Ecuador vs Kiribati: Share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food

Ecuador
53.8%
in 2015
Kiribati
53.6%
in 2015
Ecuador rank
88th
Kiribati rank
89th

Share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food over time

  • Ecuador
  • Kiribati
0204060199020022015

How they compare

Ecuador currently reports 53.8% against 53.6% in Kiribati, a difference of 0.2%.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 26 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Ecuador ahead.

Ecuador ranks 88th and Kiribati ranks 89th of 217 countries.

Ecuador has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Ecuador Kiribati Difference Ahead
1990s 65.5% 62.2% 3.3% Ecuador
2000s 64.0% 51.6% 12.4% Ecuador
2010s 56.1% 40.3% 15.8% Ecuador

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, Ecuador or Kiribati?
Ecuador, at 53.8% against 53.6% in Kiribati as of 2015.
What is the difference in share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food between Ecuador and Kiribati?
0.2%, with Ecuador ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Kiribati?
26 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2015.
How do Ecuador and Kiribati rank globally for share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food?
Ecuador ranks 88th and Kiribati ranks 89th 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

Indicator
Share of national greenhouse gas emissions that come from food
Unit
%
Source
Crippa et al. (2021) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
217 places, 5,642 data points, 1990–2015
Last refreshed

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.