Australia and New Zealand vs International Centers (FAO): Plant genetic resources accessions stored ex situ

Australia and New Zealand
333,342
in 2024
International Centers (FAO)
907,571
in 2024
Australia and New Zealand rank
6th
International Centers (FAO) rank
1st

Plant genetic resources accessions stored ex situ over time

  • Australia and New Zealand
  • International Centers (FAO)
200.0k400.0k600.0k800.0k1.0M199520092024

How they compare

International Centers (FAO) currently reports 907,571 against 333,342 in Australia and New Zealand, a difference of 574,229.

That makes International Centers (FAO)'s figure about 2.7 times Australia and New Zealand's.

Across all 15 years both countries report, International Centers (FAO) has been ahead every year.

Australia and New Zealand ranks 6th and International Centers (FAO) ranks 1st of 126 countries.

International Centers (FAO) has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Australia and New Zealand International Centers (FAO) Difference Ahead
1990s 137,153 615,726 478,573 International Centers (FAO)
2000s 195,954 712,622 516,668 International Centers (FAO)
2010s 269,909 815,764 545,856 International Centers (FAO)
2020s 322,147 899,565 577,418 International Centers (FAO)

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher plant genetic resources accessions stored ex situ, Australia and New Zealand or International Centers (FAO)?
International Centers (FAO), at 907,571 against 333,342 in Australia and New Zealand as of 2024.
What is the difference in plant genetic resources accessions stored ex situ between Australia and New Zealand and International Centers (FAO)?
574,229, with International Centers (FAO) ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and New Zealand and International Centers (FAO)?
15 years are reported by both, from 1995 to 2024.
How do Australia and New Zealand and International Centers (FAO) rank globally for plant genetic resources accessions stored ex situ?
Australia and New Zealand ranks 6th and International Centers (FAO) ranks 1st of 126 countries.
Where does this data come from?
United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database, published as Plant genetic resources accessions stored ex situ (number). 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

Australia and New Zealand vs International Centers (FAO): Plant genetic resources accessions stored ex situ. Statizoid, drawing on United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database. Retrieved 16 September 2026, from https://development-goals.statizoid.com/compare/plant-genetic-resources-accessions-stored-ex-situ-number/australia-and-new-zealand/international-centers-fao/

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/plant-genetic-resources-accessions-stored-ex-situ-number/australia-and-new-zealand/international-centers-fao/">Australia and New Zealand vs International Centers (FAO): Plant genetic resources accessions stored ex situ</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Plant genetic resources accessions stored ex situ (number)
Source
United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database
Licence
UN SDG Global Database (open, attribution requested)
Coverage
161 places, 2,414 data points, 1995–2024
Last refreshed