Dam capacity per capita 1982
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 | 4,586.87 cubic meters per inhabitant |
2 | Côte d'Ivoire | 4,180.98 cubic meters per inhabitant |
3 | Argentina | 3,400.76 cubic meters per inhabitant |
4 | Albania | 1,257.51 cubic meters per inhabitant |
5 | Bulgaria | 666.732 cubic meters per inhabitant |
6 | Angola | 493.81 cubic meters per inhabitant |
7 | Austria | 255.444 cubic meters per inhabitant |
8 | Afghanistan | 182.78 cubic meters per inhabitant |
9 | Algeria | 104.253 cubic meters per inhabitant |
10 | Antigua and Barbuda | 77.503 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 | 69.784 cubic meters per inhabitant |
15 | Belarus | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
16 | Canada | 32,911.1 cubic meters per inhabitant |
17 | Brazil | 3,932.5 cubic meters per inhabitant |
18 | Chile | 815.595 cubic meters per inhabitant |
19 | Costa Rica | 771.537 cubic meters per inhabitant |
20 | Cameroon | 499.035 cubic meters per inhabitant |
21 | Cuba | 410.147 cubic meters per inhabitant |
22 | Botswana | 302.001 cubic meters per inhabitant |
23 | China | 272.441 cubic meters per inhabitant |
24 | Colombia | 240.287 cubic meters per inhabitant |
25 | Brunei Darussalam | 227.149 cubic meters per inhabitant |
26 | Dominican Republic | 171.254 cubic meters per inhabitant |
27 | Cyprus | 135.257 cubic meters per inhabitant |
28 | Burkina Faso | 124.645 cubic meters per inhabitant |
29 | Bolivia | 48.92 cubic meters per inhabitant |
30 | Belgium | 14.693 cubic meters per inhabitant |
31 | Benin | 5.654 cubic meters per inhabitant |
32 | Congo | 4.711 cubic meters per inhabitant |
33 | Congo, Democratic Republic of the | 1.866 cubic meters per inhabitant |
34 | Belize | 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 | Egypt | 3,624.34 cubic meters per inhabitant |
42 | El Salvador | 756.953 cubic meters per inhabitant |
43 | Eswatini | 354.261 cubic meters per inhabitant |
44 | Ecuador | 23.887 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 | 11,745.2 cubic meters per inhabitant |
49 | Iraq | 9,100.32 cubic meters per inhabitant |
50 | Iceland | 7,013.62 cubic meters per inhabitant |
51 | Finland | 3,854.04 cubic meters per inhabitant |
52 | Laos | 2,037.67 cubic meters per inhabitant |
53 | Kenya | 1,265.04 cubic meters per inhabitant |
54 | Greece | 1,053.52 cubic meters per inhabitant |
55 | Lesotho | 583.871 cubic meters per inhabitant |
56 | Iran | 382.427 cubic meters per inhabitant |
57 | Gabon | 278.733 cubic meters per inhabitant |
58 | Guyana | 257.689 cubic meters per inhabitant |
59 | Ireland | 250.033 cubic meters per inhabitant |
60 | India | 230.045 cubic meters per inhabitant |
61 | France | 169.261 cubic meters per inhabitant |
62 | Italy | 151.959 cubic meters per inhabitant |
63 | Japan | 110.623 cubic meters per inhabitant |
64 | Indonesia | 58.285 cubic meters per inhabitant |
65 | Haiti | 50.892 cubic meters per inhabitant |
66 | Guinea | 45.163 cubic meters per inhabitant |
67 | Hungary | 24.061 cubic meters per inhabitant |
68 | Honduras | 6.363 cubic meters per inhabitant |
69 | Denmark | 3.908 cubic meters per inhabitant |
70 | Guatemala | 0.155 cubic meters per inhabitant |
71 | Fiji | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
72 | Georgia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
73 | Germany | 39.216 cubic meters per inhabitant |
74 | Grenada | 0.191 cubic meters per inhabitant |
75 | Guinea-Bissau | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
76 | Liberia | 116.671 cubic meters per inhabitant |
77 | Lebanon | 72.015 cubic meters per inhabitant |
78 | Jordan | 2.719 cubic meters per inhabitant |
79 | Jamaica | 2.473 cubic meters per inhabitant |
80 | Kazakhstan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
81 | Kyrgyzstan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
82 | Latvia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
83 | Libya | 104.138 cubic meters per inhabitant |
84 | Lithuania | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
85 | Nicaragua | 9,297.13 cubic meters per inhabitant |
86 | Mozambique | 6,129.93 cubic meters per inhabitant |
87 | Norway | 5,691.54 cubic meters per inhabitant |
88 | New Zealand | 5,156.88 cubic meters per inhabitant |
89 | Panama | 4,158.66 cubic meters per inhabitant |
90 | Paraguay | 2,643.68 cubic meters per inhabitant |
91 | Mexico | 1,292.18 cubic meters per inhabitant |
92 | North Korea | 950.47 cubic meters per inhabitant |
93 | Portugal | 658.275 cubic meters per inhabitant |
94 | Namibia | 649.723 cubic meters per inhabitant |
95 | Malaysia | 531.431 cubic meters per inhabitant |
96 | Morocco | 507.385 cubic meters per inhabitant |
97 | Netherlands | 450.261 cubic meters per inhabitant |
98 | Nigeria | 444.523 cubic meters per inhabitant |
99 | Romania | 372.286 cubic meters per inhabitant |
100 | Pakistan | 308.724 cubic meters per inhabitant |
101 | Mali | 298.339 cubic meters per inhabitant |
102 | Luxembourg | 148.681 cubic meters per inhabitant |
103 | Mongolia | 140.027 cubic meters per inhabitant |
104 | Mauritius | 64.019 cubic meters per inhabitant |
105 | Madagascar | 51.63 cubic meters per inhabitant |
106 | Malawi | 6.16 cubic meters per inhabitant |
107 | Maldives | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
108 | Malta | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
109 | Mauritania | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
110 | Montenegro | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
111 | Peru | 220.113 cubic meters per inhabitant |
112 | Philippines | 77.245 cubic meters per inhabitant |
113 | Myanmar | 69.923 cubic meters per inhabitant |
114 | Poland | 55.333 cubic meters per inhabitant |
115 | Niger | 12.801 cubic meters per inhabitant |
116 | Nepal | 5.234 cubic meters per inhabitant |
117 | North Macedonia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
118 | Oman | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
119 | Papua New Guinea | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
120 | Republic of Moldova | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
121 | Russia | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
122 | Saint Lucia | 21.123 cubic meters per inhabitant |
123 | Rwanda | 0 cubic meters per inhabitant |
124 | Samoa | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
125 | Sao Tome and Principe | 380.458 cubic meters per inhabitant |
126 | Saudi Arabia | 68.141 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 | 53,113.1 cubic meters per inhabitant |
131 | Zambia | 16,368.2 cubic meters per inhabitant |
132 | Zimbabwe | 12,654 cubic meters per inhabitant |
133 | Uganda | 5,766.33 cubic meters per inhabitant |
134 | Uruguay | 5,698.61 cubic meters per inhabitant |
135 | Tanzania | 5,108.05 cubic meters per inhabitant |
136 | Sweden | 4,246.63 cubic meters per inhabitant |
137 | United States | 3,036.92 cubic meters per inhabitant |
138 | Syrian Arab Republic | 1,327.98 cubic meters per inhabitant |
139 | Thailand | 1,281.19 cubic meters per inhabitant |
140 | Spain | 1,070.26 cubic meters per inhabitant |
141 | Turkey | 1,014.75 cubic meters per inhabitant |
142 | Venezuela | 642.12 cubic meters per inhabitant |
143 | Switzerland | 523.092 cubic meters per inhabitant |
144 | Vietnam | 478.925 cubic meters per inhabitant |
145 | Sri Lanka | 275.004 cubic meters per inhabitant |
146 | United Kingdom | 91.461 cubic meters per inhabitant |
147 | Sierra Leone | 64.551 cubic meters per inhabitant |
148 | Singapore | 28.507 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 | 675.945 cubic meters per inhabitant |
153 | Tunisia | 229.009 cubic meters per inhabitant |
154 | South Korea | 216.713 cubic meters per inhabitant |
155 | State of Palestine | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
156 | Sudan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
157 | Tajikistan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
158 | Trinidad and Tobago | 62.26 cubic meters per inhabitant |
159 | Togo | 2.398 cubic meters per inhabitant |
160 | Turkmenistan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
161 | Ukraine | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
162 | United Arab Emirates | 13.246 cubic meters per inhabitant |
163 | Uzbekistan | NaN cubic meters per inhabitant |
164 | Yemen | 0.511 cubic meters per inhabitant |
↑Top 10 Countries
- #1
Australia
- #2
Côte d'Ivoire
- #3
Argentina
- #4
Albania
- #5
Bulgaria
- #6
Angola
- #7
Austria
- #8
Afghanistan
- #9
Algeria
- #10
Antigua and Barbuda
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
Tajikistan
- #156
Sudan
- #155
State of Palestine
Context: These countries or territories have the lowest values, often due to geographic size, administrative status, or specific characteristics.
Analysis & Context
In 1982, the concept of "dam capacity per capita" was a crucial indicator of how nations managed their water resources in relation to their populations. This metric, expressed in cubic meters per inhabitant, sheds light on the sustainability of water management practices and their implications for economic and social development. The ability to store water efficiently is vital for ensuring water security, supporting agricultural needs, sustaining industries, and nurturing communities, especially in a world facing increasing environmental challenges.
Global Landscape Analysis
In 1982, data from 126 countries revealed significant disparities in dam capacity per capita. Suriname led the world with an astounding 53,113.10 cubic meters per inhabitant, reflecting its extensive water resources relative to its population size. Canada followed with 32,911.10 cubic meters, benefiting from its vast landscapes and numerous water bodies. On the other hand, several countries, including Cambodia, Rwanda, and Fiji, reported no dam capacity per capita, highlighting potential vulnerabilities in water resource management.
The average dam capacity per capita globally was 2,022.12 cubic meters, but the median was significantly lower at 257.69 cubic meters. This discrepancy suggests that while a few countries have exceptionally high capacities, a majority have relatively modest or even negligible capacities. Such variations can be attributed to geographic, climatic, and economic factors that influence a nation's ability to build and maintain dam infrastructure.
Regional Comparisons and Implications
Analyzing regional data unveils stark contrasts. Africa showcased diverse results, with Zambia and Zimbabwe boasting high capacities of 16,368.2 and 12,654 cubic meters per inhabitant, respectively, thanks to their significant investments in dam infrastructure. Conversely, countries like Rwanda reported zero capacity, possibly due to limited resources or political constraints on infrastructure development.
The Americas displayed a wide range of outcomes. While Canada was at the forefront, countries like Nicaragua and Suriname also showed substantial capacities. In stark contrast, Belize and Guatemala had negligible capacities, underscoring disparities within the continent and the potential impact of economic and topographical challenges.
Historical Trends and Year-over-Year Changes
Examining changes from the previous year provides insights into evolving trends. The average global dam capacity per capita witnessed a decrease of 19.69 cubic meters or 10.4%. This decline might reflect growing populations outpacing new dam developments, or perhaps environmental considerations limiting the expansion of dam projects.
Notably, Uruguay experienced a substantial increase in capacity by 938.23 cubic meters (19.7%), reflecting successful infrastructure projects or effective policy interventions. In contrast, Zambia and Zimbabwe saw declines of 534.40 and 497.60 cubic meters per inhabitant, respectively, possibly due to environmental pressures or changes in water management strategies.
Sustainability and Policy Considerations
The relationship between dam capacity per capita and sustainability is pivotal. Countries with higher capacities are generally better positioned to manage water resources sustainably, ensuring availability for agricultural, industrial, and domestic use. For example, Iceland, with a capacity of 7,013.62 cubic meters per inhabitant, illustrates how abundant water resources can support both economic activities and environmental preservation.
Policy interventions play a critical role in shaping these outcomes. Nations with proactive water management policies are likely to enhance their capacities, reducing vulnerabilities to water shortages and climate change impacts. Conversely, regions with insufficient policy frameworks might struggle to meet the growing demands of their populations, risking economic and social stability.
Future Outlook and Challenges
Looking forward, countries must balance the need for increased dam capacity with environmental considerations and the social impacts of large-scale infrastructure projects. As populations grow and climate change intensifies, the strategic development of water storage facilities will be essential. Nations like Suriname and Canada exemplify the advantages of abundant water resources, but the challenge lies in emulating such success in more resource-constrained environments.
Ultimately, the metric of dam capacity per capita serves as both a benchmark for current water resource management and a guide for future development. By understanding and addressing the disparities unveiled in 1982, countries can work towards more equitable and sustainable water management solutions, ensuring that all inhabitants have sufficient access to this vital resource.
Insights by country
Serbia
In 1982, Serbia ranked 154 out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a reported value of null cubic meters per inhabitant. This indicates that Serbia had little to no significant dam capacity relative to its population at that time, reflecting limited investment in large-scale water infrastructure.
The low dam capacity per capita can be attributed to several factors, including historical economic challenges and the political landscape of the region during the early 1980s. The country was part of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which faced various economic difficulties and was focused on different development priorities.
Furthermore, inadequate infrastructure development, combined with the lack of resources allocated for water management projects, contributed to this statistic. It is important to note that dam capacity plays a crucial role in water supply, flood control, and hydroelectric power generation, all of which are vital for a country’s development and sustainability.
Montenegro
In 1982, Montenegro ranked 145th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a reported value of null cubic meters per inhabitant. This indicates a significant lack of developed dam infrastructure relative to its population at that time.
The low dam capacity per capita can be attributed to several factors, including Montenegro's geographic characteristics, historical development patterns, and the political context of the period, which was marked by its status as part of Yugoslavia. The focus on industrialization and urban development often overshadowed investments in water management and infrastructure.
Furthermore, Montenegro's mountainous terrain may have posed challenges for the construction of large-scale dams, which typically require specific geographical conditions to be economically viable. Despite these challenges, the region possesses considerable hydropower potential, which has been increasingly recognized in subsequent years as essential for sustainable energy development.
Congo
In 1982, Congo ranked 112th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a measured capacity of 4.71098 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the country's ability to harness and store water resources for various uses, including hydroelectric power generation and irrigation.
The relatively low dam capacity per capita can be attributed to several factors, including limited infrastructure development, ongoing political instability, and economic challenges that have hindered investment in water management systems. Additionally, the geographical diversity of Congo, with its vast river systems, has made the construction and maintenance of large dams logistically complex.
It's noteworthy that while Congo has significant water resources, the effective utilization of these resources has been constrained by external and internal challenges, affecting overall development. In contrast, neighboring countries with more developed infrastructure often exhibit higher dam capacities per capita, reflecting their better management of water resources.
Belgium
In 1982, Belgium ranked 105th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a capacity of 14.693 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the country's investment in water management infrastructure, which is crucial for flood control, irrigation, and hydroelectric power generation.
The relatively low ranking indicates that while Belgium has a developed network of dams, the capacity is not as extensive when compared to other nations. Factors influencing this statistic include the country's geographical characteristics, urbanization patterns, and historical investment in large-scale water management projects.
Additionally, Belgium's dense population and industrial activity necessitate efficient water resource management, which may impact the allocation of resources toward expanding dam capacity. In contrast, countries with higher per capita dam capacity often possess larger land areas or prioritize water-based energy solutions more aggressively.
Ethiopia
Ethiopia ranked 134th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita in 1982. The country had a dam capacity of null cubic meters per inhabitant, indicating a lack of significant water storage infrastructure relative to its population at that time.
This low per capita dam capacity can be attributed to several factors, including limited investment in infrastructure, economic challenges, and political instability during the late 20th century. The Ethiopian government faced difficulties in developing its water resources, which impacted the overall availability of water for agricultural and domestic use.
In contrast to its historical context, Ethiopia has since made substantial investments in hydropower projects, most notably the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, which aims to significantly increase the nation's water storage capacity and electricity generation, reflecting a shift in priorities regarding water resource management.
Nepal
Nepal ranked 111th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita in the year 1982. The country had a dam capacity of 5.23378 cubic meters per inhabitant, indicating a relatively low level of water storage infrastructure available for its population.
This statistic reflects Nepal's geographic and economic context, where mountainous terrain and limited financial resources have historically hindered large-scale infrastructure development. Despite having abundant water resources due to its rivers and monsoon rains, the country's ability to harness this potential through dam construction has been constrained by various factors including political instability, lack of investment, and technological challenges.
Furthermore, in 1982, Nepal was in the early stages of developing its hydroelectric potential, which is now recognized as a key asset for economic growth. Today, hydropower remains a critical area for development, with ongoing efforts to increase dam capacity and improve water management practices.
Bolivia
In 1982, Bolivia ranked 98th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a figure of 48.9198 cubic meters per inhabitant. This statistic reflects the country's infrastructure capabilities related to water management and storage, which are critical for both irrigation and hydroelectric power generation in a nation characterized by diverse geographical features.
The relatively low dam capacity per capita can be attributed to Bolivia's economic challenges during this period, including political instability and limited investment in large-scale infrastructure projects. Additionally, the country's high levels of poverty and rural population distribution have made it difficult to implement comprehensive water management systems that would enhance dam capacity.
Moreover, Bolivia's significant water resources, including rivers and lakes, have not been fully harnessed due to various factors, such as environmental concerns and the need for sustainable management practices. Understanding the dam capacity per capita provides insight into the broader challenges Bolivia faces in water resource management and economic development.
Georgia
In 1982, Georgia had a dam capacity per capita value of null cubic meters per inhabitant, ranking 136 out of 164 countries in this regard. This statistic indicates that the country had insufficient dam infrastructure relative to its population at that time, which could reflect limited investment in water resource management and hydropower development.
Several factors may have contributed to this low dam capacity per capita, including historical socio-economic challenges, lack of technological advancement, and political instability that affected infrastructure projects. Additionally, the Soviet Union's centralized planning may have prioritized other regions for dam construction over Georgia during the early 1980s.
Interestingly, Georgia's geographical features, characterized by mountainous terrain and numerous rivers, present significant potential for hydropower development, which could be a future avenue for increasing dam capacity and optimizing water resource management.
Sudan
In 1982, Sudan ranked 160 out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, reflecting a significant scarcity of water management infrastructure. The country reported a dam capacity of null cubic meters per inhabitant, indicating a lack of large-scale dam projects to store and manage water resources effectively.
This low dam capacity per capita can be attributed to a combination of factors, including prolonged political instability, economic challenges, and insufficient investment in water infrastructure. The Nile River, which flows through Sudan, has been a crucial water source, yet the country's ability to harness this resource through dams has been limited.
Historically, Sudan has faced challenges related to its water management policies, which have hindered the development of water infrastructure. Additionally, the population growth and agricultural demands have intensified the pressure on existing water resources, further exacerbating the situation.
Norway
In 1982, Norway ranked 12th out of 164 countries in terms of dam capacity per capita, with a notable value of 5691.54 cubic meters per inhabitant. This high level of dam capacity reflects Norway's extensive investment in hydroelectric power, which is a significant component of its energy production strategy.
The country's mountainous terrain and abundant water resources contribute to its ability to develop large-scale dams, facilitating the generation of renewable energy. As a result, Norway has become a leader in hydroelectric energy, with approximately 96% of its electricity generated from hydropower as of recent years.
Additionally, the emphasis on sustainable energy practices and environmental conservation has further driven the development of dam infrastructure. This statistic not only illustrates Norway's commitment to renewable energy but also highlights the country's proactive approach to managing its natural resources efficiently.
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