Bhutan vs Spain: People not using safely managed drinking water sources
Bhutan
272,330 people
in 2024
Spain
259,452 people
in 2024
Bhutan rank
92nd
Spain rank
94th
People not using safely managed drinking water sources over time
- Bhutan
- Spain
How they compare
Bhutan currently reports 272,330 people against 259,452 people in Spain, a difference of 12,878 people.
Across all 25 years both countries report, Bhutan has been ahead every year.
Bhutan ranks 92nd and Spain ranks 94th of 163 countries.
Bhutan has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bhutan | Spain | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 454,282 people | 222,374 people | 231,908 people | Bhutan |
| 2010s | 396,744 people | 186,312 people | 210,432 people | Bhutan |
| 2020s | 265,031 people | 243,835 people | 21,195 people | Bhutan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher people not using safely managed drinking water sources, Bhutan or Spain?
- Bhutan, at 272,330 people against 259,452 people in Spain as of 2024.
- What is the difference in people not using safely managed drinking water sources between Bhutan and Spain?
- 12,878 people, with Bhutan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bhutan and Spain?
- 25 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2024.
- How do Bhutan and Spain rank globally for people not using safely managed drinking water sources?
- Bhutan ranks 92nd and Spain ranks 94th of 163 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene (2025) – processed by Our World in Data, published as People not using safely managed drinking water sources. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
People not using safely managed drinking water sources either use unimproved drinking water sources or the improved sources they use are not located on their premises, not available when needed, or not free of contamination.