Denmark vs Japan: Vulnerability score, Water
Vulnerability score, Water over time
- Denmark
- Japan
How they compare
Denmark currently reports 0.3784 against 0.3774 in Japan, a difference of 0.001.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Japan ahead.
Denmark ranks 67th and Japan ranks 68th of 170 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Denmark averaged higher in 1 and Japan in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Denmark | Japan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 0.378 | 0.3782 | 0.0001 | Japan |
| 2020s | 0.3784 | 0.3774 | 0.001 | Denmark |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher vulnerability score, water, Denmark or Japan?
- Denmark, at 0.3784 against 0.3774 in Japan as of 2024.
- What is the difference in vulnerability score, water between Denmark and Japan?
- 0.001, with Denmark ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Denmark and Japan?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2024.
- How do Denmark and Japan rank globally for vulnerability score, water?
- Denmark ranks 67th and Japan ranks 68th of 170 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- International Monetary Fund, published as Vulnerability score, Water. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The ND-GAIN index is a global free open-source index, that measures a country’s current vulnerability to climate disruptions and assesses a country’s readiness to leverage private and public sector investment for adaptive actions. The IMF-adapted ND-GAIN index is an adaptation of the original index, adjusted by IMF staff to replace the Doing Business (DB) Index, used as source data in the original ND-GAIN, because the DB database has been discontinued by the World Bank in 2020 and it is no longer allowed in IMF work. The IMF-adapted ND-GAIN is an interim solution offered by IMF staff until the ND-GAIN compilers will review the methodology and replace the DB index.