IDA blend vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Mineral rents
Mineral rents over time
- IDA blend
- Tanzania, United Republic of
How they compare
Tanzania, United Republic of currently reports 4.0% against 1.1% in IDA blend, a difference of 2.9%.
That makes Tanzania, United Republic of's figure about 3.8 times IDA blend's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 34 shared years of data; in 1988 it was IDA blend ahead.
IDA blend ranks 28th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 27th of 47 groups.
Across the 5 decades both report, IDA blend averaged higher in 2 and Tanzania, United Republic of in 3.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | IDA blend | Tanzania, United Republic of | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1980s | 0.8% | 0.0% | 0.8% | IDA blend |
| 1990s | 0.4% | 0.1% | 0.3% | IDA blend |
| 2000s | 0.3% | 0.8% | 0.5% | Tanzania, United Republic of |
| 2010s | 0.7% | 1.6% | 0.9% | Tanzania, United Republic of |
| 2020s | 0.8% | 2.6% | 1.8% | Tanzania, United Republic of |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher mineral rents, IDA blend or Tanzania, United Republic of?
- Tanzania, United Republic of, at 4.0% against 1.1% in IDA blend as of 2021.
- What is the difference in mineral rents between IDA blend and Tanzania, United Republic of?
- 2.9%, with Tanzania, United Republic of ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for IDA blend and Tanzania, United Republic of?
- 34 years are reported by both, from 1988 to 2021.
- How do IDA blend and Tanzania, United Republic of rank globally for mineral rents?
- IDA blend ranks 28th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 27th of 47 groups.
- Where does this data come from?
- The Changing Wealth of Nations, World Bank (WB), published as Mineral rents (% of GDP). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Mineral rents are the difference between the value of production for a stock of minerals at world prices and their total costs of production. Minerals included in the calculation are tin, gold, lead, zinc, iron, copper, nickel, silver, bauxite, and phosphate.