Bhutan vs Nicaragua: Consumption-based deforestation per person
Bhutan
18.42 square meters
in 2023
Nicaragua
17.95 square meters
in 2023
Bhutan rank
12th
Nicaragua rank
13th
Consumption-based deforestation per person over time
- Bhutan
- Nicaragua
How they compare
Bhutan currently reports 18.42 square meters against 17.95 square meters in Nicaragua, a difference of 0.47 square meters.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 19 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Nicaragua ahead.
Bhutan ranks 12th and Nicaragua ranks 13th of 178 countries.
Nicaragua has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bhutan | Nicaragua | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 2.14 square meters | 38.05 square meters | 35.92 square meters | Nicaragua |
| 2010s | 3.16 square meters | 14.87 square meters | 11.71 square meters | Nicaragua |
| 2020s | 10.71 square meters | 12.47 square meters | 1.76 square meters | Nicaragua |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher consumption-based deforestation per person, Bhutan or Nicaragua?
- Bhutan, at 18.42 square meters against 17.95 square meters in Nicaragua as of 2023.
- What is the difference in consumption-based deforestation per person between Bhutan and Nicaragua?
- 0.47 square meters, with Bhutan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bhutan and Nicaragua?
- 19 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2023.
- How do Bhutan and Nicaragua rank globally for consumption-based deforestation per person?
- Bhutan ranks 12th and Nicaragua ranks 13th of 178 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Singh et al. (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Consumption-based deforestation per person. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Estimated average deforestation for agricultural and forestry products, per person. This is adjusted for trade, so it reflects deforestation caused by consumption, not domestic production.