Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden (current US$), gaps in Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka: Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden (current US$), gaps was 2.36 million current US$ in 2023. ◆ Volatile
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden (current US$), gaps in Sri Lanka, 1960–2023
Source: Statizoid (derived). Measured in current US$.
Analysis
In 2023, net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps in Sri Lanka stood at 2.36 million current US$.
That represents a change of down 19.0% on the previous year and down 37.7% over ten years.
Over the whole period, net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps in Sri Lanka peaked at 51.72 million current US$ in 2005 and was at its lowest, 30,000 current US$, in 1960.
Sri Lanka ranks 68th of 142 countries on this measure, in the middle of the range.
The series is highly variable year to year, so single readings are best treated with caution.
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden (current US$), gaps in Sri Lanka, year by year
| Year | current US$ | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1960 | 30,000 current US$ | — |
| 1961 | 40,000 current US$ | +33.3% |
| 1962 | 40,000 current US$ | +0.0% |
| 1963 | 80,000 current US$ | +100.0% |
| 1964 | 130,000 current US$ | +62.5% |
| 1965 | 280,000 current US$ | +115.4% |
| 1966 | 270,000 current US$ | -3.6% |
| 1967 | 260,000 current US$ | -3.7% |
| 1968 | 210,000 current US$ | -19.2% |
| 1969 | 100,000 current US$ | -52.4% |
| 1970 | 30,000 current US$ | -70.0% |
| 1971 | 1.74 million current US$ | +5700.0% |
| 1972 | 780,000 current US$ | -55.2% |
| 1973 | 3.36 million current US$ | +330.8% |
| 1974 | 3.80 million current US$ | +13.1% |
| 1975 | 9.33 million current US$ | +145.5% |
| 1976 | 9.03 million current US$ | -3.2% |
| 1977 | 11.67 million current US$ | +29.2% |
| 1978 | 13.68 million current US$ | +17.2% |
| 1979 | 35.37 million current US$ | +158.6% |
| 1980 | 23.11 million current US$ | -34.7% |
| 1981 | 22.73 million current US$ | -1.6% |
| 1982 | 25.21 million current US$ | +10.9% |
| 1983 | 28.26 million current US$ | +12.1% |
| 1984 | 32.30 million current US$ | +14.3% |
| 1985 | 33.26 million current US$ | +3.0% |
| 1986 | 23.97 million current US$ | -27.9% |
| 1987 | 19.94 million current US$ | -16.8% |
| 1988 | 7.18 million current US$ | -64.0% |
| 1989 | 6.29 million current US$ | -12.4% |
| 1990 | 10.57 million current US$ | +68.0% |
| 1991 | 13.43 million current US$ | +27.1% |
| 1992 | 12.11 million current US$ | -9.8% |
| 1993 | 11.99 million current US$ | -1.0% |
| 1994 | 8.51 million current US$ | -29.0% |
| 1995 | 12.36 million current US$ | +45.2% |
| 1996 | 12.47 million current US$ | +0.9% |
| 1997 | 13.88 million current US$ | +11.3% |
| 1998 | 12.89 million current US$ | -7.1% |
| 1999 | 14.26 million current US$ | +10.6% |
| 2000 | 16.69 million current US$ | +17.0% |
| 2001 | 18.27 million current US$ | +9.5% |
| 2002 | 15.03 million current US$ | -17.7% |
| 2003 | 13.49 million current US$ | -10.2% |
| 2004 | 22.95 million current US$ | +70.1% |
| 2005 | 51.72 million current US$ | +125.4% |
| 2006 | 20.56 million current US$ | -60.2% |
| 2007 | 23.07 million current US$ | +12.2% |
| 2008 | 15.49 million current US$ | -32.9% |
| 2009 | 18.31 million current US$ | +18.2% |
| 2010 | 11.05 million current US$ | -39.7% |
| 2011 | 12.95 million current US$ | +17.2% |
| 2012 | 4.78 million current US$ | -63.1% |
| 2013 | 3.79 million current US$ | -20.8% |
| 2014 | 6.37 million current US$ | +68.3% |
| 2015 | 1.80 million current US$ | -71.7% |
| 2016 | 2.24 million current US$ | +24.1% |
| 2017 | 2.17 million current US$ | -2.8% |
| 2018 | 2.04 million current US$ | -6.2% |
| 2019 | 2.56 million current US$ | +25.7% |
| 2020 | 2.03 million current US$ | -20.8% |
| 2021 | 2.61 million current US$ | +28.6% |
| 2022 | 2.91 million current US$ | +11.5% |
| 2023 | 2.36 million current US$ | -19.0% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 144,000 current US$ | 30,000 current US$ | 280,000 current US$ | 10 |
| 1970s | 8.88 million current US$ | 30,000 current US$ | 35.37 million current US$ | 10 |
| 1980s | 22.23 million current US$ | 6.29 million current US$ | 33.26 million current US$ | 10 |
| 1990s | 12.25 million current US$ | 8.51 million current US$ | 14.26 million current US$ | 10 |
| 2000s | 21.56 million current US$ | 13.49 million current US$ | 51.72 million current US$ | 10 |
| 2010s | 4.97 million current US$ | 1.80 million current US$ | 12.95 million current US$ | 10 |
| 2020s | 2.48 million current US$ | 2.03 million current US$ | 2.91 million current US$ | 4 |
Countries ranked near Sri Lanka
- 65 Côte d'Ivoire 2.70 million current US$ compare
- 66 Brazil 2.64 million current US$ compare
- 67 Togo 2.48 million current US$ compare
- 69 El Salvador 2.17 million current US$ compare
- 70 Madagascar 2.03 million current US$ compare
- 71 Lao People's Democratic Republic 1.82 million current US$ compare
More aid effectiveness data for Sri Lanka
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Austria 743,046 current US$ (2023)
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Belgium 104,629 current US$ (2023)
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Canada 10.44 million current US$ (2023)
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, European Union institutions 28.32 million current US$ (2023)
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Switzerland 3.69 million current US$ (2023)
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Germany 26.12 million current US$ (2023)
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, France 5.01 million current US$ (2023)
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, United Kingdom 9.57 million current US$ (2023)
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Italy 441,093 current US$ (2023)
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Japan 76.61 million current US$ (2023)
Frequently asked questions
- What is net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps in Sri Lanka?
- Net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps in Sri Lanka was 2.36 million current US$ in 2023, according to Statizoid (derived).
- What is the highest net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps recorded in Sri Lanka?
- The highest recorded value was 51.72 million current US$ in 2005.
- What is the lowest net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps recorded in Sri Lanka?
- The lowest recorded value was 30,000 current US$ in 1960.
- How does Sri Lanka rank for net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps?
- Sri Lanka ranks 68th out of 142 countries with data for 2023.
- Is net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps rising or falling in Sri Lanka?
- Over the last ten years it is down 37.7%. The long-run trend across the full record is volatile.
- Where does this Sri Lanka data come from?
- The figures come from Statizoid (derived), published as part of Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden (current US$), gaps filled. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 64 observations, free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page.
How this figure is calculated
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden (current US$) with 332 missing years estimated by linear interpolation between the nearest real observations. Only gaps of 4 years or fewer are filled, and never beyond the first or last actual measurement — these are filled holes, not forecasts.
Computed from
- Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden Development Assistance Committee, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Statizoid computes this series; the underlying measurements belong to the publishers named above. The arithmetic is applied to every country and year where both inputs report, and nothing is estimated unless the page says so.
About this data
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden (current US$) with 332 missing years estimated by linear interpolation between the nearest real observations. Only gaps of 4 years or fewer are filled, and never beyond the first or last actual measurement — these are filled holes, not forecasts.