Top 100 Countries by Threatened Plant Species, 2025
Nature & Biodiversity Rankings
Countries and Territories with the Most Threatened Plant Species, 2025 Snapshots, 2025 Snapshot
Updated: April 27, 2026
Threatened plant species counts show where assessed vascular plants are already facing elevated extinction risk. The indicator is important because plants underpin soils, water regulation, pollination, carbon storage, food webs and climate resilience. When plant diversity declines, the damage moves through agriculture, forests, wetlands, cities and coastal systems.
The ranking presents 100 countries and territories using rounded 2025 snapshot valuesing rounded 2025 snapshot values based on the available international indicator framework. The values are approximate because country totals can move when taxonomies are revised, new botanical assessments are completed, or reporting systems are updated.Highest count in this snapshot
About 2,250 threatened higher plant species in the rounded comparison used for this page.
Top three cluster
China, Malaysia and Indonesia lead the table, combining high plant richness, endemism and intense land-use pressure.
Top 10 range
The leading countries sit far above the rest of the table, which signals concentrated biodiversity risk.
Main limitation
High values can reflect high biodiversity, high pressure, stronger assessment coverage, or all three at once.
What the top of the ranking shows
The top of the list is dominated by countries with large floras, strong endemism and heavy pressure on habitats. Tropical Asia, the tropical Andes, megadiverse Latin America and selected island or mountain systems appear repeatedly because narrow-range plants are especially vulnerable when forests, wetlands, limestone habitats, cloud forests or coastal ecosystems are converted.
China, Malaysia and Indonesia stand out for scale. Ecuador and Colombia show how Andean and tropical forest diversity can translate into very high threatened-species counts even in countries smaller than continental giants. South Africa, Madagascar, the Philippines and Papua New Guinea illustrate another pattern: concentrated endemism in ecosystems where many plants have small ranges and limited ecological backup.
Large territory, diverse climate zones and rapid land-use change create a high-risk inventory across forests, mountains, wetlands and dryland systems.
Malaysia’s position reflects tropical forest richness, Bornean endemism and long-running pressures from conversion, fragmentation and extraction.
Island biogeography, peatlands, lowland forests and plantation pressure combine to make Indonesia one of the central countries in plant conservation.
Ecuador’s small area masks extreme ecological gradients from the Andes to Amazonia, where many species occupy narrow ranges.
Colombia combines Andean, Amazonian, Caribbean and Pacific ecosystems, making it one of the most plant-rich countries on the planet.
India’s threatened flora reflects pressure on the Western Ghats, Himalaya, dry forests, wetlands and densely used agricultural landscapes.Short table: Top 10 countries and territories
Short table: Top 10 countries and territories
| Rank | Country | Threatened plants |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | China | ≈ 2,250 |
| 2 | Malaysia | ≈ 2,230 |
| 3 | Indonesia | ≈ 2,090 |
| 4 | Ecuador | ≈ 1,920 |
| 5 | Colombia | ≈ 1,760 |
| 6 | India | ≈ 1,640 |
| 7 | Brazil | ≈ 1,590 |
| 8 | Mexico | ≈ 1,460 |
| 9 | Philippines | ≈ 1,050 |
| 10 | United States | ≈ 980 |
Charts: where threatened plant counts concentrate
Chart 1. Top 10 threatened plant counts
The bar chart highlights the gap between the highest-risk countries and the rest of the table. The visual comparison keeps the Top 10 pattern readable without requiring interaction.
Chart 2. Forest cover and threatened plant counts
Forest cover is only a broad habitat-retention proxy. The relationship is mixed because many threatened plants occur in mountains, drylands, coastal systems, islands or fragmented habitats where total forest percentage does not capture ecological quality.
How the indicator is defined. The ranking uses the count of threatened higher plant species by country. In common international reporting, threatened species correspond to IUCN Red List categories Vulnerable, Endangered and Critically Endangered. The World Bane of comparison.
Year and rounding. The page is presented as a 2025 snapshot because threatened-species indicators update irregularly as assessments and taxonomies change. Values in the table are rounded and approximate. They should be read as comparison bands rather than exact live counts.
Why the table is not a simple “ecological health” ranking. A high count can mean severe pressure, but it can also mean high plant richness, strong endemism and better assessment coverage. A lower count can reflect lower risk, but it can also reflect under-assessment. For this reason, the ranking is useful for identifying priority clusters, not for declaring one country ecologically better or worse than anoCountries and territories are sorted from higher to lower approximate threatened-plant counts.rom higher to lower approximate threatened-plant counts. In ranks 31–100,k gaps. Region labels are added for reader navigation and pattern recognition; they are not official World Bank or IUCN classifications. The forest-cover chart uses World Bank forest area data only as a broad habitat proxy, not as a causal explanation.
Insights: what the distribution says
The upper tier is defined by megadiversity. China, Malaysia, Indonesia, Ecuador and Colombia are not only places with pressure on ecosystems; they are also places where a large number of species exist in the first place. That is why the ranking must be read through both richness and risk.
The middle of the table is dominated by countries where specific ecosystems carry much of the threat burden: Caribbean islands, Central American forests, East African mountains, Mediterranean landscapes and parts of Southeast Asia. These are often places where land-use decisions in relatively small areas can affect many narrow-range species.
The lower part of the Top 100 includes many European and temperate countries. Their counts are lower than those of tropical hotspots, but that does not make conservation less important. In those countries, threats may be concentrated in wetlands, grasslands, coastal systems, old-growth remnants or highly fragmented habitats.
What this means for readers
For readers, the ranking helps make plant extinction risk visible. It shows why conservation cannot focus only on charismatic animals: plants are the biological base that supports pollinators, soil systems, freshwater quality, food security and carbon storage.
For policy readers, the table highlights where botanical surveys, protected-area planning, seed banks and land-use controls are especially important. The practical unit of action is rarely the whole country; it is usually the ecoregion, watershed, mountain belt, island or habitat type where threatened plants cluster.
For business and infrastructure readers, the ranking is a reminder that project risk is not limited to emissions or protected animals. Roads, mines, plantations, dams and urban expansion can trigger high biodiversity risk when they intersect with narrow-range plant habitats.
FAQ
What does “threatened plant species” mean?
It usually refers to higher plant species assessed as Vulnerable, Endangered or Critically Endangered under the IUCN Red List framework. The count is a country-level inventory of assessed plants facing elevated extinction risk.
Does a high count mean a country has the worst environmental policy?
Not by itself. A high count can reflect very high biodiversity and endemism as well as pressure. It can also reflect stronger botanical assessment coverage. The indicator is better for identifying conservation priority than for judging policy quality alone.
Why are many tropical countries near the top?
Tropical countries often have more plant species, more narrow-range endemics and faster habitat conversion. That combination raises the number of plants that can enter threatened categories.
Why are approximate values used?
Threatened-species counts change as new assessments are published, taxonomies are revised and country records are updated. Rounded values make the comparison more stable and discourage over-reading small rank differences.
Can forest cover explain threatened plant counts?
Only partly. Forest cover does not measure habitat quality, fragmentation, dryland plants, mountain microhabitats, wetlands or invasive species pressure. It is useful context, but not a full explanation.
What should readers do with this ranking?
Use it as a map of priority clusters. The next step is to ask which ecosystems inside a country drive the count and whether current land-use decisions protect or erode those habitats.
Sources
The sources below provide the indicator definition, extinction-risk framework, forest-cover context and conservation-policy background used to interpret the ranking.
- World Bank Open Data — Plant species (higher), threatenedMain cross-country indicator reference for threatened higher plant species counts, indicator EN.HPT.THRD.NO.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.HPT.THRD.NO - IUCN Red List of Threatened SpeciesReference framework for extinction-risk categories and assessment methodology.
https://www.iucnredlist.org/ - World Bank Open Data — Forest area (% of land area)Forest-cover context used as a broad habitat-retention proxy in the chart section.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.FRST.ZS - Convention on Biological DiversityGlobal policy context for biodiversity targets, national strategies and conservation planning.
https://www.cbd.int/ - UNEP-WCMC / Protected PlanetProtected-area context for connecting species risk with conservation coverage.
https://www.protectedplanet.net/
