The average for 2022 based on 195 countries was 18.38 births per 1000 people. The highest value was in Niger: 45.03 births per 1000 people and the lowest value was in Hong Kong: 4.4 births per 1000 people. The indicator is available from 1960 to 2022. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

The Country-Level Population and Downscaled Projections Based on Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) A1, B1, and A2 Scenarios, 1990-2100, were adopted in 2000 from population projections realized at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) in 1996. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) SRES A1 and B1 scenarios both used the same IIASA "rapid" fertility transition projection, which assumes low fertility and low mortality rates. The SRES A2 scenario used a corresponding IIASA "slow" fertility transition projection (high fertility and high mortality rates). Both IIASA low and high projections are performed for 13 world regions including North Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, China and Centrally Planned Asia, Pacific Asia, Pacific OECD, Central Asia, Middle East, South Asia, Eastern Europe, European part of the former Soviet Union, Western Europe, Latin America, and North America. This data set is produced and distributed by the Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN).

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) publishes data on the number of live births by the mother's country of birth in England and Wales each year. Every time a birth is registered in England and Wales both parents are required to state their places of birth on their child's birth certificate, and this information is then collated to produce these statistics. In order to make it easier to look at what these data tell us about births in London, and how these have been changing over time, the GLA Demography team has extracted the data which relate to London from the main ONS dataset since 2001 and presented it here in an easily accessible format. For more information about how the ONS produces these statistics, please visit their website: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths For more information about how we extracted these data and created this report, please this project's Github repository: https://github.com/Greater-London-Authority/births_by_mothers_country_of_birth Since 2001, the number of live births being recorded in London has changed from 104,162 to 104,246 births per year. The proportion of births which were to mothers who had been born outside the UK has changed from 43% in 2001 to 59% in the most recent year (2023). In 2023, the region of origin which supplied the largest number of births to non-UK-born mothers in London was Asia with 24,004, followed by the Africa which provided 10,596. The region of origin which has seen the largest change since 2001 is the Asia, which went from 13,489 live births per year in 2001 to 24,004 in 2023. In 2023, the region with the largest number of births to non-UK-born mothers was London with 61,357 live births (59% of all live births in London). By contrast, the region with the lowest number of births to non-UK-born mothers was the Wales with 3,891 live births to non-UK-born mothers, which only represented 14% of all live births in that region. The data shows that London accounted for 33% of all the births to non-UK-born mothers in England and Wales in 2023, which was a far higher proportion than any other region. These data also highlight a couple of other interesting comparisons. Firstly, despite being the second largest region in England and Wales in terms of population, London is not the region with the largest number of births to UK-born mothers. Secondly, London is the only region to have relatively large numbers of mothers from every region of the world according to the way in which the ONS has categorised them, including Africa, non-EU European countries (such as Turkey and Russia) and the 'Rest of the World' (which includes the Americas and Oceania). The data comparing London with England & Wales excluding London and England & Wales as a whole (including London) is provided in the table below: Total Births - UK Mothers Total Births - Overseas Mothers Pre-2004 EU countries Post-2004 EU accession countries Rest of Europe Asia Africa Rest of the world Year Region No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % 2023 London 42,889 41% 61,357 59% 6,505 6% 8,265 8% 5,985 6% 24,004 23% 10,596 10% 6,002 6% 2023 Rest of England & Wales 360,109 74% 126,540 26% 10,590 2% 26,464 5% 6,587 1% 49,668 10% 26,014 5% 7,217 1% 2023 England & Wales 402,998 68% 187,897 32% 17,095 3% 34,729 6% 12,572 2% 73,672 12% 36,610 6% 13,219 2% Births by Mother's Country of Birth by London Borough

BackgroundGlobally, with a neonatal mortality rate of 27/1000 live births, Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest rate in the world and is responsible for 43% of all infant fatalities. In the first week of life, almost three-fourths of neonatal deaths occur and about one million babies died on their first day of life. Previous studies lack conclusive evidence regarding the overall estimate of early neonatal mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa. Therefore, this review aimed to pool findings reported in the literature on magnitude of early neonatal mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa.MethodsThis review’s output is the aggregate of magnitude of early neonatal mortality in sub-Saharan Africa. Up until June 8, 2023, we performed a comprehensive search of the databases PubMed/Medline, PubMed Central, Hinary, Google, Cochrane Library, African Journals Online, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The studies were evaluated using the JBI appraisal check list. STATA 17 was employed for the analysis. Measures of study heterogeneity and publication bias were conducted using the I2 test and the Eggers and Beggs tests, respectively. The Der Simonian and Laird random-effect model was used to calculate the combined magnitude of early neonatal mortality. Besides, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and meta regression were carried out to identify the source of heterogeneity.ResultsFourteen studies were included from a total of 311 articles identified by the search with a total of 278,173 participants. The pooled magnitude of early neonatal mortality in sub-Saharan Africa was 80.3 (95% CI 66 to 94.6) per 1000 livebirths. Ethiopia had the highest pooled estimate of early neonatal mortality rate, at 20.1%, and Cameroon had the lowest rate, at 0.5%. Among the included studies, both the Cochrane Q test statistic (χ2 = 6432.46, P

By the middle of the 1990s, Indonesia had enjoyed over three decades of remarkable social, economic, and demographic change and was on the cusp of joining the middle-income countries. Per capita income had risen more than fifteenfold since the early 1960s, from around US$50 to more than US$800. Increases in educational attainment and decreases in fertility and infant mortality over the same period reflected impressive investments in infrastructure. In the late 1990s the economic outlook began to change as Indonesia was gripped by the economic crisis that affected much of Asia. In 1998 the rupiah collapsed, the economy went into a tailspin, and gross domestic product contracted by an estimated 12-15%-a decline rivaling the magnitude of the Great Depression. The general trend of several decades of economic progress followed by a few years of economic downturn masks considerable variation across the archipelago in the degree both of economic development and of economic setbacks related to the crisis. In part this heterogeneity reflects the great cultural and ethnic diversity of Indonesia, which in turn makes it a rich laboratory for research on a number of individual- and household-level behaviors and outcomes that interest social scientists. The Indonesia Family Life Survey is designed to provide data for studying behaviors and outcomes. The survey contains a wealth of information collected at the individual and household levels, including multiple indicators of economic and non-economic well-being: consumption, income, assets, education, migration, labor market outcomes, marriage, fertility, contraceptive use, health status, use of health care and health insurance, relationships among co-resident and non- resident family members, processes underlying household decision-making, transfers among family members and participation in community activities. In addition to individual- and household-level information, the IFLS provides detailed information from the communities in which IFLS households are located and from the facilities that serve residents of those communities. These data cover aspects of the physical and social environment, infrastructure, employment opportunities, food prices, access to health and educational facilities, and the quality and prices of services available at those facilities. By linking data from IFLS households to data from their communities, users can address many important questions regarding the impact of policies on the lives of the respondents, as well as document the effects of social, economic, and environmental change on the population. The Indonesia Family Life Survey complements and extends the existing survey data available for Indonesia, and for developing countries in general, in a number of ways. First, relatively few large-scale longitudinal surveys are available for developing countries. IFLS is the only large-scale longitudinal survey available for Indonesia. Because data are available for the same individuals from multiple points in time, IFLS affords an opportunity to understand the dynamics of behavior, at the individual, household and family and community levels. In IFLS1 7,224 households were interviewed, and detailed individual-level data were collected from over 22,000 individuals. In IFLS2, 94.4% of IFLS1 households were re-contacted (interviewed or died). In IFLS3 the re-contact rate was 95.3% of IFLS1 households. Indeed nearly 91% of IFLS1 households are complete panel households in that they were interviewed in all three waves, IFLS1, 2 and 3. These re-contact rates are as high as or higher than most longitudinal surveys in the United States and Europe. High re-interview rates were obtained in part because we were committed to tracking and interviewing individuals who had moved or split off from the origin IFLS1 households. High re-interview rates contribute significantly to data quality in a longitudinal survey because they lessen the risk of bias due to nonrandom attrition in studies using the data. Second, the multipurpose nature of IFLS instruments means that the data support analyses of interrelated issues not possible with single-purpose surveys. For example, the availability of data on household consumption together with detailed individual data on labor market outcomes, health outcomes and on health program availability and quality at the community level means that one can examine the impact of income on health outcomes, but also whether health in turn affects incomes. Third, IFLS collected both current and retrospective information on most topics. With data from multiple points of time on current status and an extensive array of retrospective information about the lives of respondents, analysts can relate dynamics to events that occurred in the past. For example, changes in labor outcomes in recent years can be explored as a function of earlier decisions about schooling and work. Fourth, IFLS collected extensive measures of health status, including self-reported measures of general health status, morbidity experience, and physical assessments conducted by a nurse (height, weight, head circumference, blood pressure, pulse, waist and hip circumference, hemoglobin level, lung capacity, and time required to repeatedly rise from a sitting position). These data provide a much richer picture of health status than is typically available in household surveys. For example, the data can be used to explore relationships between socioeconomic status and an array of health outcomes. Fifth, in all waves of the survey, detailed data were collected about respondents¹ communities and public and private facilities available for their health care and schooling. The facility data can be combined with household and individual data to examine the relationship between, for example, access to health services (or changes in access) and various aspects of health care use and health status. Sixth, because the waves of IFLS span the period from several years before the economic crisis hit Indonesia, to just prior to it hitting, to one year and then three years after, extensive research can be carried out regarding the living conditions of Indonesian households during this very tumultuous period. In sum, the breadth and depth of the longitudinal information on individuals, households, communities, and facilities make IFLS data a unique resource for scholars and policymakers interested in the processes of economic development.

In 2023, the infant mortality rate in India was at about 24.5 deaths per 1,000 live births, a significant decrease from previous years. Infant mortality as an indicatorThe infant mortality rate is the number of deaths of children under one year of age per 1,000 live births. This rate is an important key indicator for a country’s health and standard of living; a low infant mortality rate indicates a high standard of healthcare. Causes of infant mortality include premature birth, sepsis or meningitis, sudden infant death syndrome, and pneumonia. Globally, the infant mortality rate has shrunk from 63 infant deaths per 1,000 live births to 27 since 1990 and is forecast to drop to 8 infant deaths per 1,000 live births by the year 2100. India’s rural problemWith 32 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, India is neither among the countries with the highest nor among those with the lowest infant mortality rate. Its decrease indicates an increase in medical care and hygiene, as well as a decrease in female infanticide. Increasing life expectancy at birth is another indicator that shows that the living conditions of the Indian population are improving. Still, India’s inhabitants predominantly live in rural areas, where standards of living as well as access to medical care and hygiene are traditionally lower and more complicated than in cities. Public health programs are thus put in place by the government to ensure further improvement.