Country Data:

Impacts and Priority challenges

Sections below provide a snapshot of the country’s water profile and the priority challenges in water resources management. This includes basic country socioeconomic and water statistics, as well as following country responses from 2011 IWRM survey questionnaire:

  • Impacts: Indicates to what extent improved water resources management has impacted economic, social, environmental and overall national objectives in the past 20 years in your country, rating the impacts from low to high.

  • Priority challenge areas: Provides information on priority challenges in water resources management (as reported by country in 2011). Counties have rated the current (year 2011) challenge levels on a scale ‘Not a Problem’ to ‘High Priority’

  • Change in priority challenges: Indicates to what extent the priority challenges have changed in the past 20 years.

  • Impacts of improved water resources management
  • (Click on + to view underlying survey questions)
  • Red 5 Orange 4 Yellow 3 Blue 2 Purple 1 Grey 0 - No response
  • (low to high impact)
  • Priority challenge areas
  • (Click on + to view underlying survey questions)
  • Red 5 - Highest priority Orange 4 - High priority Yellow 3 - Medium priority Blue 2 - Low priority Purple 1 - Not a problem Grey 0 - No response
  • Change in priority challenges
  • (Click on + to view underlying survey questions)
  • Red 5 - Significantly increased Orange 4 - Slightly increased Yellow 3 - Unchanged Blue 2 - Slightly decreased Purple 1 - Significantly decreased Grey 0 - No response
  • Statistics

    2007 2011* Latest**
    Population (in '000s)
    Surface area (sq. km)
    GDP per capita (current US$)
    Human Development Index (HDI)
    Average precipitation in depth (mm per year)
    Renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic meters)
    Renewable internal freshwater resources per capita (cubic meters)
    Annual freshwater withdrawals, total (billion cubic meters)
    Annual freshwater withdrawals, total (% of internal resources)
    Annual freshwater withdrawals, agriculture (% of total freshwater withdrawal)
    Annual freshwater withdrawals, industry (% of total freshwater withdrawal)
    Annual freshwater withdrawals, domestic (% of total freshwater withdrawal)
    Improved water source, rural (% of rural population with access)
    Improved water source, urban (% of urban population with access)
  • *Data of all indicators are from 2011 except for fresh water indicators, which are from 2012.
  • **Data of population, surface area, GDP per capita and HDI are from 2014 while the rest are from 2013.
  • Source: World Bank
  • Status of implementation

    Interpretation of the aggregated scores

    Blue Fully implemented 4.5 to 5
    Yellow In place and partially implemented 3.5 to 4.49
    Orange In place but not yet implemented 2.5 to 3.49
    Red Under consideration 1.5 and 2.49
    Purple Not relevant 1 to 1.49
    Grey No data 0

    Score overview (Click on + to view underlying survey questions)

    Methodology

    Country data for 2007 shows reported status across eleven axis (dimensions) of IWRM. The scores of each axis is calculated as a simple average of scores from the questions that were deemed relevant for- and representative of the specific dimension of IWRM. Countries reported progress to each question in the 2007 questionnaire based on a scale 1 to 5 (‘Not Relevant’ to ‘Fully Implemented’). The score for the specific dimension of IWRM is the simple average of these reported scores. Questions selected to represent the specific dimension of IWRM can be explored on the right side of the page.
    Where reply to one or more questions was not reported by countries, the question was omitted and average was calculated based on available scores.
    Country replies to three of the IWRM aspects (axis 2-“Subnational instruments for IWRM, 13-Infrastructure investment plans and programs, 14-Mobilizing financing for WR infrastructure) were not present in the 2007 survey and were only reported on in the survey questionnaire of 2011).

    Status of implementation

    Interpretation of the aggregated scores

    Blue Fully implemented 5.5 to 6
    Green Implementation advanced 4.5 to 5.49
    Yellow Implementation started 3.5 to 4.49
    Orange Developed but implementation not yet started 2.5 to 3.49
    Red Under development 1.5 and 2.49
    Purple Not relevant 1 to 1.49
    Grey No data 0

    Score overview (Click on + to view underlying survey questions)

    Methodology

    Country data for 2011 shows reported status across fourteen axis (dimensions) of IWRM. The scores of each axis is calculated as a simple average of scores from the questions that were deemed relevant for- and representative of the specific dimension of IWRM. Countries reported progress to each question in the 2011 questionnaire based on a scale 1 to 6 (‘Not Relevant’ to ‘Fully Implemented’). The score for the specific dimension of IWRM is the simple average of these reported scores. Questions selected to represent the specific dimension of IWRM can be explored on the right side of the page.
    Where reply to one or more questions was not reported by countries, the question was omitted and average was calculated based on available scores.

    SDG 6 Indicator 6.5.1 on the Degree of implementation of IWRM

    Download the complete final national submission on SDG indicator 6.5.1 here.

    Main section scores SDG 6.5.1 baseline year 2017

    Statistics

    2007 2011* Latest**
    Population (in '000s)
    Surface area (sq. km)
    GDP per capita (current US$)
    Human Development Index (HDI)
    Average precipitation in depth (mm per year)
    Renewable internal freshwater resources, total (billion cubic meters)
    Renewable internal freshwater resources per capita (cubic meters)
    Annual freshwater withdrawals, total (billion cubic meters)
    Annual freshwater withdrawals, total (% of internal resources)
    Annual freshwater withdrawals, agriculture (% of total freshwater withdrawal)
    Annual freshwater withdrawals, industry (% of total freshwater withdrawal)
    Annual freshwater withdrawals, domestic (% of total freshwater withdrawal)
    Improved water source, rural (% of rural population with access)
    Improved water source, urban (% of urban population with access)
  • *Data of all indicators are from 2011 except for fresh water indicators, which are from 2012.
  • **Data of population, surface area, GDP per capita and HDI are from 2014 while the rest are from 2013.
  • Source: World Bank
  • Status of implementation

    Interpretation of the aggregated scores

    Year Purple 2007 Purple 2011
    Fully implemented 5.5 to 6
    Implementation advanced 4.5 to 5.49
    Implementation started 3.5 to 4.49
    Developed but implementation not yet started 2.5 to 3.49
    Under development 1.5 and 2.49
    Not relevant 1 to 1.49
    No data 0

    Score overview

    Methodology

    The scoring scales of the two survey (2007 and 2011) offer different level of detail, with 2007 survey scoring progress on a scale of 1-5, and 2011 scoring progress on a scale 1-6. To enable direct comparison and tracking of progress over time in the ‘Comparison’ section of the portal, the scores of the 2007 survey were adjusted and rescaled using following approach:

    Country resources

    Description Link Type Organisation Year

    Other IWRM related resources

    Description Organisation
    Aqueduct World Resources Institute
    IWRM ToolBox Global Water Partnership
    UNEP Live United Nations Environment Programme
    UN Water Country Briefs Project UN Water