Post-demographic dividend vs Timor-Leste: Renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic)

Post-demographic dividend
0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP
in 2022
Timor-Leste
0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP
in 2022
Post-demographic dividend rank
38th
Timor-Leste rank
41st

Renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic) over time

  • Post-demographic dividend
  • Timor-Leste
0000196119912022

How they compare

Timor-Leste currently reports 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP against 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP in Post-demographic dividend, a difference of 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP.

That makes Timor-Leste's figure about 16.6 times Post-demographic dividend's.

Across all 33 years both countries report, Timor-Leste has been ahead every year.

Post-demographic dividend ranks 38th and Timor-Leste ranks 41st of 43 groups.

Timor-Leste has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Post-demographic dividend Timor-Leste Difference Ahead
1990s 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP Timor-Leste
2000s 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP Timor-Leste
2010s 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP Timor-Leste
2020s 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP Timor-Leste

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic), Post-demographic dividend or Timor-Leste?
Timor-Leste, at 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP against 0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP in Post-demographic dividend as of 2022.
What is the difference in renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic) between Post-demographic dividend and Timor-Leste?
0 billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP, with Timor-Leste ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Post-demographic dividend and Timor-Leste?
33 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2022.
How do Post-demographic dividend and Timor-Leste rank globally for renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic)?
Post-demographic dividend ranks 38th and Timor-Leste ranks 41st of 43 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic meters), per unit of GDP. 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

Post-demographic dividend vs Timor-Leste: Renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 09 September 2026, from https://infrastructure.statizoid.com/compare/renewable-internal-freshwater-resources-total-billion-cubic-meters-per-unit-of-gdp/post-demographic-dividend/timor-leste/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://infrastructure.statizoid.com/compare/renewable-internal-freshwater-resources-total-billion-cubic-meters-per-unit-of-gdp/post-demographic-dividend/timor-leste/">Post-demographic dividend vs Timor-Leste: Renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic meters), per unit of GDP
Unit
billion cubic meters per US$ of GDP
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
227 places, 12,317 data points, 1961–2022
Last refreshed

Renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic meters) divided by GDP (current US$), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.