The only point being made here is that people in the top five countries for this statistic have a lot of space, and that they all speak English, which is a factor of their sharing a common mother country. It isn’t surprising for the United States, New Zealand, Canada and Australia to have such large houses, since those countries all have population densities of less than 30 people per square kilometer, far less than the United Kingdom’s rate of 244.69 people per square kilometer.
One point I could make is that, along with its language, England also exported a culture which valued individuality and privacy, and also that these former colonies have prospered economically, with New Zealand having the lowest ranking of the five in GDP per capita, at 35th-highest in the world. Presumably, people in Pakistan, India and Nicaragua would build houses large enough so that up to three people didn’t have to share a room, if they could afford to.
Other points could also be made, such as the relationship that seems to exist between controlled population growth (all five of the countries with the largest houses have an average annual increase of less than one percent) and a higher standard of living. Of course, there is no way to tell which way this relationship works. Do people have fewer children as living standards rise or vice-versa?