Equatorial Guinea vs IDA blend: Renewable internal freshwater resources per capita (cubic meters)

Equatorial Guinea
14,416 cubic meters
in 2022
IDA blend
2,842 cubic meters
in 2022
Equatorial Guinea rank
40th
IDA blend rank
37th

Renewable internal freshwater resources per capita (cubic meters) over time

  • Equatorial Guinea
  • IDA blend
020.0k40.0k60.0k80.0k100.0k196119912022

How they compare

Equatorial Guinea currently reports 14,416 cubic meters against 2,842 cubic meters in IDA blend, a difference of 11,574 cubic meters.

That makes Equatorial Guinea's figure about 5.1 times IDA blend's.

Across all 62 years both countries report, Equatorial Guinea has been ahead every year.

Equatorial Guinea ranks 40th and IDA blend ranks 37th of 183 countries.

Equatorial Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Equatorial Guinea IDA blend Difference Ahead
1960s 87,259 cubic meters 13,896 cubic meters 73,363 cubic meters Equatorial Guinea
1970s 88,521 cubic meters 10,728 cubic meters 77,793 cubic meters Equatorial Guinea
1980s 71,273 cubic meters 7,814 cubic meters 63,460 cubic meters Equatorial Guinea
1990s 46,583 cubic meters 5,537 cubic meters 41,046 cubic meters Equatorial Guinea
2000s 28,944 cubic meters 4,205 cubic meters 24,739 cubic meters Equatorial Guinea
2010s 18,421 cubic meters 3,312 cubic meters 15,109 cubic meters Equatorial Guinea
2020s 14,782 cubic meters 2,900 cubic meters 11,882 cubic meters Equatorial Guinea

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher renewable internal freshwater resources per capita, Equatorial Guinea or IDA blend?
Equatorial Guinea, at 14,416 cubic meters against 2,842 cubic meters in IDA blend as of 2022.
What is the difference in renewable internal freshwater resources per capita between Equatorial Guinea and IDA blend?
11,574 cubic meters, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and IDA blend?
62 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2022.
How do Equatorial Guinea and IDA blend rank globally for renewable internal freshwater resources per capita?
Equatorial Guinea ranks 40th and IDA blend ranks 37th of 183 countries.
Where does this data come from?
AQUASTAT - FAO's Global Information System on Water and Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), published as Renewable internal freshwater resources per capita (cubic meters). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Equatorial Guinea vs IDA blend: Renewable internal freshwater resources per capita. Statizoid, drawing on AQUASTAT - FAO's Global Information System on Water and Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Retrieved 08 November 2026, from https://infrastructure.statizoid.com/compare/renewable-internal-freshwater-resources-per-capita-cubic-meters/equatorial-guinea/ida-blend/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://infrastructure.statizoid.com/compare/renewable-internal-freshwater-resources-per-capita-cubic-meters/equatorial-guinea/ida-blend/">Equatorial Guinea vs IDA blend: Renewable internal freshwater resources per capita</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Renewable internal freshwater resources per capita (cubic meters)
Unit
cubic meters
Source
AQUASTAT - FAO's Global Information System on Water and Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
230 places, 13,255 data points, 1961–2022
Last refreshed

Renewable internal freshwater resources flows refer to internal renewable resources (internal river flows and groundwater from rainfall) in the country. Renewable internal freshwater resources per capita are calculated using the World Bank's population estimates.