Cambodia vs Cote d'Ivoire: Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population (%)
Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population (%) over time
- Cambodia
- Cote d'Ivoire
How they compare
Cote d'Ivoire currently reports 37.9% against 36.4% in Cambodia, a difference of 1.5%.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Cambodia ahead.
Cambodia ranks 41st and Cote d'Ivoire ranks 39th of 130 countries.
Cambodia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Cambodia | Cote d'Ivoire | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 37.7% | 36.9% | 0.8% | Cambodia |
| 2020s | 41.0% | 39.4% | 1.6% | Cambodia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population, Cambodia or Cote d'Ivoire?
- Cote d'Ivoire, at 37.9% against 36.4% in Cambodia as of 2024.
- What is the difference in prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population between Cambodia and Cote d'Ivoire?
- 1.5%, with Cote d'Ivoire ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Cambodia and Cote d'Ivoire?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2024.
- How do Cambodia and Cote d'Ivoire rank globally for prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population?
- Cambodia ranks 41st and Cote d'Ivoire ranks 39th of 130 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), published as Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population (%). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The percentage of people in the population who live in households classified as moderately or severely food insecure. A household is classified as moderately or severely food insecure when at least one adult in the household has reported to have been exposed, at times during the year, to low quality diets and might have been forced to also reduce the quantity of food they would normally eat because of a lack of money or other resources.