Top 100 Countries by Pollinator Diversity (Bees and Butterflies), 2025
Nature & Biodiversity Rankings
Global Pollinator Diversity by Country: 2025 Comparison
Updated: April 27, 2026
Pollinator diversity shows how many wild bee and butterfly species are documented in each country. It is useful because pollinators support wild plants, food crops and landscape resilience, but it must be read carefully: species richness is not the same as population abundance or conservation status.
This 2025 snapshot compares documented pollinator species richness using rounded estimates for wild bees and day-flying butterflies. The values are best read as a comparison of known richness, not as a complete census of every pollinating insect species.
Highest documented richness
About 5,200 documented wild bee and butterfly species in the rounded 2025 comparison.
Top region pattern
The upper tier is dominated by tropical and subtropical countries with large habitat gradients and strong butterfly richness.
Top 10 range
The top ten countries sit far above the rest of the table because of large species pools and strong documentation.
Main limitation
Countries with fewer surveys may be undercounted. A lower rank does not automatically mean lower true diversity.
What the top of the ranking shows
The top of the ranking is shaped by megadiverse biomes, mountain gradients, tropical forests and large-scale documentation. Brazil, Peru, Colombia, Ecuador and Bolivia reflect the richness of the Amazon-Andes system, while the United States and Mexico rank high because of extensive bee diversity, strong museum records and multiple climate zones.
The table also reflects how unevenly pollinators are documented around the world. Some countries with deep entomological research appear high because more species have been recorded. Other countries may have comparable ecological potential but fewer published checklists, fewer digitized occurrence records or weaker taxonomic coverage.
Brazil combines Amazonian, Atlantic Forest, Cerrado and other ecosystems, supporting very large bee and butterfly diversity.
The United States ranks high mainly because of its exceptionally rich native bee fauna and strong documentation infrastructure.
Peru’s Andean and Amazonian gradients create major butterfly richness across steep elevation and habitat changes.
Colombia combines Andean, Amazonian, Caribbean and Pacific ecosystems, making it a global pollinator-rich country.
Mexico’s deserts, mountains, dry forests and tropical regions support high richness across both bees and butterflies.
China’s broad climate range and varied topography create one of the largest pollinator species pools in Asia.
Short table: Top 10 countries
| Rank | Country | Total species |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brazil | ≈5,200 |
| 2 | United States | ≈4,750 |
| 3 | Peru | ≈4,300 |
| 4 | Colombia | ≈4,100 |
| 5 | Mexico | ≈3,600 |
| 6 | China | ≈3,600 |
| 7 | Ecuador | ≈3,500 |
| 8 | Venezuela | ≈3,150 |
| 9 | Bolivia | ≈2,950 |
| 10 | Indonesia | ≈2,650 |
Main ranking table: Top 100 countries by pollinator diversity
The main table ranks countries by rounded documented richness of wild bees and butterflies. Small gaps between neighboring ranks should not be over-read, especially where records are sparse or taxonomy is changing.
| Rank | Country | Total species | Region |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brazil | ≈5,200 | Americas |
| 2 | United States | ≈4,750 | Americas |
| 3 | Peru | ≈4,300 | Americas |
| 4 | Colombia | ≈4,100 | Americas |
| 5 | Mexico | ≈3,600 | Americas |
| 6 | China | ≈3,600 | Asia |
| 7 | Ecuador | ≈3,500 | Americas |
| 8 | Venezuela | ≈3,150 | Americas |
| 9 | Bolivia | ≈2,950 | Americas |
| 10 | Indonesia | ≈2,650 | Asia |
| 11 | India | ≈2,300 | Asia |
| 12 | Argentina | ≈2,200 | Americas |
| 13 | Australia | ≈2,120 | Oceania |
| 14 | South Africa | ≈1,850 | Africa |
| 15 | Democratic Republic of the Congo | ≈1,600 | Africa |
| 16 | Malaysia | ≈1,550 | Asia |
| 17 | Philippines | ≈1,500 | Asia |
| 18 | Kenya | ≈1,400 | Africa |
| 19 | Tanzania | ≈1,400 | Africa |
| 20 | Thailand | ≈1,320 | Asia |
| 21 | Ethiopia | ≈1,300 | Africa |
| 22 | Vietnam | ≈1,280 | Asia |
| 23 | Spain | ≈1,260 | Europe |
| 24 | Myanmar | ≈1,250 | Asia |
| 25 | Italy | ≈1,230 | Europe |
| 26 | Canada | ≈1,200 | Americas |
| 27 | Papua New Guinea | ≈1,200 | Oceania |
| 28 | France | ≈1,150 | Europe |
| 29 | Madagascar | ≈1,150 | Africa |
| 30 | Uganda | ≈1,150 | Africa |
| 31 | Turkey | ≈1,150 | MENA |
| 32 | Cameroon | ≈1,080 | Africa |
| 33 | Russia | ≈1,000 | Europe |
| 34 | Iran | ≈1,000 | MENA |
| 35 | Guatemala | ≈1,000 | Americas |
| 36 | Costa Rica | ≈930 | Americas |
| 37 | Panama | ≈900 | Americas |
| 38 | Nigeria | ≈850 | Africa |
| 39 | Gabon | ≈850 | Africa |
| 40 | Morocco | ≈760 | Africa |
| 41 | Honduras | ≈750 | Americas |
| 42 | Greece | ≈740 | Europe |
| 43 | Guyana | ≈700 | Americas |
| 44 | Japan | ≈690 | Asia |
| 45 | Suriname | ≈680 | Americas |
| 46 | Chile | ≈680 | Americas |
| 47 | Romania | ≈660 | Europe |
| 48 | Algeria | ≈640 | Africa |
| 49 | Portugal | ≈610 | Europe |
| 50 | Ghana | ≈600 | Africa |
| 51 | Paraguay | ≈600 | Americas |
| 52 | Bulgaria | ≈570 | Europe |
| 53 | Poland | ≈550 | Europe |
| 54 | Ukraine | ≈530 | Europe |
| 55 | Belize | ≈480 | Americas |
| 56 | Cuba | ≈480 | Americas |
| 57 | Nepal | ≈480 | Asia |
| 58 | Switzerland | ≈470 | Europe |
| 59 | El Salvador | ≈460 | Americas |
| 60 | Kazakhstan | ≈440 | Asia |
| 61 | Austria | ≈430 | Europe |
| 62 | Hungary | ≈430 | Europe |
| 63 | Dominican Republic | ≈420 | Americas |
| 64 | Sri Lanka | ≈420 | Asia |
| 65 | Afghanistan | ≈420 | Asia |
| 66 | Egypt | ≈410 | Africa |
| 67 | Sweden | ≈400 | Europe |
| 68 | Tunisia | ≈390 | Africa |
| 69 | Czechia | ≈390 | Europe |
| 70 | Bhutan | ≈380 | Asia |
| 71 | United Kingdom | ≈380 | Europe |
| 72 | New Zealand | ≈380 | Oceania |
| 73 | Slovenia | ≈375 | Europe |
| 74 | Bangladesh | ≈360 | Asia |
| 75 | Uzbekistan | ≈360 | Asia |
| 76 | Serbia | ≈355 | Europe |
| 77 | Croatia | ≈350 | Europe |
| 78 | Saudi Arabia | ≈330 | MENA |
| 79 | Finland | ≈330 | Europe |
| 80 | North Macedonia | ≈330 | Europe |
| 81 | Kyrgyzstan | ≈315 | Asia |
| 82 | Albania | ≈305 | Europe |
| 83 | Bosnia and Herzegovina | ≈305 | Europe |
| 84 | Trinidad and Tobago | ≈300 | Americas |
| 85 | Norway | ≈290 | Europe |
| 86 | Haiti | ≈280 | Americas |
| 87 | Israel | ≈280 | MENA |
| 88 | Netherlands | ≈275 | Europe |
| 89 | Tajikistan | ≈260 | Asia |
| 90 | Belgium | ≈260 | Europe |
| 91 | Iraq | ≈255 | MENA |
| 92 | Yemen | ≈250 | MENA |
| 93 | Denmark | ≈245 | Europe |
| 94 | Lebanon | ≈215 | MENA |
| 95 | Jordan | ≈195 | MENA |
| 96 | Ireland | ≈185 | Europe |
| 97 | Slovakia | ≈180 | Europe |
| 98 | Latvia | ≈170 | Europe |
| 99 | Lithuania | ≈165 | Europe |
| 100 | Estonia | ≈160 | Europe |
Data note: values are rounded documented richness estimates for wild bees and day-flying butterflies. They should be used for broad comparison, not as complete national species lists.
Charts: pollinator richness and land-use context
Chart 1. Top 20 countries by documented pollinator richness
The bar chart shows the steep upper tier: tropical and megadiverse countries dominate, but the United States remains unusually high because of documented native bee richness.
Chart 2. Pollinator richness vs agricultural land share
The scatter chart uses agricultural land share as a broad land-use pressure context. It does not prove causality; it shows how biodiversity potential and landscape conversion can coexist in very different ways.
Methodology
Indicator. The ranking combines documented wild bee species and day-flying butterfly species by country. Managed honey bee colonies are not the focus; the page is about species richness, not individual abundance.
Year and rounding. Values are rounded for the 2025 comparison because taxonomies, national checklists and occurrence records continue to change. Rounded totals make the country comparison easier to read without implying exact live counts.
Survey coverage. A high value can reflect genuine biodiversity and strong research coverage. A lower value can reflect limited sampling or incomplete digitization. The figures should be treated as comparable estimates based on published checklist and occurrence-data context, not as an official global registry.
Limits of interpretation. This is not a conservation-status ranking, an abundance ranking or a pollination-service index. It does not measure whether pollinator populations are increasing or declining.
Insights: what the distribution means
The upper tier is dominated by countries where tropical richness, mountains and large habitat gradients overlap. Brazil, Peru, Colombia, Ecuador and Bolivia show the role of the Amazon-Andes system. Mexico and the United States show how temperate, desert and mountain systems can produce exceptional bee richness.
The middle tier mixes tropical countries, Mediterranean systems and large temperate countries. Many of these countries are biologically rich but have uneven survey coverage, so the ranks should be used as a guide rather than exact cutoffs.
The lower part of the Top 100 still matters. It often contains smaller countries or countries with less documented diversity. Local pollinator conservation can be urgent even where total national richness is lower.
What this means for readers
For readers, the ranking makes pollinator diversity visible beyond familiar honey bee narratives. Wild bees and butterflies are part of food resilience, urban greening, school gardens, native plant restoration and protected-area planning.
For policymakers, the practical lesson is to protect habitat mosaics, not only formal reserves. Pollinators need nesting sites, seasonal flowers, edges, grasslands, fallows, hedgerows and reduced chemical pressure.
For educators and local groups, the table can support public engagement: a high national rank can inspire pride and responsibility, while a lower rank can highlight the need for better surveys and habitat work.
FAQ
What does pollinator diversity mean in this ranking?
It means the documented number of wild bee and butterfly species associated with a country. It measures species richness, not the number of individual insects.
Does a high rank mean pollinators are safe?
No. A country can have high species richness and still experience local declines, habitat loss or pesticide pressure. Richness and conservation status are different questions.
Why are bees and butterflies combined?
They are two of the most visible and best-documented pollinator groups globally. Combining them gives a broader view than either group alone, while still keeping the indicator understandable.
Why are the values approximate?
Country species lists change as surveys, museum records, DNA work and taxonomy updates improve. Approximate values avoid giving a false impression of exact live counts.
Can a lower-ranked country still be important for pollinators?
Yes. Small islands, drylands, mountain regions and grasslands can hold unique or threatened pollinator communities even when the national species total is lower.
What should readers do with this ranking?
Use it as a starting point for biodiversity awareness, not as a final verdict. The next step is to look at habitats, local trends and conservation actions inside each country.
Sources
The sources below provide the pollinator-policy background, occurrence-data infrastructure, butterfly checklist context, bee reference material and land-use context used to interpret the ranking.
- IPBES — Assessment on Pollinators, Pollination and Food ProductionGlobal scientific synthesis on pollinator importance, pressures and policy options.
https://files.ipbes.net/ipbes-web-prod-public-files/spm_deliverable_3a_pollination_20170222.pdf - Map of Life — Butterfly Country ChecklistsCountry-level butterfly checklist context and documentation methods.
https://mapoflife.ai/documentation/butterfly-country-checklists - Discover Life — Apoidea species guide and checklistReference entry point for wild bee taxonomy and country presence information.
https://www.discoverlife.org/mp/20q?act=x_checklist&guide=Apoidea_species - GBIF — Global Biodiversity Information FacilityOpen biodiversity occurrence infrastructure used widely in species-distribution and checklist work.
https://www.gbif.org/ - World Bank Open Data — Agricultural land (% of land area)Land-use context used in the scatter chart section.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.AGRI.ZS
