Denmark vs Serbia: Net Forest conversion — Area — UNFCCC
Denmark
4.92 1000 ha
in 2022
Serbia
6.45 1000 ha
in 2022
Denmark rank
46th
Serbia rank
43rd
Net Forest conversion — Area — UNFCCC over time
- Denmark
- Serbia
How they compare
Serbia currently reports 6.45 1000 ha against 4.92 1000 ha in Denmark, a difference of 1.53 1000 ha.
That makes Serbia's figure about 1.3 times Denmark's.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Serbia has been ahead every year.
Denmark ranks 46th and Serbia ranks 43rd of 58 countries.
Serbia has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Denmark | Serbia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 1.6 1000 ha | 5.4 1000 ha | 3.8 1000 ha | Serbia |
| 2010s | 3.22 1000 ha | 5.79 1000 ha | 2.57 1000 ha | Serbia |
| 2020s | 4.73 1000 ha | 6.29 1000 ha | 1.56 1000 ha | Serbia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher net forest conversion — area — unfccc, Denmark or Serbia?
- Serbia, at 6.45 1000 ha against 4.92 1000 ha in Denmark as of 2022.
- What is the difference in net forest conversion — area — unfccc between Denmark and Serbia?
- 1.53 1000 ha, with Serbia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Denmark and Serbia?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2022.
- How do Denmark and Serbia rank globally for net forest conversion — area — unfccc?
- Denmark ranks 46th and Serbia ranks 43rd of 58 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Net Forest conversion — Area — UNFCCC. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The FAOSTAT domain on Emissions from Forests consists of CO2 emissions and removals corresponding to forest carbon stock changes (aboveground and belowground living biomass). Estimates are computed following the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC, 2006).