In 2023, the resident population of California was 38.97 million. This is a slight decrease from the previous year, with 39.03 million people in 2022. This makes it the most populous state in the U.S. Californian demographics Along with an increase in population, California’s gross domestic product (GDP) has also been increasing, from 1.7 trillion U.S. dollars in 2000 to 3.23 trillion U.S. dollars in 2023. In the same time period, the per-capita personal income has almost doubled, from 33,403 U.S. dollars in 2000 to 77,339 U.S. dollars in 2022. In 2023, the majority of California’s resident population was Hispanic or Latino, although the number of white residents followed as a close second, with Asian residents making up the third largest demographic in the state. The dark side of the Golden State While California is one of the most well-known states in the U.S., is home to Silicon Valley, and one of the states where personal income has been increasing over the past 20 years, not everyone in California is so lucky: In 2023, the poverty rate in California was about 12 percent, and the state had the fifth-highest rate of homelessness in the country during that same year, with an estimated 46 homeless people per 10,000 of the population.

Graph and download economic data for Resident Population in California (CAPOP) from 1900 to 2024 about residents, CA, population, and USA.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Fremont population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Fremont across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.

Key observations

In 2023, the population of Fremont was 226,208, a 0.04% decrease year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Fremont population was 226,305, a decline of 0.72% compared to a population of 227,953 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Fremont increased by 21,884. In this period, the peak population was 235,473 in the year 2018. The numbers suggest that the population has already reached its peak and is showing a trend of decline. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2023

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2023)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Fremont is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Fremont population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Fremont Population by Year. You can refer the same here

The 2023 cartographic boundary shapefiles are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some states and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2010 Census and beyond, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.

In this time period, the Hispanic population of North Dakota increased by 414 percent, while the Hispanic population of South Dakota increased by 360 percent, the two highest growths in the United States. In 2023, California, Texas, and Florida registered the largest Hispanic or Latino population in the U.S.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the data for the California Township, Michigan population pyramid, which represents the California township population distribution across age and gender, using estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 5-Year estimates. It lists the male and female population for each age group, along with the total population for those age groups. Higher numbers at the bottom of the table suggest population growth, whereas higher numbers at the top indicate declining birth rates. Furthermore, the dataset can be utilized to understand the youth dependency ratio, old-age dependency ratio, total dependency ratio, and potential support ratio.

Key observations

• Youth dependency ratio, which is the number of children aged 0-14 per 100 persons aged 15-64, for California Township, Michigan, is 58.8.
• Old-age dependency ratio, which is the number of persons aged 65 or over per 100 persons aged 15-64, for California Township, Michigan, is 9.3.
• Total dependency ratio for California Township, Michigan is 68.1.
• Potential support ratio, which is the number of youth (working age population) per elderly, for California Township, Michigan is 10.7.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group for the California township population analysis. Total expected values are 18 and are define above in the age groups section.
• Population (Male): The male population in the California township for the selected age group is shown in the following column.
• Population (Female): The female population in the California township for the selected age group is shown in the following column.
• Total Population: The total population of the California township for the selected age group is shown in the following column.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for California township Population by Age. You can refer the same here

Chart and table of population level and growth rate for the Sacramento metro area from 1950 to 2025. United Nations population projections are also included through the year 2035.

New York was the most populous state in the union in the year 1900. It had the largest white population, for both native born and foreign born persons, and together these groups made up over 7.1 million of New York's 7.2 million inhabitants at this time. The United States' industrial centers to the north and northeast were one of the most important economic draws during this period, and states in these regions had the largest foreign born white populations. Ethnic minorities Immigration into the agricultural southern states was much lower than the north, and these states had the largest Black populations due to the legacy of slavery - this balance would begin to shift in the following decades as a large share of the Black population migrated to urban centers to the north during the Great Migration. The Japanese and Chinese populations at this time were more concentrated in the West, as these states were the most common point of entry for Asians into the country. The states with the largest Native American populations were to the west and southwest, due to the legacy of forced displacement - this included the Indian Territory, an unorganized and independent territory assigned to the Native American population in the early 1800s, although this was incorporated into Oklahoma when it was admitted into the union in 1907. Additionally, non-taxpaying Native Americans were historically omitted from the U.S. Census, as they usually lived in separate communities and could not vote or hold office - more of an effort was made to count all Native Americans from 1890 onward, although there are likely inaccuracies in the figures given here. Changing distribution Internal migration in the 20th century greatly changed population distribution across the country, with California and Florida now ranking among the three most populous states in the U.S. today, while they were outside the top 20 in 1900. The growth of Western states' populations was largely due to the wave of internal migration during the Great Depression, where unemployment in the east saw many emigrate to "newer" states in search of opportunity, as well as significant immigration from Latin America (especially Mexico) and Asia since the mid-1900s.

Graph and download economic data for Resident Population in Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA (MSA) (LNAPOP) from 2010 to 2024 about Los Angeles, residents, CA, population, and USA.

The influence of density-dependent and number-dependent processes on individual demographic rates often results in ecological tradeoffs. Because such processes have important implications for individual level fitness and population regulation, they long have been an important topic in ecological research. I used Dascyllus trimaculatus , a site-attached planktivorous coral reef fish, to determine independently the effects of population density and group size on rates of individual growth and mortality. Somatic growth of D. trimaculatus was positively related to the density of D. trimaculatus outplanted to host anenomes, Heteractis magnifica , with nearly twice as much growth observed in individuals living in the highest density treatment. By contrast, survivorship of D. trimaculatus on H. magnifica exhibited a negative relationship with density. There was no significant effect of group size on either the growth or mortality rates of D. trimaculatus . These relationships suggest a tradeoff between density-dependent growth and survival in this species. My analysis of behavioral data indicated that D. trimaculatus living under conditions of higher local population densities displayed decreased rates of intraspecific aggression because of positive feedback between local population density and the foraging distance from an individual’s host anemone. In turn, lower rates of aggression and feeding higher in the water column resulted in increased somatic growth rates due to: (1) a reduced energy expenditure and (2) an increase in prey consumption. These data are part of a Master's Thesis published by ProQuest: Nielsen, Jessica Anne. Effects of density on behaviorally-mediated tradeoffs between growth and survivorship. MA Thesis, University of California Santa Barbara, 2013.

Every 10 years, the number of seats a state has in the U.S. House of Representatives, and therefore the Electoral College, changes based on population. While many states experienced no change in representation due to the 2020 Census, a few states gained or lost seats. Texas notably gained two seats due to an increase in population, while New York, Michigan, California, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Illinois all lost one seat.

This change will stay in place until 2030, when the next Census is conducted in the United States.

This US History GeoInquiry is designed to enhance teaching the "Dust Bowl" in US History classes. The activity uses a web-based map and is tied to the C3 Framework.In this activity, teachers will lead students as they explore the Dust Bowl region using population change, agriculture, and precipitation data. Learning outcomes:

        Students will be able to analyze the effect of climate on population.Students will be able to analyze the change in California’s population relative to the

change in the Dust Bowl states’ population during the 1920s and 1930s. Find more US History GeoInquiries here or explore all GeoInquiries at https://www.esri.com/geoinquiries

According to a population projection based on 2020 Census Data, in 2040, California's population will amount to 42.16 million inhabitants

This is a copy of the statewide Census Place GIS Tiger file. It is used to determine if a place is DAC or not by adding ACS (American Community Survey) Median Household Income (MHI) data at the place level. The IRWM web based DAC mapping tool uses this GIS layer. Every year this table gets updated after ACS publishes their updated MHI estimates. Created by joining ACS 2016-2020 5 year estimates to the 2020 Census Place feature class. The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The TIGER/Line shapefiles include both incorporated places (legal entities) and census designated places or CDPs (statistical entities). An incorporated place is established to provide governmental functions for a concentration of people as opposed to a minor civil division (MCD), which generally is created to provide services or administer an area without regard, necessarily, to population. Places always nest within a state, but may extend across county and county subdivision boundaries. An incorporated place usually is a city, town, village, or borough, but can have other legal descriptions. CDPs are delineated for the decennial census as the statistical counterparts of incorporated places. CDPs are delineated to provide data for settled concentrations of population that are identifiable by name, but are not legally incorporated under the laws of the state in which they are located. The boundaries for CDPs often are defined in partnership with state, local, and/or tribal officials and usually coincide with visible features or the boundary of an adjacent incorporated place or another legal entity. CDP boundaries often change from one decennial census to the next with changes in the settlement pattern and development; a CDP with the same name as in an earlier census does not necessarily have the same boundary. The only population/housing size requirement for CDPs is that they must contain some housing and population. The boundaries of all incorporated places are as of January 1, 2020 as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS). The boundaries of all CDPs were delineated as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) for the 2020 Census.

The associated data are considered DWR enterprise GIS data, which meet all appropriate requirements of the DWR Spatial Data Standards, specifically the DWR Spatial Data Standard version 3.3, dated April 13, 2022. This data set was not produced by DWR. Data were originally developed and supplied by US Bureau of Census. DWR makes no warranties or guarantees - either expressed or implied - as to the completeness, accuracy, or correctness of the data. DWR neither accepts nor assumes liability arising from or for any incorrect, incomplete, or misleading subject data. Comments, problems, improvements, updates, or suggestions should be forwarded to the official GIS steward as available and appropriate at gis@water.ca.gov.

US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 2013, 5-year estimates of the key population, household, and housing characteristics of Cities/Places geographic level in Orange County, California. The data contains a number of fields showcasing annual estimated values of total population, households and housing units for each city in Orange County, California, along with total and mean annual average changes. The US Census geodemographic data are based on the 2013-2017 TigerLines across multiple geographies. The spatial geographies were merged with ACS data tables. See full documentation at the OCACS project github page (https://github.com/ktalexan/OCACS-Geodemographics).

The 2022 cartographic boundary shapefiles are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. The cartographic boundary files include both incorporated places (legal entities) and census designated places or CDPs (statistical entities). An incorporated place is established to provide governmental functions for a concentration of people as opposed to a minor civil division (MCD), which generally is created to provide services or administer an area without regard, necessarily, to population. Places always nest within a state, but may extend across county and county subdivision boundaries. An incorporated place usually is a city, town, village, or borough, but can have other legal descriptions. CDPs are delineated for the decennial census as the statistical counterparts of incorporated places. CDPs are delineated to provide data for settled concentrations of population that are identifiable by name, but are not legally incorporated under the laws of the state in which they are located. The boundaries for CDPs often are defined in partnership with state, local, and/or tribal officials and usually coincide with visible features or the boundary of an adjacent incorporated place or another legal entity. CDP boundaries often change from one decennial census to the next with changes in the settlement pattern and development; a CDP with the same name as in an earlier census does not necessarily have the same boundary. The only population/housing size requirement for CDPs is that they must contain some housing and population. The generalized boundaries of most incorporated places in this file are based on those as of January 1, 2022, as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS). The generalized boundaries of all CDPs are based on those delineated as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) for the 2020 Census.

In 2020, about 82.66 percent of the total population in the United States lived in cities and urban areas. As the United States was one of the earliest nations to industrialize, it has had a comparatively high rate of urbanization over the past two centuries. The urban population became larger than the rural population during the 1910s, and by the middle of the century it is expected that almost 90 percent of the population will live in an urban setting. Regional development of urbanization in the U.S. The United States began to urbanize on a larger scale in the 1830s, as technological advancements reduced the labor demand in agriculture, and as European migration began to rise. One major difference between early urbanization in the U.S. and other industrializing economies, such as the UK or Germany, was population distribution. Throughout the 1800s, the Northeastern U.S. became the most industrious and urban region of the country, as this was the main point of arrival for migrants. Disparities in industrialization and urbanization was a key contributor to the Union's victory in the Civil War, not only due to population sizes, but also through production capabilities and transport infrastructure. The Northeast's population reached an urban majority in the 1870s, whereas this did not occur in the South until the 1950s. As more people moved westward in the late 1800s, not only did their population growth increase, but the share of the urban population also rose, with an urban majority established in both the West and Midwest regions in the 1910s. The West would eventually become the most urbanized region in the 1960s, and over 90 percent of the West's population is urbanized today. Urbanization today New York City is the most populous city in the United States, with a population of 8.3 million, while California has the largest urban population of any state. California also has the highest urbanization rate, although the District of Columbia is considered 100 percent urban. Only four U.S. states still have a rural majority, these are Maine, Mississippi, Montana, and West Virginia.

This map shows the 2022 disadvantaged communities designated by CalEPA for the purpose of SB 535. These areas represent:Highest scoring 25% of census tracts from CalEnviroScreen 4.0, along with census tracts scoring in the top 5% of the Pollution Burden indicator but without an overall CalEnviroScreen score due to due to unavailable or unreliable Population Characteristics indicator data and score.All census tracts currently identified as disadvantaged but not in the highest scoring 25% census tracts in version 4.0 (i.e., the highest scoring 25% of census tracts in CalEnviroScreen 3.0 along with the census tracts with the highest 5% Pollution Burden scores, but without an overall CalEnviroScreen score). See the Disadvantaged Communities 2017 map here.Federally recognized tribal areas as identified by the Census in the 2021 American Indian Areas Related National Geodatabase. A Tribe may establish that a particular area of land is under its control, for purposes of this designation, by requesting a consultation with the CalEPA Deputy Secretary for Environmental Justice, Tribal Affairs and Border Relations at TribalAffairs@calepa.ca.govPlease see CalEPA's Draft Designation of Disadvantaged Communities Pursuant to Senate Bill 535 document as well as CalEPA's California Climate Investments to Benefit Disadvantaged Communities page.

Since 1852, the U.S. presidential election has been contested in California 44 times, with Californians successfully voting for the winning candidate on 35 occasions, giving an overall success rate of 80 percent. California has awarded the majority of its electoral votes to the Republican Party in 23 elections, the Democratic Party in 20 elections, and the only year when a third-party candidate won a majority was in 1912, where Theodore Roosevelt won the state while campaigning as the Progressive Party's nominee. Between 1952 and 1988, there was only one election that was not won by the Republican candidate, while all elections since 1992 have been won by the Democratic nominee. In the 2024 election, Oakland-born Vice President Kamala Harris ran as the Democratic nominee, and comfortably won her home state but lost the nationwide vote. Californian under-representation? California was admitted to the union in 1850, and was granted just four electoral votes in its first three presidential elections. In the past two centuries, California's population has grown rapidly, largely due to a positive net migration rate from within the U.S. and abroad. Today, it has the highest population of any state in the U.S, with almost forty million people, and has therefore been designated 54 electoral votes; the most of any state. Although California has been allocated around ten percent of the total electoral votes on offer nationwide, The Golden State is home to roughly twelve percent of the total U.S. population, therefore a number closer to 62 electoral votes would be more proportional to the U.S. population distribution. Despite this, California's total allocation was reduced to 54 in the 2024 election. Native Californians As of 2020, Richard Nixon is the only native Californian to have been elected to the presidency, having won the election in 1968 and 1972. California also voted for Nixon in the 1960 election, although John F. Kennedy was the overall winner. Two other U.S. Presidents had declared California as their home state; they were Herbert Hoover, who won the 1928 election, and Ronald Reagan, who won in 1980 and 1984 respectively. While states generally support candidates who were born or reside there, Californian candidates have failed to carry their home state or state of birth in four U.S. presidential elections, these were; John C. Frémont in 1854 (who actually came third in California), Herbert Hoover in 1932, and Adlai Stevenson in both the 1952 and 1956 elections.

Demographic performance (recruitment, growth, and survival) are quantified annually for multiple individual colonies of the three most common genera (Acropora, Pocillopora, Porites) at both backreef and forereef sites. Each coral was tagged in 2011 and subsequently sampled again in 2012 to track colony growth and mortality dynamics. However, since 2013, investigators have transitioned to identifying coral through detailed mapping methodology and will continue to identify corals using this method in the subsequent years. The mapping system developed in 2013 provides data appropriate for detailed demographic study of coral on varying spatial scales around the island. This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation under Grant No. OCE 16-37396 (and earlier awards) as well as a generous gift from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. Research was completed under permits issued by the French Polynesian Government (Délégation à la Recherche) and the Haut-commissariat de la République en Polynésie Francaise (DTRT) (Protocole d'Accueil 2005-2022). This work represents a contribution of the Moorea Coral Reef (MCR) LTER Site.