Costa Rica vs Philippines: Cumulative CO₂ emissions from land-use change, per square kilometre

Costa Rica
44,196 tonnes per square kilometre
in 2023
Philippines
48,976 tonnes per square kilometre
in 2023
Costa Rica rank
4th
Philippines rank
1st

Cumulative CO₂ emissions from land-use change, per square kilometre over time

  • Costa Rica
  • Philippines
010.0k20.0k30.0k40.0k50.0k196119922023

How they compare

Philippines currently reports 48,976 tonnes per square kilometre against 44,196 tonnes per square kilometre in Costa Rica, a difference of 4,780 tonnes per square kilometre.

That makes Philippines's figure about 1.1 times Costa Rica's.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Philippines ahead.

Costa Rica ranks 4th and Philippines ranks 1st of 194 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Costa Rica averaged higher in 1 and Philippines in 6.

Head to head by decade

Decade Costa Rica Philippines Difference Ahead
1960s 27,026 tonnes per square kilometre 30,909 tonnes per square kilometre 3,882 tonnes per square kilometre Philippines
1970s 33,519 tonnes per square kilometre 35,529 tonnes per square kilometre 2,009 tonnes per square kilometre Philippines
1980s 41,301 tonnes per square kilometre 41,019 tonnes per square kilometre 282.33 tonnes per square kilometre Costa Rica
1990s 42,883 tonnes per square kilometre 43,004 tonnes per square kilometre 120.78 tonnes per square kilometre Philippines
2000s 43,402 tonnes per square kilometre 44,783 tonnes per square kilometre 1,381 tonnes per square kilometre Philippines
2010s 44,054 tonnes per square kilometre 47,535 tonnes per square kilometre 3,481 tonnes per square kilometre Philippines
2020s 44,232 tonnes per square kilometre 48,766 tonnes per square kilometre 4,534 tonnes per square kilometre Philippines

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher cumulative co₂ emissions from land-use change, per square kilometre, Costa Rica or Philippines?
Philippines, at 48,976 tonnes per square kilometre against 44,196 tonnes per square kilometre in Costa Rica as of 2023.
What is the difference in cumulative co₂ emissions from land-use change, per square kilometre between Costa Rica and Philippines?
4,780 tonnes per square kilometre, with Philippines ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Costa Rica and Philippines?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Costa Rica and Philippines rank globally for cumulative co₂ emissions from land-use change, per square kilometre?
Costa Rica ranks 4th and Philippines ranks 1st of 194 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Cumulative CO₂ emissions from land-use change, per square kilometre. 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

Costa Rica vs Philippines: Cumulative CO₂ emissions from land-use change, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 22 September 2026, from https://climate.statizoid.com/compare/cumulative-co2-emissions-from-land-use-change-per-square-kilometre/costa-rica/philippines/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://climate.statizoid.com/compare/cumulative-co2-emissions-from-land-use-change-per-square-kilometre/costa-rica/philippines/">Costa Rica vs Philippines: Cumulative CO₂ emissions from land-use change, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Cumulative CO₂ emissions from land-use change, per square kilometre
Unit
tonnes per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
194 places, 11,145 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Cumulative CO₂ emissions from land-use change divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.