guinea vs Kyrgyzstan: Protection of biodiversity and landscape
Equatorial Guinea
734.45 million
in 2020
Kyrgyzstan
920.00 million
in 2022
Equatorial Guinea rank
39th
Kyrgyzstan rank
36th
Protection of biodiversity and landscape over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Kyrgyzstan
How they compare
Kyrgyzstan currently reports 920.00 million against 734.45 million in Equatorial Guinea, a difference of 185.55 million.
That makes Kyrgyzstan's figure about 1.3 times Equatorial Guinea's.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Equatorial Guinea has been ahead every year.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 39th and Kyrgyzstan ranks 36th of 92 countries.
Equatorial Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Kyrgyzstan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 1.08 billion | 779.66 million | 301.67 million | Equatorial Guinea |
| 2020s | 734.45 million | 571.80 million | 162.65 million | Equatorial Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protection of biodiversity and landscape, Equatorial Guinea or Kyrgyzstan?
- Kyrgyzstan, at 920.00 million against 734.45 million in Equatorial Guinea as of 2022.
- What is the difference in protection of biodiversity and landscape between Equatorial Guinea and Kyrgyzstan?
- 185.55 million, with Kyrgyzstan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Kyrgyzstan?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2020.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Kyrgyzstan rank globally for protection of biodiversity and landscape?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 39th and Kyrgyzstan ranks 36th of 92 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- International Monetary Fund, published as Protection of biodiversity and landscape (Domestic Currency). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
This dataset captures government spending on environmental protection efforts such as pollution abatement, biodiversity conservation, and waste management. These expenditures are classified according to the COFOG framework (Classification of the Functions of Government).