Kiribati vs Nepal: Using safely managed drinking water in urban vs. rural areas
Kiribati
20.9%
in 2024
Nepal
23.6%
in 2024
Kiribati rank
100th
Nepal rank
99th
Using safely managed drinking water in urban vs. rural areas over time
- Kiribati
- Nepal
How they compare
Nepal currently reports 23.6% against 20.9% in Kiribati, a difference of 2.7%.
That makes Nepal's figure about 1.1 times Kiribati's.
Across all 25 years both countries report, Nepal has been ahead every year.
Kiribati ranks 100th and Nepal ranks 99th of 105 countries.
Nepal has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Kiribati | Nepal | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 17.0% | 37.8% | 20.8% | Nepal |
| 2010s | 19.2% | 33.6% | 14.4% | Nepal |
| 2020s | 20.7% | 23.9% | 3.2% | Nepal |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher using safely managed drinking water in urban vs. rural areas, Kiribati or Nepal?
- Nepal, at 23.6% against 20.9% in Kiribati as of 2024.
- What is the difference in using safely managed drinking water in urban vs. rural areas between Kiribati and Nepal?
- 2.7%, with Nepal ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kiribati and Nepal?
- 25 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2024.
- How do Kiribati and Nepal rank globally for using safely managed drinking water in urban vs. rural areas?
- Kiribati ranks 100th and Nepal ranks 99th of 105 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 Using safely managed drinking water in urban vs. rural areas. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Proportion of people using an improved drinking water source that is located on premises, available when needed and free from faecal and priority chemical contamination.