Liberia vs Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa: Import product diversification index

Liberia
0.871
in 2011
Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa
0.377
in 2011
Liberia rank
1st
Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa rank
1st

Import product diversification index over time

  • Liberia
  • Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa
00.20.40.60.8199520032011

How they compare

Liberia currently reports 0.871 against 0.377 in Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa, a difference of 0.494.

That makes Liberia's figure about 2.3 times Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa's.

Across all 17 years both countries report, Liberia has been ahead every year.

Liberia ranks 1st and Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa ranks 1st of 53 countries.

Liberia has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Liberia Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa Difference Ahead
1990s 0.8807 0.3511 0.5296 Liberia
2000s 0.8559 0.3692 0.4868 Liberia
2010s 0.8498 0.3711 0.4787 Liberia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher import product diversification index, Liberia or Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa?
Liberia, at 0.871 against 0.377 in Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa as of 2011.
What is the difference in import product diversification index between Liberia and Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa?
0.494, with Liberia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Liberia and Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa?
17 years are reported by both, from 1995 to 2011.
How do Liberia and Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa rank globally for import product diversification index?
Liberia ranks 1st and Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa ranks 1st of 53 countries.
Where does this data come from?
UNCTAD Statistical Office, also reported in the UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics, various issues (http://unctadstat.unctad.org/), published as Import product diversification index. 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

Liberia vs Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa: Import product diversification index. Statizoid, drawing on UNCTAD Statistical Office, also reported in the UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics, various issues (http://unctadstat.unctad.org/). Retrieved 07 September 2026, from https://trade.statizoid.com/compare/import-product-diversification-index/liberia/sub-saharan-africa-excluding-south-africa/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://trade.statizoid.com/compare/import-product-diversification-index/liberia/sub-saharan-africa-excluding-south-africa/">Liberia vs Sub-Saharan Africa excluding South Africa: Import product diversification index</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Import product diversification index
Source
UNCTAD Statistical Office, also reported in the UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics, various issues (http://unctadstat.unctad.org/)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
55 places, 935 data points, 1995–2011
Last refreshed

The diversification index signals whether the structure of imports by product of a given country or group of countries differ from the structure of product of the world. Diversification index that ranges from 0 to 1 reveals the extent of the differences between the structure of trade of the country or country group and the world average. The index value closer to 1 indicates a bigger difference from the world average. It is constructed as the inverse of a Herfindahl index, using disaggregated exports at 4 digits (following the STIC3). This index is a modified Finger-Kreinin measure of similarity in trade. For more information, please consult the article of Finger, J. M. and M. E. Kreinin (1979), “A measure of ‘export similarity’ and its possible uses” in the Economic Journal , 89: 905-12.