Latvia vs Macao: People not using safely managed sanitation facilities
Latvia
139,742 people
in 2024
Macao
144,371 people
in 2024
Latvia rank
123rd
Macao rank
122nd
People not using safely managed sanitation facilities over time
- Latvia
- Macao
How they compare
Macao currently reports 144,371 people against 139,742 people in Latvia, a difference of 4,629 people.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 25 shared years of data; in 2000 it was Latvia ahead.
Latvia ranks 123rd and Macao ranks 122nd of 150 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Latvia averaged higher in 2 and Macao in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Latvia | Macao | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 435,157 people | 245,846 people | 189,311 people | Latvia |
| 2010s | 264,372 people | 239,277 people | 25,095 people | Latvia |
| 2020s | 148,348 people | 168,808 people | 20,460 people | Macao |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher people not using safely managed sanitation facilities, Latvia or Macao?
- Macao, at 144,371 people against 139,742 people in Latvia as of 2024.
- What is the difference in people not using safely managed sanitation facilities between Latvia and Macao?
- 4,629 people, with Macao ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Macao?
- 25 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2024.
- How do Latvia and Macao rank globally for people not using safely managed sanitation facilities?
- Latvia ranks 123rd and Macao ranks 122nd of 150 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 People not using safely managed sanitation facilities. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
People not using safely managed sanitation services might practice open defecation, use unimproved sanitation facilities, or use improved facilities that do not safely manage human waste.