China, Hong Kong SAR vs Latvia: Savanna and woody savanna … Burning annual growth rate
China, Hong Kong SAR
-100 % change on previous year
in 2022
Latvia
-100 % change on previous year
in 2023
China, Hong Kong SAR rank
126th
Latvia rank
126th
Savanna and woody savanna … Burning annual growth rate over time
- China, Hong Kong SAR
- Latvia
How they compare
China, Hong Kong SAR currently reports -100 % change on previous year against -100 % change on previous year in Latvia, a difference of 0 % change on previous year.
The two have swapped places 8 times across 18 shared years of data; in 1993 it was Latvia ahead.
China, Hong Kong SAR ranks 126th and Latvia ranks 126th of 183 countries.
Across the 4 decades both report, China, Hong Kong SAR averaged higher in 3 and Latvia in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | China, Hong Kong SAR | Latvia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | -1 % change on previous year | -20.88 % change on previous year | 19.88 % change on previous year | China, Hong Kong SAR |
| 2000s | 11.1 % change on previous year | -62.76 % change on previous year | 73.86 % change on previous year | China, Hong Kong SAR |
| 2010s | -25.61 % change on previous year | -48.29 % change on previous year | 22.67 % change on previous year | China, Hong Kong SAR |
| 2020s | -100 % change on previous year | -50.01 % change on previous year | 49.99 % change on previous year | Latvia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher savanna and woody savanna — burning crop residues (biomass burned), China, Hong Kong SAR or Latvia?
- China, Hong Kong SAR, at -100 % change on previous year against -100 % change on previous year in Latvia as of 2022.
- What is the difference in savanna and woody savanna — burning crop residues (biomass burned) between China, Hong Kong SAR and Latvia?
- 0 % change on previous year, with China, Hong Kong SAR ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for China, Hong Kong SAR and Latvia?
- 18 years are reported by both, from 1993 to 2022.
- How do China, Hong Kong SAR and Latvia rank globally for savanna and woody savanna — burning crop residues (biomass burned)?
- China, Hong Kong SAR ranks 126th and Latvia ranks 126th of 183 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Savanna and woody savanna — Burning crop residues (Biomass burned, dry matter), annual growth rate. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The year-on-year percentage change in Savanna and woody savanna — Burning crop residues (Biomass burned, dry matter). Computed from consecutive annual observations; years either side of a gap are skipped rather than bridged.