Norway vs Slovenia: Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population
Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population over time
- Norway
- Slovenia
How they compare
Slovenia currently reports 8.2% against 7.8% in Norway, a difference of 0.4%.
That makes Slovenia's figure about 1.1 times Norway's.
Across all 9 years both countries report, Slovenia has been ahead every year.
Norway ranks 100th and Slovenia ranks 98th of 126 countries.
Slovenia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Norway | Slovenia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 4.7% | 10.7% | 6.0% | Slovenia |
| 2020s | 6.0% | 7.6% | 1.6% | Slovenia |
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, Norway or Slovenia?
- Slovenia, at 8.2% against 7.8% in Norway as of 2023.
- What is the difference in prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population between Norway and Slovenia?
- 0.4%, with Slovenia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Norway and Slovenia?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2023.
- How do Norway and Slovenia rank globally for prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population?
- Norway ranks 100th and Slovenia ranks 98th of 126 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.