Data on the geography of import of prohibited food products, Table No.5
January-April 2016 saw the import volume of prohibited food products reach 30.03490656 units. Rows detail the geography of supplies, categorized into total indicators, non-CIS countries, and CIS member states. Each item includes its share in percent, allowing for an assessment of each country group's portion of the import structure. Columns are organized by EAEU TN VED codes, covering a wide range of commodity groups subject to restrictions during the specified period
Chart of the geography of prohibited food imports for January-April 2016 by country groups
Set in numbers
Rosstat data. Rows: 454, indicators: 3. Shown by items: Total; Far-Abroad Countries; CIS member states; Belarus; Total and others
Highest values: Total (100), CIS member states (50.3), Far-Abroad Countries (49.7). The gap between the highest and lowest is 185.9 times
All table numbers are series: 454
How to read this table
The differences between rows reflect the affiliation of supplier countries with specific economic unions, enabling comparisons between non-CIS and CIS activity in prohibited food supplies. Values should be compared by both absolute figures and their share of the total import volume, which sums to 100 percent. Each of the 454 rows corresponds to an individual commodity type identified by its commodity nomenclature code, allowing for a detailed study of the import structure by commodity groups
What is visible in these numbers
Table columns: TN VED EAEU; January-April 2016; ______ share, %
There are 50 values in the table out of 75 possible, which is 66.7%. The data are sparse — for many items, observations were not conducted for the entire period, and summary totals for them should not be calculated
More in the section Indicators characterizing import substitution»
Period and application
This information is relevant for analyzing foreign trade restrictions in the food sector for the period of January-April 2016. The data was prepared by Rosstat and will be useful for economic researchers, customs regulation specialists, and food market participants studying the impact of bans on the geographic structure of imports
Did you notice an error in this table? The parser is wrong, and most often one correction fixes many pages
Report an error Typo is easier this way: highlight it and press Ctrl + Enter