Dam capacity per capita 1969
Dam capacity per capita measures the amount of water storage available for each individual in a country, expressed in cubic meters. This statistic highlights water resource management and its impact on sustainability and development. Understanding dam capacity is crucial for addressing water security and supporting agriculture, industry, and communities.
Interactive Map
Complete Data Rankings
Rank | ||
|---|---|---|
1 | Australia | 2,163.15 cubic meters per inhabitant |
2 | Bulgaria | 366.022 cubic meters per inhabitant |
3 | Argentina | 296.942 cubic meters per inhabitant |
4 | Afghanistan | 182.348 cubic meters per inhabitant |
5 | Albania | 178.666 cubic meters per inhabitant |
6 | Austria | 177.547 cubic meters per inhabitant |
7 | Algeria | 132.662 cubic meters per inhabitant |
8 | Antigua and Barbuda | 78.676 cubic meters per inhabitant |
9 | Angola | 32.202 cubic meters per inhabitant |
10 | Armenia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
11 | Azerbaijan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
12 | Bahrain | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
13 | Bangladesh | 96.249 cubic meters per inhabitant |
14 | Belarus | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
15 | Canada | 23,832.3 cubic meters per inhabitant |
16 | Brazil | 4,582.86 cubic meters per inhabitant |
17 | Chile | 914.279 cubic meters per inhabitant |
18 | Botswana | 374.404 cubic meters per inhabitant |
19 | Brunei Darussalam | 342.445 cubic meters per inhabitant |
20 | China | 233.108 cubic meters per inhabitant |
21 | Côte d'Ivoire | 192.037 cubic meters per inhabitant |
22 | Colombia | 179.133 cubic meters per inhabitant |
23 | Cuba | 75.2 cubic meters per inhabitant |
24 | Bolivia | 62.311 cubic meters per inhabitant |
25 | Cyprus | 45.784 cubic meters per inhabitant |
26 | Burkina Faso | 40.904 cubic meters per inhabitant |
27 | Costa Rica | 20.623 cubic meters per inhabitant |
28 | Congo | 6.268 cubic meters per inhabitant |
29 | Denmark | 4.088 cubic meters per inhabitant |
30 | Belgium | 3.765 cubic meters per inhabitant |
31 | Congo, Democratic Republic of the | 1.679 cubic meters per inhabitant |
32 | Cameroon | 1.046 cubic meters per inhabitant |
33 | Belize | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
34 | Benin | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
35 | Bhutan | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
36 | Bosnia and Herzegovina | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
37 | Cabo Verde | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
38 | Cambodia | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
39 | Croatia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
40 | Czech Republic | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
41 | El Salvador | 368.798 cubic meters per inhabitant |
42 | Egypt | 183.273 cubic meters per inhabitant |
43 | Eswatini | 117.081 cubic meters per inhabitant |
44 | Ecuador | 17.69 cubic meters per inhabitant |
45 | Eritrea | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
46 | Estonia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
47 | Ethiopia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
48 | Ghana | 17,040.5 cubic meters per inhabitant |
49 | Iraq | 10,751.5 cubic meters per inhabitant |
50 | Finland | 3,489.99 cubic meters per inhabitant |
51 | Kenya | 1,831.37 cubic meters per inhabitant |
52 | Lesotho | 880.892 cubic meters per inhabitant |
53 | Greece | 755.681 cubic meters per inhabitant |
54 | Iran | 332.887 cubic meters per inhabitant |
55 | Ireland | 295.503 cubic meters per inhabitant |
56 | Guyana | 263.697 cubic meters per inhabitant |
57 | India | 201.874 cubic meters per inhabitant |
58 | Liberia | 166.899 cubic meters per inhabitant |
59 | France | 149.007 cubic meters per inhabitant |
60 | Italy | 94.821 cubic meters per inhabitant |
61 | Lebanon | 94.495 cubic meters per inhabitant |
62 | Japan | 93.51 cubic meters per inhabitant |
63 | Haiti | 65.284 cubic meters per inhabitant |
64 | Guinea | 56.451 cubic meters per inhabitant |
65 | Indonesia | 49.679 cubic meters per inhabitant |
66 | Germany | 33.194 cubic meters per inhabitant |
67 | Honduras | 4.94 cubic meters per inhabitant |
68 | Jordan | 4.48 cubic meters per inhabitant |
69 | Jamaica | 2.938 cubic meters per inhabitant |
70 | Hungary | 1.313 cubic meters per inhabitant |
71 | Guatemala | 0.135 cubic meters per inhabitant |
72 | Dominican Republic | 0.103 cubic meters per inhabitant |
73 | Fiji | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
74 | Gabon | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
75 | Georgia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
76 | Grenada | 0.061 cubic meters per inhabitant |
77 | Guinea-Bissau | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
78 | Iceland | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
79 | Kazakhstan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
80 | Kyrgyzstan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
81 | Laos | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
82 | Latvia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
83 | Libya | 6.672 cubic meters per inhabitant |
84 | Lithuania | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
85 | Nicaragua | 13,613.7 cubic meters per inhabitant |
86 | Norway | 4,058.79 cubic meters per inhabitant |
87 | Panama | 3,966.79 cubic meters per inhabitant |
88 | New Zealand | 2,484.85 cubic meters per inhabitant |
89 | Mozambique | 2,258.66 cubic meters per inhabitant |
90 | Mexico | 1,378.15 cubic meters per inhabitant |
91 | North Korea | 1,161.8 cubic meters per inhabitant |
92 | Portugal | 563.499 cubic meters per inhabitant |
93 | Namibia | 475.122 cubic meters per inhabitant |
94 | Netherlands | 413.789 cubic meters per inhabitant |
95 | Nigeria | 349.329 cubic meters per inhabitant |
96 | Pakistan | 231.143 cubic meters per inhabitant |
97 | Peru | 231.035 cubic meters per inhabitant |
98 | Morocco | 204.259 cubic meters per inhabitant |
99 | Mongolia | 198.054 cubic meters per inhabitant |
100 | Luxembourg | 152.709 cubic meters per inhabitant |
101 | Malaysia | 127.728 cubic meters per inhabitant |
102 | Mauritius | 77.383 cubic meters per inhabitant |
103 | Madagascar | 75.325 cubic meters per inhabitant |
104 | Mali | 28.328 cubic meters per inhabitant |
105 | Malawi | 9.235 cubic meters per inhabitant |
106 | Maldives | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
107 | Malta | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
108 | Mauritania | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
109 | Montenegro | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
110 | Romania | 114.086 cubic meters per inhabitant |
111 | Myanmar | 56.81 cubic meters per inhabitant |
112 | Saint Lucia | 25.521 cubic meters per inhabitant |
113 | Niger | 1.717 cubic meters per inhabitant |
114 | Nepal | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
115 | North Macedonia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
116 | Oman | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
117 | Philippines | 43.643 cubic meters per inhabitant |
118 | Poland | 41.992 cubic meters per inhabitant |
119 | Papua New Guinea | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
120 | Paraguay | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
121 | Republic of Moldova | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
122 | Russia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
123 | Rwanda | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
124 | Samoa | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
125 | Sao Tome and Principe | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
126 | Saudi Arabia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
127 | Senegal | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
128 | Serbia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
129 | Seychelles | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
130 | Suriname | 54,509.9 cubic meters per inhabitant |
131 | Zambia | 22,735.5 cubic meters per inhabitant |
132 | Zimbabwe | 19,189.1 cubic meters per inhabitant |
133 | Uganda | 7,988.13 cubic meters per inhabitant |
134 | Tanzania | 7,737.53 cubic meters per inhabitant |
135 | Uruguay | 4,093.83 cubic meters per inhabitant |
136 | United States | 3,006.87 cubic meters per inhabitant |
137 | Sweden | 3,004.18 cubic meters per inhabitant |
138 | Spain | 992.303 cubic meters per inhabitant |
139 | Thailand | 708.89 cubic meters per inhabitant |
140 | Vietnam | 552.47 cubic meters per inhabitant |
141 | Venezuela | 514.626 cubic meters per inhabitant |
142 | Switzerland | 502.725 cubic meters per inhabitant |
143 | Turkey | 358.223 cubic meters per inhabitant |
144 | Sri Lanka | 349.918 cubic meters per inhabitant |
145 | Tunisia | 104.02 cubic meters per inhabitant |
146 | Sierra Leone | 82.664 cubic meters per inhabitant |
147 | Singapore | 13.449 cubic meters per inhabitant |
148 | Slovakia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
149 | Slovenia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
150 | Somalia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
151 | South Africa | 166.3 cubic meters per inhabitant |
152 | South Korea | 70.306 cubic meters per inhabitant |
153 | State of Palestine | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
154 | Sudan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
155 | Syrian Arab Republic | 52.02 cubic meters per inhabitant |
156 | Tajikistan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
157 | United Kingdom | 80.565 cubic meters per inhabitant |
158 | Trinidad and Tobago | 25.359 cubic meters per inhabitant |
159 | Togo | 3.45 cubic meters per inhabitant |
160 | Turkmenistan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
161 | Ukraine | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
162 | United Arab Emirates | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
163 | Uzbekistan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
164 | Yemen | 0.762 cubic meters per inhabitant |
↑Top 10 Countries
- #1
Australia
- #2
Bulgaria
- #3
Argentina
- #4
Afghanistan
- #5
Albania
- #6
Austria
- #7
Algeria
- #8
Antigua and Barbuda
- #9
Angola
- #10
Armenia
Analysis: These countries represent the highest values in this dataset, showcasing significant scale and impact on global statistics.
↓Bottom 10 Countries
- #164
Yemen
- #163
Uzbekistan
- #162
United Arab Emirates
- #161
Ukraine
- #160
Turkmenistan
- #159
Togo
- #158
Trinidad and Tobago
- #157
United Kingdom
- #156
Tajikistan
- #155
Syrian Arab Republic
Context: These countries or territories have the lowest values, often due to geographic size, administrative status, or specific characteristics.
Analysis & Context
In 1969, the metric of dam capacity per capita served as a crucial indicator of a country's ability to manage its water resources effectively. Expressed in cubic meters per inhabitant, this statistic provided insights into the sustainability and development potential of different regions. Understanding a country's dam capacity per capita was vital not only for assessing water security but also for supporting agricultural, industrial, and community needs.
Global Insights on Dam Capacity
The global average dam capacity per capita in 1969 was approximately 1942.50 cubic meters per inhabitant. However, this average masked significant disparities between countries. At the top of the list, Suriname boasted a staggering capacity of 54509.9 cubic meters per person, followed by Canada and Zambia with 23832.3 and 22735.5 cubic meters, respectively. Such high capacities were indicative of these countries' vast water reserves and strategic investments in dam infrastructure.
Conversely, several countries reported minimal or zero dam capacities, including Cambodia, Nepal, and Fiji. These figures highlighted challenges related to infrastructure development and geographical limitations, which could hinder their efforts in achieving long-term water security and sustainable growth.
Regional Disparities and Influencing Factors
Examining the regional disparities in dam capacity per capita reveals a stark contrast between water-rich and water-scarce regions. Countries like Suriname and Canada, with vast natural water resources and lower population densities, naturally exhibited higher dam capacities. In contrast, densely populated countries or nations with limited access to water resources struggled to achieve comparable per capita figures.
Africa presented an intriguing case. Countries like Zambia and Zimbabwe ranked among the top 10, reflecting strategic dam investments and resource availability. However, other African nations such as Rwanda and Benin reported no significant dam capacity per capita, underscoring the uneven distribution of water resources across the continent.
Year-over-Year Changes and Trends
Between 1968 and 1969, several countries experienced notable changes in their dam capacity per capita. For instance, Canada saw an increase of 851.10 cubic meters (3.7%), reflecting ongoing efforts to enhance water storage infrastructure. Similarly, Norway and Spain reported increases, with Spain showing a significant 19.6% rise. These improvements were likely driven by policy initiatives focusing on water conservation and infrastructure expansion.
On the downside, Suriname experienced the largest decrease in dam capacity per capita, dropping by 1889.10 cubic meters (-3.3%). Other countries like Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Nicaragua also witnessed declines, indicative of potential challenges in maintaining or expanding their existing water storage capabilities.
Policy Implications and Future Prospects
The wide range in dam capacity per capita in 1969 suggested varying levels of governmental commitment to water management policies. Countries with higher capacities likely prioritized water security through substantial investments in dam infrastructure and technology. In contrast, nations with lower capacities faced the challenge of balancing rapid population growth with limited water resources, necessitating innovative solutions and international cooperation.
Looking ahead, countries with lower dam capacities per capita in 1969 needed to forge strategic partnerships and secure funding for dam projects to enhance their water security. The experiences of nations like Canada and Spain demonstrated the potential benefits of proactive water management policies, which could serve as models for other countries aiming to improve their dam storage capabilities.
Environmental and Economic Impact
The environmental implications of dam capacity per capita were significant. High capacities often correlated with extensive dam networks, which could alter ecosystems and affect biodiversity. Thus, it became essential for countries to consider sustainable practices when expanding their water storage facilities.
Economically, countries with substantial dam capacities were better positioned to support agriculture and industry, fostering economic growth. Regions like South America, where Brazil had a capacity of 4582.86 cubic meters, could leverage their water resources to boost agricultural outputs and industrial processes.
The 1969 dam capacity per capita data underscored the critical role of water management in ensuring sustainable development. It highlighted the need for ongoing investment in infrastructure, careful environmental stewardship, and international collaboration to address the disparities and challenges in global water resource management.
Insights by country
Sierra Leone
Sierra Leone ranked 70th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita in 1969, with a recorded capacity of 82.6643 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic highlights a relatively significant level of water storage infrastructure available to the population at the time, reflecting the country’s investment in water management and agricultural support.
The capacity indicates an effort to harness water resources for agriculture and domestic use, which is crucial in a country where rainfall variability can impact food security. Factors contributing to this capacity include the geographical features of Sierra Leone, which is endowed with numerous rivers and a generally wet tropical climate that facilitates the construction of dams.
Interestingly, while Sierra Leone had a commendable dam capacity per capita, the overall development of infrastructure and economic stability in the country has faced challenges in subsequent decades, impacting the effective utilization of such resources. Overall, the statistic from 1969 serves as a historical benchmark for understanding the evolution of water management and resource allocation in Sierra Leone.
Montenegro
In 1969, Montenegro ranked 140 out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a recorded value of null cubic meters per inhabitant. This ranking indicates a significant lack of substantial water storage infrastructure relative to its population, which may have implications for water management and agricultural practices in the region.
The absence of dam capacity in Montenegro during this period can be attributed to various factors, including limited industrial development and the geographic characteristics of the region, which may not have favored large-scale dam construction. Additionally, the focus on other infrastructural developments might have diverted resources away from water management projects.
Historically, Montenegro has relied heavily on its natural water resources and river systems, which can provide sufficient water supply without the need for extensive dam infrastructure. This reliance on natural water bodies reflects a broader trend in many smaller nations, where the immediate environmental landscape plays a critical role in resource management strategies.
Algeria
In 1969, Algeria ranked 61st out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a value of 132.662 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the country's efforts to manage water resources effectively, particularly in the context of its diverse geography that includes both arid and semi-arid regions.
The relatively high dam capacity per capita can be attributed to Algeria's investment in hydroelectric projects and water storage systems, which are crucial for supporting agriculture and providing water to its population. Given the country's significant reliance on agriculture, particularly in rural areas, the infrastructure for water management has been a priority for national development.
Additionally, it is noteworthy that Algeria's water management strategies have evolved over the years, influenced by both climatic conditions and population growth. The emphasis on dam construction during this period was also a response to the need for improved irrigation and flood control, essential for sustaining agricultural productivity in a predominantly desert landscape.
Ecuador
In 1969, Ecuador ranked 93rd out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a value of 17.6897 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the country's ability to harness water resources for various uses, including agriculture, hydroelectric power generation, and domestic water supply.
The relatively low dam capacity per capita can be attributed to several factors, including the country's geographic diversity, economic challenges, and the developmental stage of its infrastructure at the time. During this period, Ecuador was still in the process of developing its hydroelectric potential, which is significant given the country's numerous rivers and varied topography.
Additionally, the water management strategies in 1969 were still evolving, with investments in large-scale dam projects only gaining momentum in later decades. As a point of interest, Ecuador has since increased its focus on renewable energy sources, particularly hydropower, which now plays a crucial role in its energy portfolio.
Cyprus
In 1969, Cyprus ranked 83rd out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a notable capacity of 45.7837 cubic meters per inhabitant. This metric reflects the country's ability to store water for agricultural, industrial, and domestic use, which is particularly significant given Cyprus's Mediterranean climate characterized by hot, dry summers and mild, wet winters.
The relatively moderate dam capacity per capita in Cyprus during this period can be attributed to several factors, including the island's geographical constraints, limited natural water resources, and the historical context of development in the region. The establishment of dams and water infrastructure was crucial for managing the water supply, especially in the face of increasing population demands and agricultural needs.
Interestingly, water management and conservation have continued to evolve in Cyprus, with ongoing efforts to enhance water supply through additional infrastructure and improved efficiency. Additionally, the significance of water resources management has grown due to environmental concerns and changing climate patterns, making the historical context of 1969 a pivotal reference point.
Rwanda
In 1969, Rwanda ranked 148th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a recorded value of 0 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the limited infrastructure for water resource management and energy generation in the country during this period.
The absence of dam capacity indicates a lack of investment in hydroelectric power and water storage facilities, which could be attributed to Rwanda's economic challenges and political instability. The nation was still recovering from the aftermath of colonial rule and grappling with issues related to governance and resource allocation.
Additionally, Rwanda's geographical landscape, characterized by its hilly terrain, may have posed challenges for the construction and maintenance of large-scale dams. The low dam capacity per capita during this time stands in contrast to the rapid development of the country's energy sector in the following decades, leading to significant improvements in water management and electricity generation.
Sudan
In 1969, Sudan ranked 159 out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a recorded value of null cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic indicates a significant lack of infrastructure for water storage and management, reflecting the country's challenges in harnessing its water resources effectively.
The low dam capacity per capita can be attributed to a combination of factors, including political instability, limited investment in infrastructure, and economic challenges that hindered the development of essential water management systems. Additionally, the Nile River, which flows through Sudan, has historically been subject to competing claims from multiple countries, complicating cooperative projects for dam construction.
Water scarcity has been a persistent issue in Sudan, exacerbated by factors such as climate variability and population growth. In the years following 1969, the country faced ongoing conflicts and governance issues that further restricted the development of water infrastructure and management, leading to continued challenges in meeting the water needs of its population.
Croatia
In 1969, Croatia ranked 122nd out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a recorded value of null cubic meters per inhabitant. This indicates that during this period, the country lacked significant infrastructure related to water storage or management, which may have impacted its ability to support agricultural irrigation and hydroelectric power generation.
The relatively low dam capacity per capita can be attributed to several factors, including the country's historical context, which involves periods of conflict and economic challenges that may have limited investment in infrastructure development. Additionally, Croatia's geographical features, characterized by numerous rivers and lakes, may have influenced the prioritization of water management strategies.
Furthermore, the importance of dam construction has grown in subsequent decades, and today, Croatia has made advancements in water management and hydroelectric power, reflecting a shift towards sustainable resource utilization. As of recent statistics, the country has developed significant capacity in this area, contrasting sharply with the situation in 1969.
Congo
In 1969, Congo ranked 97th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a notable capacity of 6.2676 cubic meters per inhabitant. This figure reflects the country's ability to harness and store water resources for various uses, including agriculture, drinking water supply, and energy generation.
The relatively low dam capacity per capita can be attributed to several factors, including the country's developmental challenges, limited infrastructure investment, and the impact of political instability during that period. Additionally, the natural geography of Congo, which includes significant river systems, may not have necessitated extensive dam construction compared to other regions with less accessible water resources.
As a related statistic, it is worth noting that during the same era, many countries in Africa were facing similar challenges in water management and infrastructure development, leading to varying levels of dam capacity and resource utilization across the continent.
United States
In 1969, the United States ranked 15th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with an impressive statistic of 3006.87 cubic meters per inhabitant. This high level of dam capacity reflects the country's extensive investment in water resources management and infrastructure, which is essential for supporting agriculture, industry, and urban development.
The significant dam capacity in the United States during this period can be attributed to the country's vast geographical area, diverse climate, and the need for effective flood control and irrigation systems. The construction of major dams, such as the Hoover Dam and Glen Canyon Dam, played a crucial role in harnessing water resources and providing hydroelectric power, which also contributed to economic growth.
Additionally, the focus on developing large-scale water projects in the mid-20th century was driven by post-war expansion and an increasing emphasis on industrialization. This era saw a surge in infrastructure projects, which not only improved water availability but also showcased the technological prowess of the United States in civil engineering.
Data Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations that leads international efforts to defeat hunger.
Visit Data SourceHistorical Data by Year
Explore Dam capacity per capita data across different years. Compare trends and see how statistics have changed over time.
More Geography Facts
Percentage of land area by degree of urbanization
Explore the percentage of land area by degree of urbanization, highlighting how urban development shapes countries' landscapes and influences economic growth. Understanding this statistic reveals the balance between urban and rural spaces, essential for sustainable planning.
View dataBrowse All Geography
Explore more facts and statistics in this category
All Categories
Discover more categories with comprehensive global data