Myanmar vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological

Myanmar
103.12 Hectares
in 2020
Tanzania, United Republic of
96.27 Hectares
in 2020
Myanmar rank
60th
Tanzania, United Republic of rank
63rd

Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological over time

  • Myanmar
  • Tanzania, United Republic of
406080100200020102020

How they compare

Myanmar currently reports 103.12 Hectares against 96.27 Hectares in Tanzania, United Republic of, a difference of 6.85 Hectares.

That makes Myanmar's figure about 1.1 times Tanzania, United Republic of's.

Across all 21 years both countries report, Myanmar has been ahead every year.

Myanmar ranks 60th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 63rd of 170 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Myanmar Tanzania, United Republic of Difference Ahead
2000s 56.71 Hectares 45.3 Hectares 11.41 Hectares Myanmar
2010s 90.77 Hectares 72.09 Hectares 18.69 Hectares Myanmar
2020s 103.12 Hectares 96.27 Hectares 6.85 Hectares Myanmar

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological, Myanmar or Tanzania, United Republic of?
Myanmar, at 103.12 Hectares against 96.27 Hectares in Tanzania, United Republic of as of 2020.
What is the difference in africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological between Myanmar and Tanzania, United Republic of?
6.85 Hectares, with Myanmar ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Myanmar and Tanzania, United Republic of?
21 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2020.
How do Myanmar and Tanzania, United Republic of rank globally for africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological?
Myanmar ranks 60th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 63rd of 170 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, published as Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological sustainability — Artificial surfaces (including urban and associated areas). 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

Myanmar vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological. Statizoid, drawing on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved 24 August 2026, from https://urban.statizoid.com/compare/africa-s-development-dynamics-afdd-table-23-ecological-sustainability-artificial-surfaces/myanmar/tanzania/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://urban.statizoid.com/compare/africa-s-development-dynamics-afdd-table-23-ecological-sustainability-artificial-surfaces/myanmar/tanzania/">Myanmar vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological sustainability — Artificial surfaces (including urban and associated areas)
Unit
Hectares
Source
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Licence
OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required)
Coverage
245 places, 5,127 data points, 2000–2020
Last refreshed

The Statistical Annex to the annual Africa's Development Dynamics (AFDD) report is a collection of development indicators that were gathered and analysed while conducting the research that went into the report. These data are also available online for free viewing or download at https://oe.cd/AFDD-2024, a bilingual website which links to the electronic version of the Africa's Development Dynamics book in both English and French. Table 23 shows indicators of ecological sustainability, in terms of land use. This includes number of hectars of land allocated to different kinds of use, carbon stock in living biomass, and fertiliser use, and wood production.