Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current vs Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea: Indicator for Coastal Eutrophication Potential (ICEP) (kilograms of)

Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current
0.7986
in 2015
Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea
1.16
in 2015
Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current rank
26th
Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea rank
24th

Indicator for Coastal Eutrophication Potential (ICEP) (kilograms of) over time

  • Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current
  • Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea
0.50.7511.21.5200020072015

How they compare

Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea currently reports 1.16 against 0.7986 in Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current, a difference of 0.3614.

That makes Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea's figure about 1.4 times Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current's.

Across all 16 years both countries report, Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea has been ahead every year.

Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current ranks 26th and Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea ranks 24th of 64 countries.

Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea Difference Ahead
2000s 0.6168 1.11 0.4917 Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea
2010s 0.7324 1 0.2693 Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher indicator for coastal eutrophication potential (icep) (kilograms of), Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current or Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea?
Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea, at 1.16 against 0.7986 in Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current as of 2015.
What is the difference in indicator for coastal eutrophication potential (icep) (kilograms of) between Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current and Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea?
0.3614, with Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current and Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea?
16 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2015.
How do Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current and Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea rank globally for indicator for coastal eutrophication potential (icep) (kilograms of)?
Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current ranks 26th and Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea ranks 24th of 64 countries.
Where does this data come from?
United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database, published as Indicator for Coastal Eutrophication Potential (ICEP) (kilograms of carbon from algae biomass per sq. km. of river basin area per day). 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

Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current vs Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea: Indicator for Coastal Eutrophication Potential (ICEP) (kilograms of). Statizoid, drawing on United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database. Retrieved 04 September 2026, from https://development-goals.statizoid.com/compare/indicator-for-coastal-eutrophication-potential-icep-kilograms-of-carbon-from-algae/large-marine-ecosystem-canary-current/large-marine-ecosystem-red-sea/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under UN SDG Global Database (open, attribution requested); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://development-goals.statizoid.com/compare/indicator-for-coastal-eutrophication-potential-icep-kilograms-of-carbon-from-algae/large-marine-ecosystem-canary-current/large-marine-ecosystem-red-sea/">Large Marine Ecosystem: Canary Current vs Large Marine Ecosystem: Red Sea: Indicator for Coastal Eutrophication Potential (ICEP) (kilograms of)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Indicator for Coastal Eutrophication Potential (ICEP) (kilograms of carbon from algae biomass per sq. km. of river basin area per day)
Source
United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database
Licence
UN SDG Global Database (open, attribution requested)
Coverage
66 places, 1,056 data points, 2000–2015
Last refreshed