Dam capacity per capita 1973
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 | Côte d'Ivoire | 4,636.92 cubic meters per inhabitant |
2 | Australia | 3,346.02 cubic meters per inhabitant |
3 | Argentina | 1,824.88 cubic meters per inhabitant |
4 | Bulgaria | 449.123 cubic meters per inhabitant |
5 | Albania | 375.41 cubic meters per inhabitant |
6 | Austria | 198.679 cubic meters per inhabitant |
7 | Afghanistan | 165.241 cubic meters per inhabitant |
8 | Algeria | 122.248 cubic meters per inhabitant |
9 | Antigua and Barbuda | 78.036 cubic meters per inhabitant |
10 | Angola | 29.052 cubic meters per inhabitant |
11 | Armenia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
12 | Azerbaijan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
13 | Bahrain | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
14 | Bangladesh | 87.857 cubic meters per inhabitant |
15 | Belarus | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
16 | Canada | 25,381.6 cubic meters per inhabitant |
17 | Brazil | 4,361.19 cubic meters per inhabitant |
18 | Chile | 858.701 cubic meters per inhabitant |
19 | Botswana | 467.192 cubic meters per inhabitant |
20 | Cameroon | 373.26 cubic meters per inhabitant |
21 | Brunei Darussalam | 305.444 cubic meters per inhabitant |
22 | China | 276.665 cubic meters per inhabitant |
23 | Cuba | 240.518 cubic meters per inhabitant |
24 | Colombia | 215.908 cubic meters per inhabitant |
25 | Cyprus | 64.88 cubic meters per inhabitant |
26 | Bolivia | 57.192 cubic meters per inhabitant |
27 | Burkina Faso | 38.99 cubic meters per inhabitant |
28 | Costa Rica | 18.558 cubic meters per inhabitant |
29 | Belgium | 6.514 cubic meters per inhabitant |
30 | Congo | 5.542 cubic meters per inhabitant |
31 | Congo, Democratic Republic of the | 2.422 cubic meters per inhabitant |
32 | Belize | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
33 | Benin | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
34 | Bhutan | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
35 | Bosnia and Herzegovina | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
36 | Cabo Verde | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
37 | Cambodia | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
38 | Croatia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
39 | Czech Republic | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
40 | Egypt | 4,533.36 cubic meters per inhabitant |
41 | El Salvador | 334.936 cubic meters per inhabitant |
42 | Eswatini | 139.811 cubic meters per inhabitant |
43 | Ecuador | 30.601 cubic meters per inhabitant |
44 | Eritrea | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
45 | Estonia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
46 | Ethiopia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
47 | Ghana | 15,243.9 cubic meters per inhabitant |
48 | Iraq | 11,773 cubic meters per inhabitant |
49 | Iceland | 5,556.05 cubic meters per inhabitant |
50 | Finland | 3,958.71 cubic meters per inhabitant |
51 | Kenya | 1,585.67 cubic meters per inhabitant |
52 | Lesotho | 764.631 cubic meters per inhabitant |
53 | Greece | 743.248 cubic meters per inhabitant |
54 | Iran | 403.013 cubic meters per inhabitant |
55 | Ireland | 281.737 cubic meters per inhabitant |
56 | Guyana | 249.282 cubic meters per inhabitant |
57 | India | 209.501 cubic meters per inhabitant |
58 | Liberia | 150.671 cubic meters per inhabitant |
59 | France | 149.127 cubic meters per inhabitant |
60 | Italy | 142.529 cubic meters per inhabitant |
61 | Japan | 99.809 cubic meters per inhabitant |
62 | Lebanon | 85.506 cubic meters per inhabitant |
63 | Indonesia | 60.54 cubic meters per inhabitant |
64 | Haiti | 60.529 cubic meters per inhabitant |
65 | Guinea | 52.593 cubic meters per inhabitant |
66 | Germany | 34.356 cubic meters per inhabitant |
67 | Honduras | 4.38 cubic meters per inhabitant |
68 | Denmark | 3.983 cubic meters per inhabitant |
69 | Jordan | 3.712 cubic meters per inhabitant |
70 | Jamaica | 2.779 cubic meters per inhabitant |
71 | Hungary | 2.671 cubic meters per inhabitant |
72 | Guatemala | 0.14 cubic meters per inhabitant |
73 | Dominican Republic | 0.092 cubic meters per inhabitant |
74 | Fiji | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
75 | Gabon | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
76 | Georgia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
77 | Grenada | 0.111 cubic meters per inhabitant |
78 | Guinea-Bissau | 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 | 89.206 cubic meters per inhabitant |
84 | Lithuania | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
85 | Nicaragua | 12,067.6 cubic meters per inhabitant |
86 | Norway | 4,870.81 cubic meters per inhabitant |
87 | Panama | 3,549.76 cubic meters per inhabitant |
88 | New Zealand | 2,330.36 cubic meters per inhabitant |
89 | Mozambique | 2,035.52 cubic meters per inhabitant |
90 | Mexico | 1,294.9 cubic meters per inhabitant |
91 | North Korea | 1,079.44 cubic meters per inhabitant |
92 | Malaysia | 669.426 cubic meters per inhabitant |
93 | Namibia | 640.514 cubic meters per inhabitant |
94 | Portugal | 625.042 cubic meters per inhabitant |
95 | Netherlands | 479.718 cubic meters per inhabitant |
96 | Morocco | 337.346 cubic meters per inhabitant |
97 | Nigeria | 318.702 cubic meters per inhabitant |
98 | Romania | 254.79 cubic meters per inhabitant |
99 | Pakistan | 219.843 cubic meters per inhabitant |
100 | Peru | 212.646 cubic meters per inhabitant |
101 | Mongolia | 177.872 cubic meters per inhabitant |
102 | Luxembourg | 150.962 cubic meters per inhabitant |
103 | Myanmar | 80.519 cubic meters per inhabitant |
104 | Mauritius | 72.786 cubic meters per inhabitant |
105 | Madagascar | 67.708 cubic meters per inhabitant |
106 | Mali | 26.527 cubic meters per inhabitant |
107 | Malawi | 8.344 cubic meters per inhabitant |
108 | Maldives | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
109 | Malta | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
110 | Mauritania | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
111 | Montenegro | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
112 | Saint Lucia | 24.187 cubic meters per inhabitant |
113 | Niger | 4.44 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 | Poland | 56.463 cubic meters per inhabitant |
118 | Philippines | 39.708 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 | 12.42 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 | 50,534.1 cubic meters per inhabitant |
131 | Zambia | 20,458.2 cubic meters per inhabitant |
132 | Zimbabwe | 17,068.6 cubic meters per inhabitant |
133 | Uganda | 7,178.6 cubic meters per inhabitant |
134 | Tanzania | 6,720.27 cubic meters per inhabitant |
135 | Uruguay | 4,002.69 cubic meters per inhabitant |
136 | Sweden | 3,984.68 cubic meters per inhabitant |
137 | United States | 3,083.35 cubic meters per inhabitant |
138 | Syrian Arab Republic | 1,752.18 cubic meters per inhabitant |
139 | Spain | 1,076.01 cubic meters per inhabitant |
140 | Thailand | 1,014.08 cubic meters per inhabitant |
141 | Venezuela | 573.304 cubic meters per inhabitant |
142 | Vietnam | 571.368 cubic meters per inhabitant |
143 | Switzerland | 494.102 cubic meters per inhabitant |
144 | Turkey | 381.139 cubic meters per inhabitant |
145 | Sri Lanka | 321.866 cubic meters per inhabitant |
146 | United Kingdom | 81.863 cubic meters per inhabitant |
147 | Sierra Leone | 76.737 cubic meters per inhabitant |
148 | Singapore | 12.545 cubic meters per inhabitant |
149 | Slovakia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
150 | Slovenia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
151 | Somalia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
152 | South Africa | 550.131 cubic meters per inhabitant |
153 | South Korea | 158.41 cubic meters per inhabitant |
154 | State of Palestine | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
155 | Sudan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
156 | Tajikistan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
157 | Tunisia | 122.911 cubic meters per inhabitant |
158 | Trinidad and Tobago | 24.196 cubic meters per inhabitant |
159 | Togo | 3.05 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 | 0.682 cubic meters per inhabitant |
↑Top 10 Countries
- #1
Côte d'Ivoire
- #2
Australia
- #3
Argentina
- #4
Bulgaria
- #5
Albania
- #6
Austria
- #7
Afghanistan
- #8
Algeria
- #9
Antigua and Barbuda
- #10
Angola
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
Tunisia
- #156
Tajikistan
- #155
Sudan
Context: These countries or territories have the lowest values, often due to geographic size, administrative status, or specific characteristics.
Analysis & Context
In 1973, the global landscape of water resource management was underscored by the metric of dam capacity per capita, a key indicator of how countries were equipped to handle water storage challenges. This statistic, expressed in cubic meters per inhabitant, provides crucial insights into a nation's capacity to support agriculture, manage water security, and facilitate industrial and community needs. As nations around the world grappled with balancing environmental concerns and development goals, analyzing the dam capacity per capita became increasingly important for understanding the sustainability and resilience of water infrastructure.
Top Performers in Dam Capacity
In 1973, Suriname emerged as the leader in dam capacity per capita, boasting a staggering 50,534.1 cubic meters per inhabitant. This impressive figure was followed by Canada, with a capacity of 25,381.6 cubic meters. These high capacities reflected the abundant natural resources and strategic investments in water infrastructure in these countries. Suriname's leadership can be attributed to its low population density and significant investments in hydropower, which play a pivotal role in its economic development. Similarly, Canada's vast and varied landscape, coupled with its focus on harnessing hydropower, positioned it as a top performer in this metric.
Challenges Faced by Low-Capacity Nations
Contrasting sharply with the leaders, several countries, including Cambodia, Rwanda, and Fiji, reported zero dam capacity per capita. These countries faced significant challenges in water resource management, often due to economic constraints, geographical limitations, or political factors. The lack of infrastructure in these regions highlighted the urgent need for international cooperation and investment in water resource development to ensure sustainable growth and improve living conditions. The absence of substantial dam capacity posed environmental and socio-economic risks, particularly in terms of agricultural productivity and access to clean water.
Year-over-Year Trends and Changes
Analyzing the year-over-year changes, the global average dam capacity per capita increased by 4.14 cubic meters, demonstrating a 39.3% growth. The Syrian Arab Republic experienced the most substantial increase, rising by 1,701.21 cubic meters, marking a 3,337.6% surge. This remarkable growth was likely fueled by significant investments in dam construction to support agricultural expansion and population growth. Conversely, Zambia and Zimbabwe both saw decreases of approximately 2.8% in their capacities, reflecting challenges in maintaining existing infrastructure amidst growing demand and potentially adverse climatic conditions.
Regional Dynamics and Implications
The 1973 data reveals intriguing regional dynamics. African nations like Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Ghana, despite having relatively high capacities, faced decreases in their dam capacity per capita. This trend suggests a pressing need for enhanced infrastructure maintenance and strategic planning to counteract the pressures of population growth and climate variability. Meanwhile, countries in the Americas, such as Nicaragua and Argentina, demonstrated notable efforts to expand their water storage capabilities, aligning with broader development objectives and economic strategies. These regional dynamics underscore the diversity of challenges and opportunities in water resource management across the globe.
Environmental and Policy Impacts
In 1973, the interplay between environmental factors and policy decisions was evident in the distribution of dam capacity per capita. Countries with proactive water management policies and investments in infrastructure saw more sustainable outcomes. For instance, nations like Suriname and Canada benefitted from favorable natural conditions and government support, leading to their high capacities. In contrast, regions with limited policy frameworks or resources faced constraints in enhancing their water storage capabilities. These differences highlight the critical role of governmental actions and international cooperation in addressing water security challenges and supporting sustainable development goals.
Understanding the metric of dam capacity per capita in 1973 provides invaluable insights into the global state of water resource management. As nations continue to face environmental challenges and developmental pressures, this statistic remains a vital tool for assessing the efficacy of water storage strategies and their impacts on communities worldwide. The data from 1973 serves as a historical benchmark, guiding future efforts to build resilient and sustainable water infrastructure capable of meeting the demands of a growing global population.
Insights by country
Mali
Mali ranked 93rd out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita in 1973, with a capacity of 26.5268 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the country's limited water storage infrastructure relative to its population at the time, indicating challenges in water resource management and accessibility.
The relatively low dam capacity per capita in Mali can be attributed to several factors, including a lack of investment in large-scale water management projects, geographic and climatic conditions that affect water availability, and socio-economic challenges that hinder infrastructure development. The reliance on seasonal rainfall for agriculture and domestic use further complicates the water supply situation in the country.
As a landlocked country in West Africa, Mali's water resources are critical for its agricultural sector, which employs a significant portion of the population. Enhanced dam capacity and water management strategies are essential for improving agricultural productivity and ensuring water security in the face of climate variability.
Congo
In 1973, Congo ranked 101st out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a recorded value of 5.54223 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the country’s water resource management and infrastructure capabilities during a time when many African nations were grappling with post-colonial development challenges.
The relatively modest dam capacity per capita can be attributed to several factors, including limited investment in infrastructure, political instability, and the economic challenges that were prevalent during this era. Additionally, the size and geographical diversity of Congo may have posed logistical challenges in developing extensive water management systems.
Interestingly, while Congo's dam capacity per capita was low compared to some other nations, it was part of a broader trend in Africa where many countries were beginning to recognize the importance of hydropower and water conservation as critical to their development agendas.
France
In 1973, France ranked 67th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a notable capacity of 149.127 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the country's extensive investment in hydroelectric power and water management infrastructure, which has been a significant focus since the mid-20th century.
The relatively high dam capacity per capita can be attributed to France's geographical diversity, which includes numerous rivers and large bodies of water suitable for dam construction. Additionally, the French government has historically prioritized the development of renewable energy sources, particularly hydroelectricity, as part of its energy strategy.
Interestingly, France's commitment to hydroelectric power has helped it maintain a low carbon footprint in electricity generation. As of 1973, hydropower constituted a significant portion of the country's total electricity production, showcasing the importance of sustainable energy practices even in that era.
China
In 1973, China ranked 53rd out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a notable capacity of 276.665 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects China's significant investment in hydropower infrastructure during a period marked by rapid industrialization and urbanization.
The substantial dam capacity per capita can be attributed to the country's extensive river systems, such as the Yangtze and Yellow Rivers, which have been harnessed for both energy generation and irrigation. The focus on developing large-scale dams was also driven by the need for flood control and water management in a country with a vast and diverse geography.
As a point of comparison, this capacity indicates a strategic approach to water resource management, which was essential for supporting the growing population and agricultural demands of the era. By enhancing dam infrastructure, China aimed to boost economic development and improve living standards, laying the groundwork for future advancements in water resource technology.
Colombia
In 1973, Colombia ranked 58th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with an impressive 215.908 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the country's considerable investments in water infrastructure, which are crucial for both agricultural and hydroelectric power generation.
The relatively high dam capacity per capita can be attributed to Colombia's diverse geography, including numerous rivers and mountainous regions, which provide ample opportunities for dam construction. Additionally, the energy needs of the growing population during this period pushed the government to develop hydroelectric resources, making use of the country's abundant freshwater resources.
Moreover, Colombia's focus on energy independence through hydroelectric power has significantly shaped its energy policies, leading to the establishment of major dam projects that continue to influence the country's energy landscape today. As a notable fact, Colombia has one of the highest shares of hydropower in its total electricity generation, which has historically contributed to its energy security.
Argentina
In 1973, Argentina ranked 23rd out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a capacity of 1824.88 cubic meters per inhabitant. This significant figure reflects the country's extensive investment in water resource management and infrastructure development during this period, which was essential for supporting both agricultural and industrial activities.
The high dam capacity per capita can be attributed to Argentina's vast natural resources, including numerous rivers and a favorable geographical landscape conducive to the construction of large dams. The government’s focus on hydroelectric power generation and irrigation systems played a crucial role in enhancing water storage capabilities, which in turn promoted agricultural productivity and energy supply.
Additionally, it is noteworthy that during the early 1970s, Argentina was experiencing a phase of economic growth, which allowed for increased public spending on infrastructure projects, including water management systems. This investment not only facilitated domestic needs but also positioned Argentina as a key player in regional agriculture and energy supply.
Nicaragua
Nicaragua ranked 6th in the world for dam capacity per capita in 1973, boasting an impressive 12,067.6 cubic meters of water storage capacity per inhabitant. This high ranking reflects the country's significant investment in hydroelectric infrastructure, which has been essential for supporting its energy needs and agricultural irrigation.
The substantial dam capacity can be attributed to Nicaragua's geographical features, including numerous rivers and lakes conducive to hydroelectric development. Furthermore, during this period, the government prioritized infrastructure projects aimed at harnessing water resources for both energy production and flood control.
Interestingly, Nicaragua's focus on hydroelectric power has continued to influence its energy landscape, with a large portion of the country's electricity being generated from renewable sources. This early commitment to dam construction laid the groundwork for sustainable energy practices that are increasingly relevant in today's context of climate change and energy demands.
Iran
In 1973, Iran ranked 43rd out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a notable figure of 403.013 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the significant investment in water infrastructure during a period of rapid modernization and industrialization in the country.
The high dam capacity per capita can be attributed to Iran's diverse topography and the need for effective water management in a predominantly arid climate. The government at the time prioritized the construction of dams to support agriculture, hydroelectric power generation, and urban water supply, addressing the challenges posed by seasonal droughts and water scarcity.
Additionally, this period was characterized by increased oil revenues, which allowed for substantial public investment in infrastructure projects, including dams. Overall, the capacity of dams in relation to the population not only highlights the country's focus on water resource management but also serves as a critical factor in supporting its agricultural economy and energy needs.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
In 1973, Bosnia and Herzegovina ranked 121st 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 lack of significant infrastructure development related to water management and hydroelectric power during this period.
The absence of dam capacity per capita can be attributed to various historical and economic factors, including the country's ongoing struggles with political stability and economic development in the decades leading up to and following the 1970s. Furthermore, the region's complex geography and hydrology may have influenced the feasibility and prioritization of dam construction.
It is also relevant to note that Bosnia and Herzegovina's water resources have historically been significant, with numerous rivers flowing through the country. However, the effective harnessing of these resources for hydroelectric power and irrigation was limited in the 1970s, impacting the overall dam capacity available to the population.
Grenada
In 1973, Grenada ranked 112th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a capacity of 0.111439 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the limited water storage infrastructure relative to the size of its population, indicating potential challenges in managing water resources effectively.
The relatively low dam capacity per capita can be attributed to several factors, including Grenada's geographic characteristics, which feature a hilly terrain that may complicate the construction of large reservoirs. Additionally, being a small island nation, Grenada has a limited land area for the development of extensive water management systems, which can impact overall water supply security.
Notably, the ability to store water through dams is crucial for agricultural activities and domestic use, especially in a Caribbean context where rainfall can be variable. As a result, countries with higher dam capacities often have greater resilience to drought and other climate-related challenges, highlighting the importance of investment in water infrastructure for Grenada's sustainable development.
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