Nepal vs Pakistan: Fertility and female labor force participation, gaps filled
Nepal
27.91
in 2017
Pakistan
28.21
in 2025
Nepal rank
181st
Pakistan rank
180th
Fertility and female labor force participation, gaps filled over time
- Nepal
- Pakistan
How they compare
Pakistan currently reports 28.21 against 27.91 in Nepal, a difference of 0.3.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Nepal has been ahead every year.
Nepal ranks 181st and Pakistan ranks 180th of 194 countries.
Nepal has averaged higher in every one of the 5 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Nepal | Pakistan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 59.61 | 6.14 | 53.47 | Nepal |
| 1980s | 45.17 | 12.58 | 32.6 | Nepal |
| 1990s | 69.1 | 14.76 | 54.34 | Nepal |
| 2000s | 87.28 | 17.16 | 70.11 | Nepal |
| 2010s | 63.75 | 23.02 | 40.73 | Nepal |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher fertility and female labor force participation, gaps filled, Nepal or Pakistan?
- Pakistan, at 28.21 against 27.91 in Nepal as of 2025.
- What is the difference in fertility and female labor force participation, gaps filled between Nepal and Pakistan?
- 0.3, with Pakistan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Nepal and Pakistan?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2017.
- How do Nepal and Pakistan rank globally for fertility and female labor force participation, gaps filled?
- Nepal ranks 181st and Pakistan ranks 180th of 194 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Fertility and female labor force participation, gaps filled. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Fertility and female labor force participation with 782 missing years estimated by linear interpolation between the nearest real observations. Only gaps of 4 years or fewer are filled, and never beyond the first or last actual measurement — these are filled holes, not forecasts.