Annual Forest Area Change Rate 2004
Annual forest area change rate indicates how quickly a country's forests are expanding or shrinking each year.
Interactive Map
Complete Data Rankings
Rank | Actions | ||
|---|---|---|---|
1 | China | 2,360,982.8 % | |
2 | Russia | 905,656.25 % | |
3 | United States | 518,400 % | |
4 | Canada | 512,606.25 % | |
5 | Indonesia | 434,660.16 % | |
6 | India | 190,500 % | |
7 | Vietnam | 160,396 % | |
8 | Spain | 147,225.97 % | |
9 | France | 113,100 % | |
10 | Turkey | 93,473.05 % | |
11 | South Africa | 87,567.97 % | |
12 | Italy | 65,879 % | |
13 | Chile | 61,363.086 % | |
14 | Cuba | 51,035.008 % | |
15 | Serbia | 39,679.004 % | |
16 | Uzbekistan | 38,814.016 % | |
17 | Bulgaria | 36,200 % | |
18 | Uruguay | 35,964 % | |
19 | Ghana | 35,720.02 % | |
20 | Belarus | 35,700 % | |
21 | Poland | 27,000 % | |
22 | Montenegro | 20,100 % | |
23 | Nepal | 16,741.016 % | |
24 | Lithuania | 15,000 % | |
25 | Romania | 14,900 % | |
26 | Latvia | 13,112.012 % | |
27 | Hungary | 12,521.997 % | |
28 | United Kingdom | 10,500 % | |
29 | North Korea | 10,217.969 % | |
30 | Bhutan | 9,929.004 % | |
31 | Estonia | 9,713.013 % | |
32 | Ireland | 9,002.002 % | |
33 | Japan | 9,000 % | |
34 | Puerto Rico | 6,230.002 % | |
35 | Kenya | 6,226.001 % | |
36 | Georgia | 6,180.005 % | |
37 | Fiji | 6,064.002 % | |
38 | Germany | 5,500 % | |
39 | Syrian Arab Republic | 5,121.002 % | |
40 | Kyrgyzstan | 4,593.994 % | |
41 | Azerbaijan | 4,527.002 % | |
42 | Switzerland | 3,853.992 % | |
43 | Ukraine | 3,800 % | |
44 | Jamaica | 3,744 % | |
45 | Tunisia | 3,558.997 % | |
46 | Croatia | 3,500 % | |
47 | Costa Rica | 3,169.995 % | |
48 | Republic of Moldova | 3,010.001 % | |
49 | Mauritania | 2,627.002 % | |
50 | Austria | 2,350 % | |
51 | Belgium | 2,257.001 % | |
52 | South Sudan | 2,200 % | |
53 | Dominican Republic | 2,047.998 % | |
54 | Iceland | 1,652 % | |
55 | Slovakia | 1,650 % | |
56 | Denmark | 1,474.005 % | |
57 | Czech Republic | 1,472.998 % | |
58 | Slovenia | 1,400 % | |
59 | Netherlands | 1,398.001 % | |
60 | Albania | 1,277.002 % | |
61 | Greece | 1,190.015 % | |
62 | Rwanda | 700.998 % | |
63 | United Arab Emirates | 457.999 % | |
64 | Cabo Verde | 440 % | |
65 | Réunion | 302 % | |
66 | North Macedonia | 288.001 % | |
67 | Luxembourg | 200 % | |
68 | Saint Lucia | 200 % | |
69 | Martinique | 155 % | |
70 | Cyprus | 123 % | |
71 | New Caledonia | 117.004 % | |
72 | Israel | 100 % | |
73 | Palau | 98 % | |
74 | Lebanon | 98 % | |
75 | French Polynesia | 91 % | |
76 | State of Palestine | 90 % | |
77 | Andorra | 79 % | |
78 | Singapore | 73 % | |
79 | Kuwait | 40 % | |
80 | Wallis and Futuna Islands | 34 % | |
81 | Micronesia (Fed. States of) | 27 % | |
82 | Liechtenstein | 17 % | |
83 | Egypt | 17 % | |
84 | Guernsey | 15 % | |
85 | Cook Islands | 2 % | |
86 | Saint Vincent and the Grenadines | 1 % | |
87 | Afghanistan | 0 % | |
88 | Anguilla | 0 % | |
89 | Aruba | 0 % | |
90 | Bahamas | 0 % | |
91 | Bahrain | 0 % | |
92 | Barbados | 0 % | |
93 | Bermuda | 0 % | |
94 | Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba | 0 % | |
95 | Botswana | 0 % | |
96 | Burundi | 0 % | |
97 | Curaçao | 0 % | |
98 | Falkland Islands (Malvinas) | 0 % | |
99 | Faroe Islands | 0 % | |
100 | Gibraltar | 0 % | |
101 | Greenland | 0 % | |
102 | Grenada | 0 % | |
103 | Guam | 0 % | |
104 | Iran | 0 % | |
105 | Isle of Man | 0 % | |
106 | Jersey | 0 % | |
107 | Jordan | 0 % | |
108 | Kiribati | 0 % | |
109 | Lesotho | 0 % | |
110 | Maldives | 0 % | |
111 | Malta | 0 % | |
112 | Marshall Islands | 0 % | |
113 | Monaco | 0 % | |
114 | Montserrat | 0 % | |
115 | Nauru | 0 % | |
116 | Northern Mariana Islands | 0 % | |
117 | Oman | 0 % | |
118 | Qatar | 0 % | |
119 | Saint Barthélemy | 0 % | |
120 | Saint Kitts and Nevis | 0 % | |
121 | Saint Martin (French part) | 0 % | |
122 | San Marino | 0 % | |
123 | Saudi Arabia | 0 % | |
124 | Sint Maarten (Dutch part) | 0 % | |
125 | Tokelau | 0 % | |
126 | Tonga | 0 % | |
127 | Turkmenistan | 0 % | |
128 | Turks and Caicos Islands | 0 % | |
129 | Tuvalu | 0 % | |
130 | Holy See | 0 % | |
131 | Yemen | 0 % | |
132 | British Virgin Islands | -1 % | |
133 | Niue | -6 % | |
134 | Dominica | -19 % | |
135 | Cayman Islands | -21 % | |
136 | Saint Pierre and Miquelon | -22 % | |
137 | Armenia | -35.001 % | |
138 | Sao Tome and Principe | -54 % | |
139 | Antigua and Barbuda | -67 % | |
140 | Guadeloupe | -71.999 % | |
141 | United States Virgin Islands | -86 % | |
142 | American Samoa | -154 % | |
143 | Seychelles | -217 % | |
144 | Western Sahara | -231 % | |
145 | New Zealand | -232.031 % | |
146 | Morocco | -296.973 % | |
147 | Libya | -333 % | |
148 | Mauritius | -357 % | |
149 | Haiti | -400 % | |
150 | Trinidad and Tobago | -423.999 % | |
151 | Mayotte | -438 % | |
152 | Samoa | -481 % | |
153 | Comoros | -548 % | |
154 | Namibia | -645.02 % | |
155 | Algeria | -675 % | |
156 | Solomon Islands | -738.013 % | |
157 | Bosnia and Herzegovina | -898.999 % | |
158 | Iraq | -1,332.001 % | |
159 | Timor-Leste | -1,400 % | |
160 | Eswatini | -1,500 % | |
161 | Brunei Darussalam | -1,700 % | |
162 | Gabon | -1,835.938 % | |
163 | Vanuatu | -2,384.998 % | |
164 | Togo | -2,958.997 % | |
165 | El Salvador | -2,970.001 % | |
166 | Bangladesh | -3,208.997 % | |
167 | Suriname | -3,996.094 % | |
168 | French Guiana | -4,293.994 % | |
169 | Guinea-Bissau | -4,396.021 % | |
170 | Guyana | -4,441.016 % | |
171 | Norway | -4,919.043 % | |
172 | Gambia | -5,787 % | |
173 | Eritrea | -5,979.004 % | |
174 | Thailand | -7,000 % | |
175 | Kazakhstan | -7,475 % | |
176 | Sri Lanka | -7,517.993 % | |
177 | Belize | -7,590.002 % | |
178 | Mongolia | -8,000 % | |
179 | Equatorial Guinea | -8,300 % | |
180 | South Korea | -8,900 % | |
181 | Sweden | -9,000 % | |
182 | Portugal | -9,669.019 % | |
183 | Panama | -11,414.99 % | |
184 | Congo | -12,000 % | |
185 | Niger | -12,419.995 % | |
186 | Pakistan | -15,207.983 % | |
187 | Senegal | -15,545.02 % | |
188 | Cambodia | -19,176.953 % | |
189 | Sierra Leone | -19,727.002 % | |
190 | Finland | -20,364.062 % | |
191 | Papua New Guinea | -21,917.969 % | |
192 | Central African Republic | -34,991.797 % | |
193 | Zambia | -35,800 % | |
194 | Honduras | -38,478.027 % | |
195 | Liberia | -38,898 % | |
196 | Laos | -38,945.02 % | |
197 | Malawi | -42,000 % | |
198 | Philippines | -46,953.953 % | |
199 | Guatemala | -47,081.008 % | |
200 | Uganda | -50,146.996 % | |
201 | Guinea | -66,997.02 % | |
202 | Cameroon | -69,700.98 % | |
203 | Ecuador | -70,212.984 % | |
204 | Ethiopia | -72,800 % | |
205 | Malaysia | -74,369.92 % | |
206 | Somalia | -76,750 % | |
207 | Chad | -82,270.016 % | |
208 | Venezuela | -84,952.734 % | |
209 | Nicaragua | -99,320.016 % | |
210 | Mali | -100,546 % | |
211 | Zimbabwe | -105,719.05 % | |
212 | Madagascar | -106,810.06 % | |
213 | Colombia | -113,860.16 % | |
214 | Côte d'Ivoire | -116,481.01 % | |
215 | Nigeria | -126,883.01 % | |
216 | Burkina Faso | -134,310.02 % | |
217 | Benin | -141,004.98 % | |
218 | Mexico | -143,800.78 % | |
219 | Bolivia | -158,621.88 % | |
220 | Australia | -173,615.62 % | |
221 | Sudan | -174,140.03 % | |
222 | Mozambique | -267,029.3 % | |
223 | Peru | -299,337.5 % | |
224 | Myanmar | -342,710.94 % | |
225 | Argentina | -371,476.94 % | |
226 | Paraguay | -376,996.1 % | |
227 | Tanzania | -403,000 % | |
228 | Angola | -510,029.7 % | |
229 | Congo, Democratic Republic of the | -674,987.5 % | |
230 | Brazil | -3,563,293.8 % |
Analysis: These countries represent the highest values in this dataset, showcasing significant scale and impact on global statistics.
- #230
Brazil
- #229
Congo, Democratic Republic of the
- #228
Angola
- #227
Tanzania
- #226
Paraguay
- #225
Argentina
- #224
Myanmar
- #223
Peru
- #222
Mozambique
- #221
Sudan
Context: These countries or territories have the lowest values, often due to geographic size, administrative status, or specific characteristics.
Analysis & Context
In 2004, the country with the highest Annual Forest Area Change Rate was China, with a remarkable increase of 2360982.8%. The global range of forest area change spanned from a minimum of -50147.00% to a maximum of 2360982.80%. The average change rate across 200 countries was 27717.12%, while the median was 0.00%, highlighting the significant disparity in forest area changes worldwide.
Economic Development and Forest Expansion
The significant increase in forest area in China can be attributed to its vigorous afforestation and reforestation policies. As the world’s most populous country, China has implemented extensive tree-planting programs as part of its economic development agenda, which has seen a boost in forest coverage. Similarly, Vietnam reported an increase of 160396%, reflecting government-led initiatives to restore forest cover to combat soil erosion and enhance agricultural productivity. These countries demonstrate that economic growth, when aligned with environmental policies, can result in positive forest area changes.
Deforestation and Economic Pressures
In contrast, several countries experienced significant forest area losses due to economic pressures and land-use changes. Uganda recorded the most substantial decrease, with a forest area change rate of -50146.996%. This is largely due to agricultural expansion and the reliance on wood for fuel, which are common in many developing nations. Similarly, Guatemala and the Philippines reported decreases of -47081.008% and -46953.953%, respectively, driven by similar economic factors and the demand for agricultural land.
Policy-Driven Forest Preservation
Countries like Russia, with an increase of 905656.25%, and Canada, with 512606.25%, have shown that policy frameworks supporting sustainable forestry can lead to positive outcomes. Both nations have vast forested areas and have implemented policies to manage these resources sustainably. In Europe, Spain and France also saw increases of 147225.97% and 113100%, respectively, reflecting the effectiveness of European Union policies on forest conservation and biodiversity.
Zero Year-over-Year Change
The year-over-year data indicates no significant changes in the annual forest area change rate for the top and bottom countries listed, with values remaining at 0.00%. This suggests that while some countries have established stable policies that maintain their forest areas, others may not have experienced significant policy shifts or environmental changes in that year. The stability in figures like those from China and Russia indicates ongoing efforts to maintain or improve forest cover, while the lack of change in countries with decreasing rates suggests a need for stronger environmental policies.
Overall, the Annual Forest Area Change Rate in 2004 highlights a complex interplay of economic, policy, and environmental factors. While some countries have made strides in expanding their forest cover through deliberate policy measures, others continue to face challenges due to economic pressures and insufficient policy intervention. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for shaping future strategies aimed at balancing economic development with environmental sustainability.
Frequently Asked Questions About Annual Forest Area Change Rate in 2004
Which country had the highest annual forest area change rate in 2004?
China had the highest annual forest area change rate in 2004 with 2,360,983%.
Which country had the lowest annual forest area change rate in 2004?
Brazil had the lowest annual forest area change rate in 2004 with -3,563,294%.
What was the average annual forest area change rate across all countries in 2004?
The average annual forest area change rate across all countries in 2004 was -15,472%.
What was the median annual forest area change rate in 2004?
The median annual forest area change rate in 2004 was 0%.
Which countries were in the top 3 for annual forest area change rate in 2004?
The top 3 countries for annual forest area change rate in 2004 were China, Russia, and the United States.
How many countries were included in the dataset for annual forest area change rate in 2004?
There were 230 countries included in the dataset for annual forest area change rate in 2004.
Insights by country
Iran
In 2004, Iran ranked #102 globally with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 0 %. This figure is notably lower than many of its neighbors, reflecting a regional trend of forest degradation. Factors contributing to this stagnation include urban expansion, agricultural practices, and limited reforestation efforts, which have hindered the country's ability to increase its forest cover.
Isle of Man
In 2004, the Isle of Man recorded an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 0 %, ranking #130 out of 230 countries. This rate is notably lower than many European nations, where forest area growth is more common due to active reforestation efforts. The lack of change in forest area can be attributed to the island's small landmass and limited agricultural expansion, which reduces the need for deforestation.
Cambodia
In 2004, Cambodia had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of -19176.953 %, ranking #188 out of 230 countries. This drastic deforestation rate is among the highest globally, with many neighboring countries experiencing far less severe declines in forest cover. Key drivers include rapid agricultural expansion, illegal logging, and insufficient enforcement of environmental regulations, which have significantly impacted Cambodia's rich biodiversity and natural resources.
Afghanistan
In 2004, Afghanistan had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 0 %, ranking #87 out of 230 countries. This rate is notably lower than many neighboring countries, indicating a significant lack of forest growth or recovery. Contributing factors include prolonged conflict, which has hindered sustainable land management practices, and a reliance on agriculture that often prioritizes crop production over reforestation efforts.
Malawi
In 2004, Malawi had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of -42000 %, ranking #197 out of 230 countries. This rate is significantly lower than many neighboring countries, highlighting Malawi's severe deforestation challenges. Key drivers include agricultural expansion, population growth, and reliance on wood for fuel, which have led to extensive forest loss over the years.
France
In 2004, France achieved a global rank of #9 with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 113100 %. This figure significantly outpaces many of its European neighbors, reflecting a robust commitment to forest management and conservation. Key drivers of this statistic include France's extensive reforestation policies and initiatives aimed at increasing biodiversity, supported by both governmental and environmental organizations.
Cameroon
In 2004, Cameroon recorded an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of -69700.98 %, ranking #202 out of 230 countries. This figure is significantly worse compared to many neighboring countries, indicating severe deforestation issues. Key drivers include extensive logging activities, agricultural expansion, and insufficient enforcement of environmental regulations, which have drastically reduced forest cover in the region.
Burundi
In 2004, Burundi had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 0 %, ranking #93 out of 230 countries. This rate is notably lower than many neighboring countries, reflecting a regional challenge in forest preservation.
The stability in forest area can be attributed to Burundi's limited economic resources and ongoing land use pressures, which often prioritize agriculture over conservation. Additionally, the country's geographic constraints limit the potential for expansive reforestation efforts.
Lesotho
In 2004, Lesotho had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 0 %, ranking #104 out of 230 countries. This rate is notably lower than many neighboring countries, reflecting a broader regional challenge in forest conservation. Factors contributing to this statistic include Lesotho's mountainous terrain, which limits agricultural expansion, and government policies that have historically prioritized other economic sectors over reforestation efforts.
Bermuda
Bermuda ranked #91 globally with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 0 % in 2004. This rate is notably lower than many countries, reflecting Bermuda's limited land area and urban development pressures.
The lack of significant forest area change can be attributed to Bermuda's small size, high population density, and strong regulatory measures that prioritize coastal and urban development over deforestation. Additionally, the island's unique biodiversity encourages the preservation of existing green spaces.
China
In 2004, China achieved a remarkable global rank of #1 with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 2360982.8 %. This figure significantly outpaces many countries, reflecting the intensive reforestation efforts undertaken in the nation compared to global averages. Key drivers include China's aggressive policies aimed at combating deforestation, improving air quality, and enhancing biodiversity through large-scale afforestation projects.
Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba
Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba achieved a global rank of #114 with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 0 % in 2004. This rate is notably lower than many countries in the Caribbean, where deforestation rates often impact biodiversity and ecosystems. The lack of forest area change can be attributed to the islands' small landmass and a focus on preserving their natural habitats, which are vital for tourism and local livelihoods.
Georgia
In 2004, Georgia achieved a global rank of #36 with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 6180.005 %. This remarkable figure is significantly higher than many neighboring countries, reflecting the country's unique ecological recovery efforts. The sharp increase can be attributed to extensive reforestation initiatives and the natural regeneration of forests following the socio-economic changes in the post-Soviet era.
Antigua and Barbuda
In 2004, Antigua and Barbuda had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of -67.00001 %, ranking #139 out of 230 countries. This significant decline is stark compared to many Caribbean nations that experience less severe deforestation rates. The primary drivers for this change include urban development and tourism-related construction, which have led to substantial forest loss in the region.
North Korea
In 2004, North Korea achieved a global rank of #29 with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 10217.969 %. This remarkable figure stands in stark contrast to many countries, reflecting significant deforestation issues rather than sustainable forest management practices. The country's heavy reliance on natural resources for energy, coupled with economic sanctions and agricultural challenges, has exacerbated environmental degradation and hindered reforestation efforts.
Senegal
In 2004, Senegal had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of -15545.02 %, ranking #187 out of 230 countries. This significant deforestation rate places Senegal among the lowest globally, particularly concerning its forest management practices. Key drivers include agricultural expansion, urbanization, and logging, which have severely impacted the country's forest resources.
Data Source
Annual change in forest area | Our World in Data
Our World in Data is a research organization that provides comprehensive datasets on global development, including statistics on annual changes in forest area by country. The dataset offers insights into deforestation and reforestation trends, enabling comparisons across different nations and time periods.
Visit Data SourceHistorical Data by Year
Explore Annual Forest Area Change Rate data across different years. Compare trends and see how statistics have changed over time.
More Environment Facts
Above-Ground Biomass in Forest (tonnes/ha)
Above-ground biomass in forest measures carbon storage per hectare. Explore rankings and compare data across 266+ countries with interactive maps.
View dataBrowse All Environment
Explore more facts and statistics in this category
All Categories
Discover more categories with comprehensive global data