Aruba vs Turks and Caicos Islands: Share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food
Aruba
13.7%
in 2015
Turks and Caicos Islands
14.3%
in 2015
Aruba rank
195th
Turks and Caicos Islands rank
192nd
Share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food over time
- Aruba
- Turks and Caicos Islands
How they compare
Turks and Caicos Islands currently reports 14.3% against 13.7% in Aruba, a difference of 0.6%.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 26 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Aruba ahead.
Aruba ranks 195th and Turks and Caicos Islands ranks 192nd of 217 countries.
Aruba has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Aruba | Turks and Caicos Islands | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 12.5% | -7.7% | 20.2% | Aruba |
| 2000s | 16.4% | -10.8% | 27.3% | Aruba |
| 2010s | 14.5% | 12.9% | 1.5% | Aruba |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food, Aruba or Turks and Caicos Islands?
- Turks and Caicos Islands, at 14.3% against 13.7% in Aruba as of 2015.
- What is the difference in share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food between Aruba and Turks and Caicos Islands?
- 0.6%, with Turks and Caicos Islands ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Aruba and Turks and Caicos Islands?
- 26 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2015.
- How do Aruba and Turks and Caicos Islands rank globally for share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food?
- Aruba ranks 195th and Turks and Caicos Islands ranks 192nd of 217 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Crippa et al. (2021) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Food system emissions include agriculture, land-use change, and supply chain emissions (transport, packaging, food processing, retail, cooking, and waste). Emissions are quantified based on food production, not consumption. This means they do not account for international trade.