Protection of biodiversity and landscape in Latvia
Latvia: Protection of biodiversity and landscape was 8.60 million in 2021. ◆ Volatile
Protection of biodiversity and landscape in Latvia, 2001–2021
Source: International Monetary Fund.
Analysis
In 2021, protection of biodiversity and landscape in Latvia stood at 8.60 million.
That represents a change of up 5.1% on the previous year and up 129.7% over ten years.
Over the whole period, protection of biodiversity and landscape in Latvia peaked at 19.61 million in 2008 and was at its lowest, 3.08 million, in 2003.
Latvia ranks 66th of 92 countries on this measure, in the middle of the range.
The series is highly variable year to year, so single readings are best treated with caution.
Protection of biodiversity and landscape in Latvia, year by year
| Year | Value | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2001 | 4.38 million | — |
| 2002 | 4.92 million | +12.3% |
| 2003 | 3.08 million | -37.4% |
| 2004 | 12.77 million | +314.6% |
| 2005 | 10.71 million | -16.1% |
| 2006 | 14.77 million | +37.9% |
| 2007 | 19.52 million | +32.1% |
| 2008 | 19.61 million | +0.5% |
| 2009 | 4.58 million | -76.6% |
| 2010 | 3.91 million | -14.6% |
| 2011 | 3.74 million | -4.4% |
| 2012 | 3.79 million | +1.3% |
| 2013 | 3.88 million | +2.3% |
| 2014 | 4.98 million | +28.3% |
| 2015 | 6.25 million | +25.6% |
| 2016 | 6.21 million | -0.8% |
| 2017 | 8.48 million | +36.6% |
| 2018 | 10.54 million | +24.3% |
| 2019 | 7.64 million | -27.5% |
| 2020 | 8.18 million | +7.1% |
| 2021 | 8.60 million | +5.1% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 10.48 million | 3.08 million | 19.61 million | 9 |
| 2010s | 5.94 million | 3.74 million | 10.54 million | 10 |
| 2020s | 8.39 million | 8.18 million | 8.60 million | 2 |
Countries ranked near Latvia
More public sector data for Latvia
- Arms imports 10.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per capita 5.36 SIPRI trend indicator values per person (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per unit of GDP 0.0002 SIPRI trend indicator values per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), annual growth rate -76.19 % change on previous year (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), gaps filled 10.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per capita 763.99 current USD per person (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per unit of GDP 0.0324 current USD per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), annual growth rate 13.71 % change on previous year (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), gaps filled 1.43 billion current USD (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per square kilometre 674.92 SIPRI trend indicator values per square kilometre (2023)
Frequently asked questions
- What is protection of biodiversity and landscape in Latvia?
- Protection of biodiversity and landscape in Latvia was 8.60 million in 2021, according to International Monetary Fund.
- What is the highest protection of biodiversity and landscape recorded in Latvia?
- The highest recorded value was 19.61 million in 2008.
- What is the lowest protection of biodiversity and landscape recorded in Latvia?
- The lowest recorded value was 3.08 million in 2003.
- How does Latvia rank for protection of biodiversity and landscape?
- Latvia ranks 66th out of 92 countries with data for 2021.
- Is protection of biodiversity and landscape rising or falling in Latvia?
- Over the last ten years it is up 129.7%. The long-run trend across the full record is volatile.
- Where does this Latvia data come from?
- The figures come from International Monetary Fund, published as part of Protection of biodiversity and landscape (Domestic Currency). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 21 observations, free to reuse under IMF Terms and Conditions (attribution required).
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).