Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) vs Serbia and Montenegro: Sorghum — Crop residues (N content), annual growth rate

Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)
-9.49 % change on previous year
in 2023
Serbia and Montenegro
15.08 % change on previous year
in 2005
Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) rank
28th
Serbia and Montenegro rank
30th

Sorghum — Crop residues (N content), annual growth rate over time

  • Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)
  • Serbia and Montenegro
-40-2002040196219922023

How they compare

Serbia and Montenegro currently reports 15.08 % change on previous year against -9.49 % change on previous year in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs), a difference of 24.57 % change on previous year.

That makes Serbia and Montenegro's figure about 1.6 times Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs)'s.

The two have swapped places 8 times across 13 shared years of data; in 1993 it was Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) ahead.

Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) ranks 28th and Serbia and Montenegro ranks 30th of 33 groups.

Serbia and Montenegro has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) Serbia and Montenegro Difference Ahead
1990s -0.4527 % change on previous year 0.8648 % change on previous year 1.32 % change on previous year Serbia and Montenegro
2000s 8.6 % change on previous year 10.3 % change on previous year 1.7 % change on previous year Serbia and Montenegro

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher sorghum — crop residues (n content), annual growth rate, Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) or Serbia and Montenegro?
Serbia and Montenegro, at 15.08 % change on previous year against -9.49 % change on previous year in Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) as of 2005.
What is the difference in sorghum — crop residues (n content), annual growth rate between Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) and Serbia and Montenegro?
24.57 % change on previous year, with Serbia and Montenegro ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) and Serbia and Montenegro?
13 years are reported by both, from 1993 to 2005.
How do Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) and Serbia and Montenegro rank globally for sorghum — crop residues (n content), annual growth rate?
Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) ranks 28th and Serbia and Montenegro ranks 30th of 33 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Sorghum — Crop residues (N content), annual growth rate. 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

Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) vs Serbia and Montenegro: Sorghum — Crop residues (N content), annual growth rate. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 29 September 2026, from https://climate.statizoid.com/compare/sorghum-crop-residues-n-content-annual-growth-rate/low-income-food-deficit-countries-lifdcs/serbia-and-montenegro/

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/sorghum-crop-residues-n-content-annual-growth-rate/low-income-food-deficit-countries-lifdcs/serbia-and-montenegro/">Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs) vs Serbia and Montenegro: Sorghum — Crop residues (N content), annual growth rate</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Sorghum — Crop residues (N content), annual growth rate
Unit
% change on previous year
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
158 places, 8,322 data points, 1962–2023
Last refreshed

The year-on-year percentage change in Sorghum — Crop residues (N content). Computed from consecutive annual observations; years either side of a gap are skipped rather than bridged.