Annual Forest Area Change Rate 2013
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 | 1,936,775 % | |
2 |  Canada | 512,606.25 % | |
3 |  Russia | 340,850 % | |
4 |  United States | 275,000 % | |
5 |  Australia | 267,275 % | |
6 |  India | 266,400 % | |
7 |  Vietnam | 134,760.16 % | |
8 |  Turkey | 109,444.14 % | |
9 |  Malaysia | 103,314.06 % | |
10 |  South Africa | 87,567.97 % | |
11 |  France | 83,400 % | |
12 |  Romania | 77,191.99 % | |
13 |  Greece | 75,439.99 % | |
14 |  Cuba | 61,929.98 % | |
15 |  Kazakhstan | 45,256.008 % | |
16 |  Uzbekistan | 39,959.96 % | |
17 |  Serbia | 39,681.984 % | |
18 |  Chile | 35,773.83 % | |
19 |  Ghana | 35,720.02 % | |
20 |  Philippines | 34,885.938 % | |
21 |  Finland | 33,400 % | |
22 |  Ukraine | 30,400 % | |
23 |  Uruguay | 27,691.992 % | |
24 |  Bulgaria | 19,200 % | |
25 |  United Kingdom | 19,200 % | |
26 |  Poland | 18,200 % | |
27 |  Burundi | 17,140.002 % | |
28 |  Estonia | 17,079.98 % | |
29 |  Costa Rica | 14,741.992 % | |
30 |  Rwanda | 14,558.002 % | |
31 |  Portugal | 11,990.039 % | |
32 |  Bosnia and Herzegovina | 11,568.018 % | |
33 |  North Korea | 11,354.004 % | |
34 |  New Caledonia | 10,717.993 % | |
35 |  Azerbaijan | 9,080.005 % | |
36 |  Denmark | 7,583.997 % | |
37 |  Ireland | 6,857.996 % | |
38 |  North Macedonia | 6,794.006 % | |
39 |  Dominican Republic | 5,710.01 % | |
40 |  Latvia | 5,300 % | |
41 |  Germany | 4,880.078 % | |
42 |  Fiji | 4,634.009 % | |
43 |  South Sudan | 4,159.961 % | |
44 |  Kyrgyzstan | 4,019.995 % | |
45 |  Jamaica | 3,800 % | |
46 |  Nepal | 3,504.004 % | |
47 |  Lithuania | 3,400 % | |
48 |  Syrian Arab Republic | 3,058.002 % | |
49 |  Albania | 3,021.997 % | |
50 |  Hungary | 2,886.011 % | |
51 |  Austria | 2,818.018 % | |
52 |  Switzerland | 2,795.996 % | |
53 |  Mauritania | 2,628.003 % | |
54 |  Czech Republic | 2,579.981 % | |
55 |  Republic of Moldova | 2,379.999 % | |
56 |  Tajikistan | 2,359.998 % | |
57 |  Israel | 2,200 % | |
58 |  Bhutan | 1,977.979 % | |
59 |  Spain | 1,832.031 % | |
60 |  Iceland | 898 % | |
61 |  Guam | 854 % | |
62 |  Northern Mariana Islands | 808 % | |
63 |  Slovakia | 767.993 % | |
64 |  Belarus | 700 % | |
65 |  Cabo Verde | 512 % | |
66 |  Western Sahara | 454.004 % | |
67 |  Réunion | 412.001 % | |
68 |  Croatia | 400 % | |
69 |  Armenia | 382.001 % | |
70 |  United Arab Emirates | 334.003 % | |
71 |  Tunisia | 300 % | |
72 |  Guadeloupe | 270 % | |
73 |  Saint Lucia | 200 % | |
74 |  Martinique | 200 % | |
75 |  Slovenia | 200 % | |
76 |  United States Virgin Islands | 146 % | |
77 |  Kuwait | 140 % | |
78 |  State of Palestine | 118 % | |
79 |  Lebanon | 98.001 % | |
80 |  Wallis and Futuna Islands | 88 % | |
81 |  Palau | 86 % | |
82 |  El Salvador | 76.001 % | |
83 |  Andorra | 42 % | |
84 |  Micronesia (Fed. States of) | 28 % | |
85 |  Djibouti | 10 % | |
86 |  Guernsey | 10 % | |
87 |  Niue | 10 % | |
88 |  Afghanistan | 0 % | |
89 |  Anguilla | 0 % | |
90 |  Aruba | 0 % | |
91 |  Bahamas | 0 % | |
92 |  Bahrain | 0 % | |
93 |  Barbados | 0 % | |
94 |  Bermuda | 0 % | |
95 |  Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba | 0 % | |
96 |  Botswana | 0 % | |
97 |  Brunei Darussalam | 0 % | |
98 |  Cayman Islands | 0 % | |
99 |  Cook Islands | 0 % | |
100 |  Curaçao | 0 % | |
101 |  Falkland Islands (Malvinas) | 0 % | |
102 |  Faroe Islands | 0 % | |
103 |  French Polynesia | 0 % | |
104 |  Georgia | 0 % | |
105 |  Gibraltar | 0 % | |
106 |  Greenland | 0 % | |
107 |  Grenada | 0 % | |
108 |  Iran | 0 % | |
109 |  Isle of Man | 0 % | |
110 |  Jersey | 0 % | |
111 |  Jordan | 0 % | |
112 |  Kiribati | 0 % | |
113 |  Lesotho | 0 % | |
114 |  Luxembourg | 0 % | |
115 |  Maldives | 0 % | |
116 |  Malta | 0 % | |
117 |  Marshall Islands | 0 % | |
118 |  Monaco | 0 % | |
119 |  Montenegro | 0 % | |
120 |  Montserrat | 0 % | |
121 |  Nauru | 0 % | |
122 |  Oman | 0 % | |
123 |  Qatar | 0 % | |
124 |  Saint Barthélemy | 0 % | |
125 |  Saint Kitts and Nevis | 0 % | |
126 |  Saint Martin (French part) | 0 % | |
127 |  San Marino | 0 % | |
128 |  Saudi Arabia | 0 % | |
129 |  Sint Maarten (Dutch part) | 0 % | |
130 |  Tokelau | 0 % | |
131 |  Tonga | 0 % | |
132 |  Turkmenistan | 0 % | |
133 |  Turks and Caicos Islands | 0 % | |
134 |  Tuvalu | 0 % | |
135 |  Holy See | 0 % | |
136 |  Yemen | 0 % | |
137 |  British Virgin Islands | -2 % | |
138 |  Mauritius | -12 % | |
139 |  Saint Pierre and Miquelon | -24 % | |
140 |  Cyprus | -25.998 % | |
141 |  Antigua and Barbuda | -66 % | |
142 |  American Samoa | -68 % | |
143 |  Mayotte | -72 % | |
144 |  Dominica | -112 % | |
145 |  Belgium | -114.001 % | |
146 |  Seychelles | -218 % | |
147 |  Singapore | -254 % | |
148 |  New Zealand | -301.953 % | |
149 |  Libya | -334 % | |
150 |  Trinidad and Tobago | -424.002 % | |
151 |  Samoa | -480.002 % | |
152 |  Comoros | -548 % | |
153 |  Sao Tome and Principe | -594 % | |
154 |  Namibia | -643.945 % | |
155 |  Puerto Rico | -654.004 % | |
156 |  Algeria | -673.999 % | |
157 |  Solomon Islands | -737.988 % | |
158 |  Bangladesh | -987.988 % | |
159 |  Mongolia | -1,114.063 % | |
160 |  Morocco | -1,160.059 % | |
161 |  Timor-Leste | -1,400 % | |
162 |  Eswatini | -1,500 % | |
163 |  Netherlands | -1,730.005 % | |
164 |  Vanuatu | -2,383.997 % | |
165 |  Togo | -2,960.01 % | |
166 |  Haiti | -3,180.005 % | |
167 |  Norway | -3,261.914 % | |
168 |  French Guiana | -3,300 % | |
169 |  Guinea-Bissau | -4,237.988 % | |
170 |  Japan | -4,400 % | |
171 |  Papua New Guinea | -4,605.469 % | |
172 |  Suriname | -4,681.836 % | |
173 |  Gambia | -5,785.999 % | |
174 |  Eritrea | -5,980.005 % | |
175 |  Panama | -6,375.977 % | |
176 |  Thailand | -7,000 % | |
177 |  Belize | -7,532.007 % | |
178 |  Equatorial Guinea | -8,472.021 % | |
179 |  Iraq | -9,138 % | |
180 |  South Korea | -10,000 % | |
181 |  Sri Lanka | -11,541.992 % | |
182 |  Guyana | -11,690.234 % | |
183 |  Gabon | -12,125.781 % | |
184 |  Niger | -12,419.995 % | |
185 |  Senegal | -15,543.945 % | |
186 |  Guatemala | -16,924.023 % | |
187 |  Sweden | -18,600 % | |
188 |  Sierra Leone | -19,725.977 % | |
189 |  Congo | -20,339.844 % | |
190 |  Nicaragua | -22,120.02 % | |
191 |  Italy | -24,208.008 % | |
192 |  Pakistan | -25,756.006 % | |
193 |  Central African Republic | -34,992.188 % | |
194 |  Ecuador | -41,833.984 % | |
195 |  Malawi | -42,000 % | |
196 |  Honduras | -43,537.99 % | |
197 |  Uganda | -50,146.047 % | |
198 |  Cameroon | -56,000 % | |
199 |  Laos | -58,237.89 % | |
200 |  Ethiopia | -59,040.234 % | |
201 |  Zimbabwe | -59,666.016 % | |
202 |  Guinea | -66,998.05 % | |
203 |  Colombia | -93,595.31 % | |
204 |  Kenya | -98,918.016 % | |
205 |  Mali | -100,546.09 % | |
206 |  Venezuela | -100,564.06 % | |
207 |  Côte d'Ivoire | -109,858.01 % | |
208 |  Liberia | -116,641.99 % | |
209 |  Burkina Faso | -119,860.06 % | |
210 |  Mexico | -122,478.125 % | |
211 |  Nigeria | -126,883.984 % | |
212 |  Chad | -127,916.016 % | |
213 |  Benin | -151,426.03 % | |
214 |  Somalia | -153,900 % | |
215 |  Madagascar | -160,132.03 % | |
216 |  Bolivia | -162,514.06 % | |
217 |  Sudan | -174,139.84 % | |
218 |  Zambia | -188,179.69 % | |
219 |  Indonesia | -255,460.94 % | |
220 |  Argentina | -256,685.94 % | |
221 |  Mozambique | -267,027.34 % | |
222 |  Myanmar | -289,712.12 % | |
223 |  Peru | -299,337.5 % | |
224 |  Cambodia | -348,482.03 % | |
225 |  Paraguay | -354,016 % | |
226 |  Tanzania | -403,000 % | |
227 |  Angola | -510,029.7 % | |
228 |  Congo, Democratic Republic of the | -1,004,496.9 % | |
229 |  Brazil | -1,915,700 % |
Analysis: These countries represent the highest values in this dataset, showcasing significant scale and impact on global statistics.
- #229Brazil
- #228Congo, Democratic Republic of the
- #227Angola
- #226Tanzania
- #225Paraguay
- #224Cambodia
- #223Peru
- #222Myanmar
- #221Mozambique
- #220Argentina
Context: These countries or territories have the lowest values, often due to geographic size, administrative status, or specific characteristics.
Analysis & Context
The country leading the Annual Forest Area Change Rate in 2013 is China with an impressive increase of 1,936,775%. The global range for this metric spans from a minimum of -59,040.23% to a maximum of 1,936,775%. To provide context, the global average change rate was 21,124.74%, while the median was 0.00%, indicating a vast disparity among countries.
Economic Growth and Forest Expansion
Several countries with high forest area change rates, such as China, Canada, and Russia, demonstrate how economic growth and forest expansion can coexist. China leads the world with a remarkable increase in its forest area, largely due to aggressive reforestation policies and investments in sustainable forestry. These initiatives are part of broader efforts to combat desertification and improve air quality. Similarly, Canada and Russia have substantial forest resources, and their positive change rates of 512,606.25% and 340,850% respectively, reflect effective forest management practices and conservation policies.
Deforestation and Environmental Challenges
At the other end of the spectrum, countries like Ethiopia, Laos, and Cameroon face significant deforestation challenges, with change rates of -59,040.23%, -58,237.89%, and -56,000%, respectively. These negative figures often result from agricultural expansion, illegal logging, and weak enforcement of environmental regulations. For instance, in Ethiopia, land clearance for agriculture is a major driver of forest loss, compounded by population growth and economic pressures. Similarly, Cameroon's forests are under threat from both logging activities and infrastructure development.
Urbanization and Its Impact
Urbanization has a complex relationship with forest area changes. In countries like the United States and Australia, which exhibit positive change rates of 275,000% and 267,275% respectively, urban expansion is often balanced by reforestation efforts and urban green space initiatives. These countries have implemented policies that encourage the integration of green spaces within urban planning, thus mitigating some of the negative impacts of urbanization on forest areas. Conversely, in countries experiencing rapid urbanization without adequate environmental policies, forest areas may decline as land is repurposed for development.
Conservation Policies and Global Trends
Global trends in forest area change rates highlight the importance of conservation policies. India and Vietnam, with change rates of 266,400% and 134,760.16% respectively, benefit from strong governmental support for reforestation and afforestation projects. These efforts are crucial for maintaining biodiversity and combating climate change. The data reflects a broader trend where countries with proactive environmental policies tend to show positive forest area change rates, underscoring the role of governance in environmental conservation.
In conclusion, the Annual Forest Area Change Rate in 2013 offers valuable insights into how different countries manage their forest resources amid economic, demographic, and environmental challenges. The stark contrast between countries like China and Ethiopia illustrates the diverse factors influencing forest area changes, from policy effectiveness to economic pressures, emphasizing the need for tailored strategies to ensure sustainable forest management globally.
Frequently Asked Questions About Annual Forest Area Change Rate in 2013
Which country had the highest annual forest area change rate in 2013?
China had the highest annual forest area change rate in 2013, with a rate of 1,936,775%.
Which country had the lowest annual forest area change rate in 2013?
Brazil had the lowest annual forest area change rate in 2013, with a rate of -1,915,700%.
What was the average annual forest area change rate across all countries in 2013?
The average annual forest area change rate across all countries in 2013 was -17,088%.
What was the median annual forest area change rate in 2013?
The median annual forest area change rate in 2013 was 0%.
How many countries were included in the dataset for annual forest area change rate in 2013?
The dataset included 229 countries for the annual forest area change rate in 2013.
Which countries were in the top 3 for the highest annual forest area change rate in 2013?
The top 3 countries with the highest annual forest area change rate in 2013 were China, Canada, and Russia.
Insights by country
Norway
In 2013, Norway recorded an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of -3261.914 %, ranking #167 out of 229 countries. This rate is significantly lower than many of its Scandinavian neighbors, reflecting a broader trend of forest area loss in the region. Key drivers include urban expansion, industrial activities, and land use changes that prioritize agriculture and infrastructure development over forest conservation.
Slovakia
In 2013, Slovakia achieved a global rank of #63 with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 767.99316 %. This figure is significantly higher than many neighboring countries, indicating a robust increase in forested areas. Key drivers for this growth include Slovakia's commitment to sustainable forestry practices and a strong emphasis on environmental conservation, supported by both government policy and public awareness initiatives.
Suriname
In 2013, Suriname ranked #172 globally with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of -4681.836 %. This decline is significantly worse than many of its regional neighbors, indicating serious deforestation challenges. The primary drivers include extensive logging activities and agricultural expansion, which have led to substantial loss of forest cover in this biodiverse region.
Republic of Moldova
In 2013, the Republic of Moldova achieved a global rank of #55 with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 2379.9988 %. This remarkable figure significantly surpasses many neighboring countries, reflecting a unique pattern of forest recovery and reforestation efforts. Key drivers include Moldova's commitment to environmental policies aimed at restoring forest cover and mitigating soil erosion, which is critical for its agricultural economy.
Poland
In 2013, Poland achieved a remarkable Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 18200 %, ranking #26 out of 229 countries. This figure is significantly higher than the global average, reflecting Poland's commitment to reforestation and sustainable land management practices. The country benefits from policies aimed at increasing forest cover, driven by both environmental initiatives and EU support for biodiversity conservation.
Nigeria
Nigeria had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of -126883.984 % in 2013, ranking #211 out of 229 countries. This significant loss contrasts sharply with many neighboring countries, which often experience less severe deforestation rates.
The primary drivers of this alarming statistic include extensive agricultural expansion, illegal logging, and urbanization, which have drastically reduced forest cover. Additionally, Nigeria's growing population places increasing pressure on land resources, exacerbating deforestation challenges.
Eswatini
In 2013, Eswatini had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of -1500 %, ranking #162 out of 229 countries. This drastic decline is significantly worse than many of its regional neighbors, highlighting severe deforestation challenges. Key drivers include agricultural expansion and unsustainable land use practices, exacerbated by limited regulatory frameworks to protect forested areas.
Panama
In 2013, Panama had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of -6375.9766 %, ranking #175 out of 229 countries. This rate is significantly lower than many of its neighbors, reflecting a concerning trend in deforestation across Central America. Key drivers include agricultural expansion, infrastructure development, and illegal logging, which have heavily impacted Panama's rich biodiversity and forest resources.
Tunisia
Tunisia ranked #71 globally in 2013 with an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 300 %. This figure is significantly higher than the global average, indicating a remarkable increase in forested areas compared to many countries. Key drivers of this growth include government initiatives aimed at reforestation and sustainable land management, alongside efforts to combat desertification in the region.
Turkmenistan
In 2013, Turkmenistan had an Annual Forest Area Change Rate of 0 %, ranking #131 out of 229 countries. This rate is notably lower than the global average, indicating limited growth or loss in forested areas compared to other nations. Factors contributing to this statistic include the country's vast arid landscapes and a focus on agricultural expansion, which often prioritizes land use over reforestation efforts.
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