Use this global model layer when performing analysis across continents. This layer displays a global land cover map and model for the year 2050 at a pixel resolution of 300m. ESA CCI land cover from the years 2010 and 2018 were used to create this prediction.Variable mapped: Projected land cover in 2050.Data Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaMosaic Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaExtent: Global Cell Size: 300mSource Type: ThematicVisible Scale: 1:50,000 and smallerSource: Clark UniversityPublication date: April 2021What you can do with this layer?This layer may be added to online maps and compared with the ESA CCI Land Cover from any year from 1992 to 2018. To do this, add Global Land Cover 1992-2018 to your map and choose the processing template (image display) from that layer called “Simplified Renderer.” This layer can also be used in analysis in ecological planning to find specific areas that may need to be set aside before they are converted to human use.Links to the six Clark University land cover 2050 layers in ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World:There are three scales (country, regional, and world) for the land cover and vulnerability models. They’re all slightly different since the country model can be more fine-tuned to the drivers in that particular area. Regional (continental) and global have more spatially consistent model weights. Which should you use? If you’re analyzing one country or want to make accurate comparisons between countries, use the country level. If mapping larger patterns, use the global or regional extent (depending on your area of interest). Land Cover 2050 - GlobalLand Cover 2050 - RegionalLand Cover 2050 - CountryLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 GlobalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 RegionalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 CountryWhat these layers model (and what they don’t model)The model focuses on human-based land cover changes and projects the extent of these changes to the year 2050. It seeks to find where agricultural and urban land cover will cover the planet in that year, and what areas are most vulnerable to change due to the expansion of the human footprint. It does not predict changes to other land cover types such as forests or other natural vegetation during that time period unless it is replaced by agriculture or urban land cover. It also doesn’t predict sea level rise unless the model detected a pattern in changes in bodies of water between 2010 and 2018. A few 300m pixels might have changed due to sea level rise during that timeframe, but not many.The model predicts land cover changes based upon patterns it found in the period 2010-2018. But it cannot predict future land use. This is partly because current land use is not necessarily a model input. In this model, land set aside as a result of political decisions, for example military bases or nature reserves, may be found to be filled in with urban or agricultural areas in 2050. This is because the model is blind to the political decisions that affect land use.Quantitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomassCrop SuitabilityDistance to AirportsDistance to Cropland 2010Distance to Primary RoadsDistance to RailroadsDistance to Secondary RoadsDistance to Settled AreasDistance to Urban 2010ElevationGDPHuman Influence IndexPopulation DensityPrecipitationRegions SlopeTemperatureQualitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomesEcoregionsIrrigated CropsProtected AreasProvincesRainfed CropsSoil ClassificationSoil DepthSoil DrainageSoil pHSoil TextureWere small countries modeled?Clark University modeled some small countries that had a few transitions. Only five countries were modeled with this procedure: Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu.As a rule of thumb, the MLP neural network in the Land Change Modeler requires at least 100 pixels of change for model calibration. Several countries experienced less than 100 pixels of change between 2010 & 2018 and therefore required an alternate modeling methodology. These countries are Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu. To overcome the lack of samples, these select countries were resampled from 300 meters to 150 meters, effectively multiplying the number of pixels by four. As a result, we were able to empirically model countries which originally had as few as 25 pixels of change.Once a selected country was resampled to 150 meter resolution, three transition potential images were calibrated and averaged to produce one final transition potential image per transition. Clark Labs chose to create averaged transition potential images to limit artifacts of model overfitting. Though each model contained at least 100 samples of "change", this is still relatively little for a neural network-based model and could lead to anomalous outcomes. The averaged transition potentials were used to extrapolate change and produce a final hard prediction and risk map of natural land cover conversion to Cropland and Artificial Surfaces in 2050.39 Small Countries Not ModeledThere were 39 countries that were not modeled because the transitions, if any, from natural to anthropogenic were very small. In this case the land cover for 2050 for these countries are the same as the 2018 maps and their vulnerability was given a value of 0. Here were the countries not modeled:AndorraAntigua and BarbudaBarbadosCape VerdeComorosCook IslandsDjiboutiDominicaFaroe IslandsFrench GuyanaFrench PolynesiaGibraltarGrenadaGuamGuyanaIcelandJan MayenKiribatiLiechtensteinLuxembourgMaldivesMaltaMarshall IslandsMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldovaMonacoNauruSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSeychellesSurinameSvalbardThe BahamasTongaTuvaluVatican CityIndex to land cover values in this dataset:The Clark University Land Cover 2050 projections display a ten-class land cover generalized from ESA Climate Change Initiative Land Cover. 1 Mostly Cropland2 Grassland, Scrub, or Shrub3 Mostly Deciduous Forest4 Mostly Needleleaf/Evergreen Forest5 Sparse Vegetation6 Bare Area7 Swampy or Often Flooded Vegetation8 Artificial Surface or Urban Area9 Surface Water10 Permanent Snow and Ice

Use this country model layer when performing analysis within a single country. This layer displays a single global land cover map that is modeled by country for the year 2050 at a pixel resolution of 300m. ESA CCI land cover from the years 2010 and 2018 were used to create this prediction.Variable mapped: Projected land cover in 2050.Data Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaMosaic Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaExtent: Global Cell Size: 300mSource Type: ThematicVisible Scale: 1:50,000 and smallerSource: Clark UniversityPublication date: April 2021What you can do with this layer?This layer may be added to online maps and compared with the ESA CCI Land Cover from any year from 1992 to 2018. To do this, add Global Land Cover 1992-2018 to your map and choose the processing template (image display) from that layer called “Simplified Renderer.” This layer can also be used in analysis in ecological planning to find specific areas that may need to be set aside before they are converted to human use.Links to the six Clark University land cover 2050 layers in ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World:There are three scales (country, regional, and world) for the land cover and vulnerability models. They’re all slightly different since the country model can be more fine-tuned to the drivers in that particular area. Regional (continental) and global have more spatially consistent model weights. Which should you use? If you’re analyzing one country or want to make accurate comparisons between countries, use the country level. If mapping larger patterns, use the global or regional extent (depending on your area of interest). Land Cover 2050 - GlobalLand Cover 2050 - RegionalLand Cover 2050 - CountryLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 GlobalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 RegionalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 CountryWhat these layers model (and what they don’t model)The model focuses on human-based land cover changes and projects the extent of these changes to the year 2050. It seeks to find where agricultural and urban land cover will cover the planet in that year, and what areas are most vulnerable to change due to the expansion of the human footprint. It does not predict changes to other land cover types such as forests or other natural vegetation during that time period unless it is replaced by agriculture or urban land cover. It also doesn’t predict sea level rise unless the model detected a pattern in changes in bodies of water between 2010 and 2018. A few 300m pixels might have changed due to sea level rise during that timeframe, but not many.The model predicts land cover changes based upon patterns it found in the period 2010-2018. But it cannot predict future land use. This is partly because current land use is not necessarily a model input. In this model, land set aside as a result of political decisions, for example military bases or nature reserves, may be found to be filled in with urban or agricultural areas in 2050. This is because the model is blind to the political decisions that affect land use.Quantitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomassCrop SuitabilityDistance to AirportsDistance to Cropland 2010Distance to Primary RoadsDistance to RailroadsDistance to Secondary RoadsDistance to Settled AreasDistance to Urban 2010ElevationGDPHuman Influence IndexPopulation DensityPrecipitationRegions SlopeTemperatureQualitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomesEcoregionsIrrigated CropsProtected AreasProvincesRainfed CropsSoil ClassificationSoil DepthSoil DrainageSoil pHSoil TextureWere small countries modeled?Clark University modeled some small countries that had a few transitions. Only five countries were modeled with this procedure: Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu.As a rule of thumb, the MLP neural network in the Land Change Modeler requires at least 100 pixels of change for model calibration. Several countries experienced less than 100 pixels of change between 2010 & 2018 and therefore required an alternate modeling methodology. These countries are Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu. To overcome the lack of samples, these select countries were resampled from 300 meters to 150 meters, effectively multiplying the number of pixels by four. As a result, we were able to empirically model countries which originally had as few as 25 pixels of change.Once a selected country was resampled to 150 meter resolution, three transition potential images were calibrated and averaged to produce one final transition potential image per transition. Clark Labs chose to create averaged transition potential images to limit artifacts of model overfitting. Though each model contained at least 100 samples of "change", this is still relatively little for a neural network-based model and could lead to anomalous outcomes. The averaged transition potentials were used to extrapolate change and produce a final hard prediction and risk map of natural land cover conversion to Cropland and Artificial Surfaces in 2050.39 Small Countries Not ModeledThere were 39 countries that were not modeled because the transitions, if any, from natural to anthropogenic were very small. In this case the land cover for 2050 for these countries are the same as the 2018 maps and their vulnerability was given a value of 0. Here were the countries not modeled:AndorraAntigua and BarbudaBarbadosCape VerdeComorosCook IslandsDjiboutiDominicaFaroe IslandsFrench GuyanaFrench PolynesiaGibraltarGrenadaGuamGuyanaIcelandJan MayenKiribatiLiechtensteinLuxembourgMaldivesMaltaMarshall IslandsMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldovaMonacoNauruSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSeychellesSurinameSvalbardThe BahamasTongaTuvaluVatican CityIndex to land cover values in this dataset:The Clark University Land Cover 2050 projections display a ten-class land cover generalized from ESA Climate Change Initiative Land Cover. 1 Mostly Cropland2 Grassland, Scrub, or Shrub3 Mostly Deciduous Forest4 Mostly Needleleaf/Evergreen Forest5 Sparse Vegetation6 Bare Area7 Swampy or Often Flooded Vegetation8 Artificial Surface or Urban Area9 Surface Water10 Permanent Snow and Ice

This dataset combines the work of several different projects to create a seamless data set for the contiguous United States. Data from four regional Gap Analysis Projects and the LANDFIRE project were combined to make this dataset. In the Northwestern United States (Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington and Wyoming) data in this map came from the Northwest Gap Analysis Project. In the Southwestern United States (Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah) data used in this map came from the Southwest Gap Analysis Project. The data for Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia came from the Southeast Gap Analysis Project and the California data was generated by the updated California Gap land cover project. The Hawaii Gap Analysis project provided the data for Hawaii. In areas of the county (central U.S., Northeast, Alaska) that have not yet been covered by a regional Gap Analysis Project, data from the Landfire project was used. Similarities in the methods used by these projects made possible the combining of the data they derived into one seamless coverage. They all used multi-season satellite imagery (Landsat ETM+) from 1999-2001 in conjunction with digital elevation model (DEM) derived datasets (e.g. elevation, landform) to model natural and semi-natural vegetation. Vegetation classes were drawn from NatureServe’s Ecological System Classification (Comer et al. 2003) or classes developed by the Hawaii Gap project. Additionally, all of the projects included land use classes that were employed to describe areas where natural vegetation has been altered. In many areas of the country these classes were derived from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD). For the majority of classes and, in most areas of the country, a decision tree classifier was used to discriminate ecological system types. In some areas of the country, more manual techniques were used to discriminate small patch systems and systems not distinguishable through topography. The data contains multiple levels of thematic detail. At the most detailed level natural vegetation is represented by NatureServe’s Ecological System classification (or in Hawaii the Hawaii GAP classification). These most detailed classifications have been crosswalked to the five highest levels of the National Vegetation Classification (NVC), Class, Subclass, Formation, Division and Macrogroup. This crosswalk allows users to display and analyze the data at different levels of thematic resolution. Developed areas, or areas dominated by introduced species, timber harvest, or water are represented by other classes, collectively refered to as land use classes; these land use classes occur at each of the thematic levels. Six layer files are included in the download packages to assist the user in displaying the data at each of the Thematic levels in ArcGIS.

In the century between Napoleon's defeat and the outbreak of the First World War (known as the "Pax Britannica"), the British Empire grew to become the largest and most powerful empire in the world. At its peak in the 1910s and 1920s, it encompassed almost one quarter of both the world's population and its land surface, and was known as "the empire on which the sun never sets". The empire's influence could be felt across the globe, as Britain could use its position to affect trade and economies in all areas of the world, including many regions that were not part of the formal empire (for example, Britain was able to affect trading policy in China for over a century, due to its control of Hong Kong and the neighboring colonies of India and Burma). Some historians argue that because of its economic, military, political and cultural influence, nineteenth century Britain was the closest thing to a hegemonic superpower that the world ever had, and possibly ever will have. "Rule Britannia" Due to the technological and logistical restrictions of the past, we will never know the exact borders of the British Empire each year, nor the full extent of its power. However, by using historical sources in conjunction with modern political borders, we can gain new perspectives and insights on just how large and influential the British Empire actually was. If we transpose a map of all former British colonies, dominions, mandates, protectorates and territories, as well as secure territories of the East India Trading Company (EIC) (who acted as the precursor to the British Empire) onto a current map of the world, we can see that Britain had a significant presence in at least 94 present-day countries (approximately 48 percent). This included large territories such as Australia, the Indian subcontinent, most of North America and roughly one third of the African continent, as well as a strategic network of small enclaves (such as Gibraltar and Hong Kong) and islands around the globe that helped Britain to maintain and protect its trade routes. The sun sets... Although the data in this graph does not show the annual population or size of the British Empire, it does give some context to how Britain has impacted and controlled the development of the world over the past four centuries. From 1600 until 1920, Britain's Empire expanded from a small colony in Newfoundland, a failing conquest in Ireland, and early ventures by the EIC in India, to Britain having some level of formal control in almost half of all present-day countries. The English language is an official language in all inhabited continents, its political and bureaucratic systems are used all over the globe, and empirical expansion helped Christianity to become the most practiced major religion worldwide. In the second half of the twentieth century, imperial and colonial empires were eventually replaced by global enterprises. The United States and Soviet Union emerged from the Second World War as the new global superpowers, and the independence movements in longstanding colonies, particularly Britain, France and Portugal, gradually succeeded. The British Empire finally ended in 1997 when it seceded control of Hong Kong to China, after more than 150 years in charge. Today, the United Kingdom consists of four constituent countries, and it is responsible for three crown dependencies and fourteen overseas territories, although the legacy of the British Empire can still be seen, and it's impact will be felt for centuries to come.

U.S. Geological Survey scientists, funded by the Climate and Land Use Change Research and Development Program, developed a dataset of 2006 and 2011 land use and land cover (LULC) information for selected 100-km2 sample blocks within 29 EPA Level 3 ecoregions across the conterminous United States. The data was collected for validation of new and existing national scale LULC datasets developed from remotely sensed data sources. The data can also be used with the previously published Land Cover Trends Dataset: 1973-2000 (http:// http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/844/), to assess land-use/land-cover change in selected ecoregions over a 37-year study period. LULC data for 2006 and 2011 was manually delineated using the same sample block classification procedures as the previous Land Cover Trends project. The methodology is based on a statistical sampling approach, manual classification of land use and land cover, and post-classification comparisons of land cover across different dates. Landsat Thematic Mapper, and Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus imagery was interpreted using a modified Anderson Level I classification scheme. Landsat data was acquired from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) collection of images. For the 2006 and 2011 update, ecoregion specific alterations in the sampling density were made to expedite the completion of manual block interpretations. The data collection process started with the 2000 date from the previous assessment and any needed corrections were made before interpreting the next two dates of 2006 and 2011 imagery. The 2000 land cover was copied and any changes seen in the 2006 Landsat images were digitized into a new 2006 land cover image. Similarly, the 2011 land cover image was created after completing the 2006 delineation. Results from analysis of these data include ecoregion based statistical estimates of the amount of LULC change per time period, ranking of the most common types of conversions, rates of change, and percent composition. Overall estimated amount of change per ecoregion from 2001 to 2011 ranged from a low of 370 km2 in the Northern Basin and Range Ecoregion to a high of 78,782 km2 in the Southeastern Plains Ecoregion. The Southeastern Plains Ecoregion continues to encompass the most intense forest harvesting and regrowth in the country. Forest harvesting and regrowth rates in the southeastern U.S. and Pacific Northwest continued at late 20th century levels. The land use and land cover data collected by this study is ideally suited for training, validation, and regional assessments of land use and land cover change in the U.S. because it is collected using manual interpretation techniques of Landsat data aided by high resolution photography. The 2001-2011 Land Cover Trends Dataset is provided in an Albers Conical Equal Area projection using the NAD 1983 datum. The sample blocks have a 30-meter resolution and file names follow a specific naming convention that includes the number of the ecoregion containing the block, the block number, and the Landsat image date. The data files are organized by ecoregion, and are available in the ERDAS Imagine (.img) format. U.S. Geological Survey scientists, funded by the Climate and Land Use Change Research and Development Program, developed a dataset of 2006 and 2011 land use and land cover (LULC) information for selected 100-km2 sample blocks within 29 EPA Level 3 ecoregions across the conterminous United States. The data was collected for validation of new and existing national scale LULC datasets developed from remotely sensed data sources. The data can also be used with the previously published Land Cover Trends Dataset: 1973-2000 (http:// http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/844/), to assess land-use/land-cover change in selected ecoregions over a 37-year study period. LULC data for 2006 and 2011 was manually delineated using the same sample block classification procedures as the previous Land Cover Trends project. The methodology is based on a statistical sampling approach, manual classification of land use and land cover, and post-classification comparisons of land cover across different dates. Landsat Thematic Mapper, and Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus imagery was interpreted using a modified Anderson Level I classification scheme. Landsat data was acquired from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) collection of images. For the 2006 and 2011 update, ecoregion specific alterations in the sampling density were made to expedite the completion of manual block interpretations. The data collection process started with the 2000 date from the previous assessment and any needed corrections were made before interpreting the next two dates of 2006 and 2011 imagery. The 2000 land cover was copied and any changes seen in the 2006 Landsat images were digitized into a new 2006 land cover image. Similarly, the 2011 land cover image was created after completing the 2006 delineation. Results from analysis of these data include ecoregion based statistical estimates of the amount of LULC change per time period, ranking of the most common types of conversions, rates of change, and percent composition. Overall estimated amount of change per ecoregion from 2001 to 2011 ranged from a low of 370 square km in the Northern Basin and Range Ecoregion to a high of 78,782 square km in the Southeastern Plains Ecoregion. The Southeastern Plains Ecoregion continues to encompass the most intense forest harvesting and regrowth in the country. Forest harvesting and regrowth rates in the southeastern U.S. and Pacific Northwest continued at late 20th century levels. The land use and land cover data collected by this study is ideally suited for training, validation, and regional assessments of land use and land cover change in the U.S. because it’s collected using manual interpretation techniques of Landsat data aided by high resolution photography. The 2001-2011 Land Cover Trends Dataset is provided in an Albers Conical Equal Area projection using the NAD 1983 datum. The sample blocks have a 30-meter resolution and file names follow a specific naming convention that includes the number of the ecoregion containing the block, the block number, and the Landsat image date. The data files are organized by ecoregion, and are available in the ERDAS Imagine (.img) format.

Before the Second World War, the Soviet Union was the largest individual world power in terms of territory, at over 21 million square kilometers. When the territories of the United Kingdom it's colonies and dominions are combined, then the expanse of the British Empire totaled at almost 35 million square kilometers, making it larger than the USSR. The Axis Powers, led by Germany, Italy, and Japan, controlled a much smaller share of the globe than the Allied Powers in 1938 - however, the majority of Europe was under Axis control by 1941, while Japan had taken much of the Western territory in Asia and pushed further into China by this time.

As of March 2025, there were a reported 5,426 data centers in the United States, the most of any country worldwide. A further 529 were located in Germany, while 523 were located in the United Kingdom. What is a data center? A data center is a network of computing and storage resources that enables the delivery of shared software applications and data. These facilities can house large amounts of critical and important data, and therefore are vital to the daily functions of companies and consumers alike. As a result, whether it is a cloud, colocation, or managed service, data center real estate will have increasing importance worldwide. Hyperscale data centers In the past, data centers were highly controlled physical infrastructures, but the cloud has since changed that model. A cloud data service is a remote version of a data center – located somewhere away from a company's physical premises. Cloud IT infrastructure spending has grown and is forecast to rise further in the coming years. The evolution of technology, along with the rapid growth in demand for data across the globe, is largely driven by the leading hyperscale data center providers.

Some say climate change is the biggest threat of our age while others say it’s a myth based on dodgy science. We are turning some of the data over to you so you can form your own view.

Even more than with other data sets that Kaggle has featured, there’s a huge amount of data cleaning and preparation that goes into putting together a long-time study of climate trends. Early data was collected by technicians using mercury thermometers, where any variation in the visit time impacted measurements. In the 1940s, the construction of airports caused many weather stations to be moved. In the 1980s, there was a move to electronic thermometers that are said to have a cooling bias.

Given this complexity, there are a range of organizations that collate climate trends data. The three most cited land and ocean temperature data sets are NOAA’s MLOST, NASA’s GISTEMP and the UK’s HadCrut.

We have repackaged the data from a newer compilation put together by the Berkeley Earth, which is affiliated with Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Study combines 1.6 billion temperature reports from 16 pre-existing archives. It is nicely packaged and allows for slicing into interesting subsets (for example by country). They publish the source data and the code for the transformations they applied. They also use methods that allow weather observations from shorter time series to be included, meaning fewer observations need to be thrown away.

In this dataset, we have include several files:

Global Land and Ocean-and-Land Temperatures (GlobalTemperatures.csv):

• Date: starts in 1750 for average land temperature and 1850 for max and min land temperatures and global ocean and land temperatures
• LandAverageTemperature: global average land temperature in celsius
• LandAverageTemperatureUncertainty: the 95% confidence interval around the average
• LandMaxTemperature: global average maximum land temperature in celsius
• LandMaxTemperatureUncertainty: the 95% confidence interval around the maximum land temperature
• LandMinTemperature: global average minimum land temperature in celsius
• LandMinTemperatureUncertainty: the 95% confidence interval around the minimum land temperature
• LandAndOceanAverageTemperature: global average land and ocean temperature in celsius
• LandAndOceanAverageTemperatureUncertainty: the 95% confidence interval around the global average land and ocean temperature

Other files include:

• Global Average Land Temperature by Country (GlobalLandTemperaturesByCountry.csv)
• Global Average Land Temperature by State (GlobalLandTemperaturesByState.csv)
• Global Land Temperatures By Major City (GlobalLandTemperaturesByMajorCity.csv)
• Global Land Temperatures By City (GlobalLandTemperaturesByCity.csv)

The raw data comes from the Berkeley Earth data page.

The Gridded Population of the World, Version 4 (GPWv4): National Identifier Grid, Revision 11 is a raster representation of nation-states in GPWv4 for use in aggregating population data. This data set was produced from the input census Units which were used to create a raster surface where pixels that cover the same census data source (most often a country or territory) have the same value. Note that these data are not official representations of country boundaries; rather, they represent the area covered by the input data. In cases where multiple countries overlapped a given pixel (e.g. on national borders), the pixels were assigned the country code of the input data set which made up the majority of the land area. The data file was produced as a global raster at 30 arc-second (~1 km at the equator) resolution. To enable faster global processing, and in support of research commUnities, the 30 arc-second data were aggregated to 2.5 arc-minute, 15 arc-minute, 30 arc-minute and 1 degree resolutions. Each level of aggregation results in the loss of one or more countries with areas smaller than the cell size of the final raster. Rasters of all resolutions were also converted to polygon shapefiles.

The average for 2021 based on 192 countries was 14.4 percent. The highest value was in Bangladesh: 60.5 percent and the lowest value was in Djibouti: 0.1 percent. The indicator is available from 1961 to 2022. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

This map service provides dynamic access to data from the Corine Land Cover 2006 inventory. Data are available as 100 meter pixel raster images at small scales up to 1:800.000 and at higher scales as vectors. CORINE Land Cover (CLC) is a geographic land cover/land use database encompassing most of the countries of Europe. In 1985 the Corine programme was initiated in the European Union. Corine means 'coordination of information on the environment' and it was a prototype project working on many different environmental issues. The Corine databases and several of its programme have been taken over by the EEA. One of these is an inventory of land cover in 44 classes organised hierarchically in three levels, and presented as a cartographic product, at a scale of 1:100 000. The first level (5 classes) corresponds to the main categories of the land cover/land use (artificial areas, agricultural land, forests and semi-natural areas, wetlands, water surfaces). The second level (15 classes) covers physical and physiognomic entities at a higher level of detail (urban zones, forests, lakes, etc), finally level 3 is composed of 44 classes. CLC was elaborated based on the visual interpretation of satellite images (SPOT, LANDSAT TM and MSS). Ancillary data (aerial photographs, topographic or vegetation maps, statistics, local knowledge) were used to refine interpretation and the assignment of the territory into the categories of the CORINE Land Cover nomenclature. The smallest surfaces mapped (minimum mapping units) correspond to 25 hectares. Linear features less than 100 m in width are not considered. The scale of the output product was fixed at 1:100.000. Thus, the location precision of the CLC database is 100 m. This database is operationally available for most areas of Europe. Original inventories, based on and interpreted from satellite imagery as well as ancillary information sources, are stored within national institutions. One of the major tasks undertaken in the framework of the Corine programme has been the establishment of a computerised inventory on the land cover. Data on land cover is necessary for the environment policy as well as for other policies such as regional development and agriculture. At the same time it provides one of the basic inputs for the production of more complex information on other themes (soil erosion, pollutant emission into the air by the vegetation, etc.). The objectives of the land cover project are: - to provide those responsible for and interested in the European policy on the environment with quantitative data on land cover, consistent and comparable across Europe. Geographic coverage: Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Kosovo under UNSCR 1244/99, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia the former Yugoslavian Republic of, Malta, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom Corine Land Cover 2006 seamless vector data - version 16 (04/2012) can be accessed here: http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/clc-2006-vector-data-version-2

The Gridded Population of the World, Version 4 (GPWv4): National Identifier Grid, Revision 11 is a raster representation of nation-states in GPWv4 for use in aggregating population data. This data set was produced from the input census Units which were used to create a raster surface where pixels that cover the same census data source (most often a country or territory) have the same value. Note that these data are not official representations of country boundaries; rather, they represent the area covered by the input data. In cases where multiple countries overlapped a given pixel (e.g. on national borders), the pixels were assigned the country code of the input data set which made up the majority of the land area. The data file was produced as a global raster at 30 arc-second (~1 km at the equator) resolution. To enable faster global processing, and in support of research commUnities, the 30 arc-second data were aggregated to 2.5 arc-minute, 15 arc-minute, 30 arc-minute and 1 degree resolutions. Each level of aggregation results in the loss of one or more countries with areas smaller than the cell size of the final raster. Rasters of all resolutions were also converted to polygon shapefiles.

Total factor productivity (TFP) is the ratio of total output (crop and livestock products) to total production inputs (land, labor, capital and materials). An increase in TFP implies that more output is being produced from a constant amount of resources used in the production process. In the long run, TFP is the main driver of growth in agriculture and can be affected by policies and investment. Partial factor productivity (PFP) measures, such as labor and land productivity, are often used to measure agricultural prodcution performance because they are easy to estimate. These measures of productivity normally show higher rates of growth than TFP because growth in land and labor productivity could result from more intensive use of inputs, including fertilizer and machinery, rather than TFP increase. If productivity increases without the addition of more inputs, then the only source of growth is TFP. The data file provides estimates of IFPRI's TFP and PFP measures for developing countries for three-sub-periods between 1990 and 2011(1991-2000,2001-2007 and 2008-2013). These TFP and PFP estimates were generated using data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) on outputs and inputs. The output values are the FAO-constructed gross agricultural outputs, measured in constant 2004-2006 US dollars and smoothed using the Hodrick-Prescott filter. Each output v alue is a composite of 190 crop and livestock commodities aggregated using a constant set of global average prices from 2004-2006. Inputs include agricultural land, measured by the sum, in hectares, of cropland and permanent pasture; labor, measured by the number of animals in cattle equivalents; machinery, measured by the total amount of horsepower available from four-wheel tractors, pedestrian-operated tractors, and combine-threshers in use; and fertilizer, measured by tons of fertilizer nutrients used. The dataset of outputs and inputs was checked and cleaned using different statistical techniques. TFP estimates were obtained using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) techniques. These techniques have been extensively used because they make TFPs easy to compute, do not involve restrictive assumptions regarding economic behavior, such as cost minimization or profit maximization. On the other hand, DEA productivity estimates are sensitive to data noise and outliers and can suffer from the probel of ""unusual"" weights that are higher or lower than expected when aggregating inputs to meas ure TFP. Given these limitations, outlier detection methods were used to determine influential observations in the dataset and input weights were allowed to vary only within a certain range of expected values because specific lower and upper bounds were imposed for each input in different regions. Results are also afected by data characteristics and quality issues. In particular, the data series on fertilizer and machinery show high volatility and could result in high variablity of TFP estimates for some countries.

Description

This comprehensive dataset provides a wealth of information about all countries worldwide, covering a wide range of indicators and attributes. It encompasses demographic statistics, economic indicators, environmental factors, healthcare metrics, education statistics, and much more. With every country represented, this dataset offers a complete global perspective on various aspects of nations, enabling in-depth analyses and cross-country comparisons.

Key Features

Country: Name of the country.

Density (P/Km2): Population density measured in persons per square kilometer.

Abbreviation: Abbreviation or code representing the country.

Agricultural Land (%): Percentage of land area used for agricultural purposes.

Land Area (Km2): Total land area of the country in square kilometers.

Armed Forces Size: Size of the armed forces in the country.

Birth Rate: Number of births per 1,000 population per year.

Calling Code: International calling code for the country.

Capital/Major City: Name of the capital or major city.

CO2 Emissions: Carbon dioxide emissions in tons.

CPI: Consumer Price Index, a measure of inflation and purchasing power.

CPI Change (%): Percentage change in the Consumer Price Index compared to the previous year.

Currency_Code: Currency code used in the country.

Fertility Rate: Average number of children born to a woman during her lifetime.

Forested Area (%): Percentage of land area covered by forests.

Gasoline_Price: Price of gasoline per liter in local currency.

GDP: Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services produced in the country.

Gross Primary Education Enrollment (%): Gross enrollment ratio for primary education.

Gross Tertiary Education Enrollment (%): Gross enrollment ratio for tertiary education.

Infant Mortality: Number of deaths per 1,000 live births before reaching one year of age.

Largest City: Name of the country's largest city.

Life Expectancy: Average number of years a newborn is expected to live.

Maternal Mortality Ratio: Number of maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.

Minimum Wage: Minimum wage level in local currency.

Official Language: Official language(s) spoken in the country.

Out of Pocket Health Expenditure (%): Percentage of total health expenditure paid out-of-pocket by individuals.

Physicians per Thousand: Number of physicians per thousand people.

Population: Total population of the country.

Population: Labor Force Participation (%): Percentage of the population that is part of the labor force.

Tax Revenue (%): Tax revenue as a percentage of GDP.

Total Tax Rate: Overall tax burden as a percentage of commercial profits.

Unemployment Rate: Percentage of the labor force that is unemployed.

Urban Population: Percentage of the population living in urban areas.

Latitude: Latitude coordinate of the country's location.

Longitude: Longitude coordinate of the country's location.

Potential Use Cases

Analyze population density and land area to study spatial distribution patterns.

Investigate the relationship between agricultural land and food security.

Examine carbon dioxide emissions and their impact on climate change.

Explore correlations between economic indicators such as GDP and various socio-economic factors.

Investigate educational enrollment rates and their implications for human capital development.

Analyze healthcare metrics such as infant mortality and life expectancy to assess overall well-being.

Study labor market dynamics through indicators such as labor force participation and unemployment rates.

Investigate the role of taxation and its impact on economic development.

Explore urbanization trends and their social and environmental consequences.

• The current US Census Bureau world population estimate in June 2019 shows that the current global population is 7,577,130,400 people on Earth, which far exceeds the world population of 7.2 billion in 2015. Our estimate based on UN data shows the world's population surpassing 7.7 billion.
• China is the most populous country in the world with a population exceeding 1.4 billion. It is one of just two countries with a population of more than 1 billion, with India being the second. As of 2018, India has a population of over 1.355 billion people, and its population growth is expected to continue through at least 2050. By the year 2030, India is expected to become the most populous country in the world. This is because India’s population will grow, while China is projected to see a loss in population.
• The following 11 countries that are the most populous in the world each have populations exceeding 100 million. These include the United States, Indonesia, Brazil, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Russia, Mexico, Japan, Ethiopia, and the Philippines. Of these nations, all are expected to continue to grow except Russia and Japan, which will see their populations drop by 2030 before falling again significantly by 2050.
• Many other nations have populations of at least one million, while there are also countries that have just thousands. The smallest population in the world can be found in Vatican City, where only 801 people reside.
• In 2018, the world’s population growth rate was 1.12%. Every five years since the 1970s, the population growth rate has continued to fall. The world’s population is expected to continue to grow larger but at a much slower pace. By 2030, the population will exceed 8 billion. In 2040, this number will grow to more than 9 billion. In 2055, the number will rise to over 10 billion, and another billion people won’t be added until near the end of the century. The current annual population growth estimates from the United Nations are in the millions - estimating that over 80 million new lives are added yearly.
• This population growth will be significantly impacted by nine specific countries which are situated to contribute to the population growth more quickly than other nations. These nations include the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Uganda, the United Republic of Tanzania, and the United States of America. Particularly of interest, India is on track to overtake China's position as the most populous country by 2030. Additionally, multiple nations within Africa are expected to double their populations before fertility rates begin to slow entirely.

Content

• In this Dataset, we have Historical Population data for every Country/Territory in the world by different parameters like Area Size of the Country/Territory, Name of the Continent, Name of the Capital, Density, Population Growth Rate, Ranking based on Population, World Population Percentage, etc. >Dataset Glossary (Column-Wise):
• Rank: Rank by Population.
• CCA3: 3 Digit Country/Territories Code.
• Country/Territories: Name of the Country/Territories.
• Capital: Name of the Capital.
• Continent: Name of the Continent.
• 2022 Population: Population of the Country/Territories in the year 2022.
• 2020 Population: Population of the Country/Territories in the year 2020.
• 2015 Population: Population of the Country/Territories in the year 2015.
• 2010 Population: Population of the Country/Territories in the year 2010.
• 2000 Population: Population of the Country/Territories in the year 2000.
• 1990 Population: Population of the Country/Territories in the year 1990.
• 1980 Population: Population of the Country/Territories in the year 1980.
• 1970 Population: Population of the Country/Territories in the year 1970.
• Area (km²): Area size of the Country/Territories in square kilometers.
• Density (per km²): Population Density per square kilometer.
• Growth Rate: Population Growth Rate by Country/Territories.
• World Population Percentage: The population percentage by each Country/Territories.

Description

The Correlates of War project hosts a variety of datasets related to the study of inter-state conflict.

Details

As of 2007-09-22 the following datasets were listed:

State System Membership (v2004.1): This data set records the fluctuating composition of the state system since 1816. It also identifies countries corresponding to the standard Correlates of War country codes. Access the system membership data here.

Inter-, Extra- and Intra-State War (v3.0): War takes many forms in the contemporary era, including serious military conflicts between states (inter-state war), between states and non-state actors (extra-state war), and within states (intra-state war). This data set records such events over the 1816-1997 period. Access the Interstate War data here. Access the Extrastate War data here. Access the Intrastate War data here.

Militarized Interstate Disputes (v3.02): This data set records all instances of when one state threatened, displayed, or used force against another. Version 3.0 covers the 1816-2001 period, and can be downloaded from this page.

National Material Capabilities (v3.02): Power is considered by many to be a central concept in explaining conflict, and six indicators—military expenditure, military personnel, energy consumption, iron and steel production, urban population, and total population—are included in this data set. It serves as the basis for the most widely used indicator of national capability, CINC (Composite Indicator of National Capability) and covers the period 1816-2001. Access the capabilities data here.

Formal Alliances (v3.03): Alliances have been credited with preventing wars and provoking wars, and they have been important instruments of statecraft for centuries. This data set records all formal alliances among states between 1816 and 2000, including mutual defense pacts, non-aggression treaties, and ententes. This data set is hosted by Douglas Gibler, University of Kentucky. It may be downloaded here.

Territorial Change (v3.0): Territory has played an important role in interstate conflict, and this data set records all peaceful and violent changes of territory from 1816-2000. This data set is hosted by Paul Diehl, University of Illinois. Access the territorial change data here.

Direct Contiguity (v3.0): Geographic factors are known to play an important role in conflict. The Direct Contiguity data set registers the land and sea borders of all states since the Congress of Vienna, and covers 1816-2000. This data set is hosted by Paul Diehl, University of Illinois. Access the direct contiguity data here.

Colonial/Dependency Contiguity (v3.0): The Colonial/Dependency Contiguity data set registers contiguity relationships between the colonies/dependencies of states (by land and by sea up to 400 miles) from 1816-2002. Access the colonial/dependency contiguity data here.

Intergovernmental Organizations (v2.1): Although the number of intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) grew dramatically during the late 20th century, they have been part of the world scene for much longer. This data set tracks the status and membership of such organizations from 1815-2000. Access information about this data here. This data set is hosted by Timothy Nordstrom, University of Mississippi, and John Pevehouse, University of Wisconsin.

Diplomatic Exchange (v2006.1): The Diplomatic Exchange data set tracks diplomatic representation at the level of chargé d'affaires, minister, and ambassador between states from 1817-2005. Access information about this data here. This data set is hosted by Reşat Bayer, Koç University.

Bilateral Trade: Trade is considered by many to have a pacifying effect on the relations of states. This collection of bilateral trade data begins in 1870 and covers most members of the interstate system. Access trade data here.

Openness: Open (?)

• Access: all datasets available for direct download in convenient formats (e.g. zipped csv)
• License: no license specified but does state on the datasets page: "The data sets listed on this page are all available for download." Some datasets require citation as a condition of use (with the exact form stated on the website).

Over the course of the Second World War approximately 127.2 million people were mobilized. The world's population in 1940 was roughly 2.3 billion, meaning that between five and six percent of the world was drafted into the military in some capacity. Approximately one in every 25 people mobilized were women, who generally served in an administrative or medical role, although hundreds of thousands of women did see active combat. Largest armies In absolute numbers, the Soviet Union mobilized the largest number of people at just under 34.5 million, and this included roughly 35 percent of the USSR's male population. By the war's end, more Soviets were mobilized than all European Axis powers combined. However, in relative terms, it was Germany who mobilized the largest share of its male population, with approximately 42 percent of men serving. The USSR was forced to find a balance between reinforcing its frontlines and maintaining agricultural and military production to supply its army (in addition to those in annexed territory after 1941), whereas a large share of soldiers taken from the German workforce were replaced by workers drafted or forcibly taken from other countries (including concentration camp prisoners and PoWs). Studying the figures The figures given in these statistics are a very simplified and rounded overview - in reality, there were many nuances in the number of people who were effectively mobilized for each country, their roles, and their status as auxiliary, collaborative, or resistance forces. The British Empire is the only power where distinctions are made between the metropole and its colonies or territories, whereas breakdowns of those who fought in other parts of Asia or Africa remains unclear. Additionally, when comparing this data with total fatalities, it is important to account for the civilian death toll, i.e. those who were not mobilized.

In 1880, European territories in Africa were largely concentrated along the coast, and the vast majority of the continent was officially independent from foreign control. By 1914, however, only the regions of Abyssinia (present-day Ethiopia) and Liberia (under the unofficial protection of the U.S.) had not been claimed by a European power. In what became known as the "Scramble for Africa" in the 1880s, the new nations of Germany and Italy sought to establish overseas empires and compete with other European powers; a number of whom had lost the majority of their colonies in the Americas, or run out of room to expand in the Asia-Pacific, and were also keen on African colonization. New possibilities and opportunities Inward expansion in the continent was facilitated by improvements in transport technology (particularly the use of steamships) and the development of anti-malarial medicines. This led to the discovery and exploitation of Africa's vast, untapped natural resources, as well as the establishment of militant trading companies who enforced these activities. Through a series of bilateral treaties and the Conference of Berlin 1884-5, European powers largely agreed upon defined boundaries between their respective territories; this allowed them to focus on securing their commercial aspirations and the suppression of native populations, without the same level of European competition they faced when colonizing the Americas. Britain and France ultimately controlled the largest territories; Britain's goal was to control one continuous territory that stretched the length of the continent, from Egypt to South Africa (which they eventually achieved following the First World War), while France's aim was for one continuous territory stretching across Africa, which would give them control of the Nile, Niger and Saharan trade routes. The newly constructed Suez Canal in Egypt was arguably the most coveted possession, as it greatly reduced the time needed for trade from Asia to reach Europe; it was eventually administered by Britain. Legacy European colonization in Africa is largely remembered for the widespread atrocities inflicted upon the African people, and the exploitation of its resources. The most well-known of these were committed in the Congo Free State (present-day Democratic Republic of the Congo). Belgian King Leopold II privately owned this territory and claimed to be conducting humanitarian work in the region; however, this was a ploy to raise capital for commercial ventures, and a front for the forced labor of the Congolese natives. These forced laborers (many of which were children) were seen as expendable, and were mutilated or murdered for failure to meet quotas; severed hands even became trophies or determined the wage bonuses of European soldiers. Despite condemnation from the international community at the time, there is evidence of their continuation after the Belgian state took control of the region in 1908, and of widespread atrocities committed by all European powers in their respective territories. Additionally, due to European influence, Africa became a major theater in both World Wars; Africans suffered disproportionately in terms of military and civilian losses, while colonial mismanagement also led to famines that killed millions. The lack of accurate census data throughout this period has made it impossible for historians to determine the full extent of the atrocities inflicted upon Africa from the 1880s until independence, although most estimates of the death tolls are several tens of millions, with up to ten million deaths in the Congo Free State alone. Today, even in the post-independence era, Western influence remains a contentious subject on the continent, with some former-French colonies expelling Western businesses and militaries from their countries during recent coups, while the foreign extraction of raw materials from countries such as the DRC come have a destabilizing effect on local populations.

Use this global model layer when performing analysis across continents. This layer displays predictions globally of relative vulnerability to modification by humans by the year 2050. ESA CCI land cover maps from the years 2010 and 2018 were used to create this prediction.Variable mapped: Vulnerability of land cover to anthropogenic change by 2050.Data Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaMosaic Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaExtent: Global Cell Size: 300mSource Type: ThematicVisible Scale: 1:50,000 and smallerSource: Clark UniversityPublication date: April 2021What you can do with this layer?This layer can be used in analysis, to estimate and compare vulnerability to land cover change globally due to expansion of human activity, by 2050. This layer is useful in ecological planning, helping to prioritize areas for conservation. Links to the six Clark University land cover 2050 layers in ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World:There are three scales (country, regional, and global) for the land cover and vulnerability models. They’re all slightly different since the country model can be more fine-tuned to the drivers in that particular area. Regional (continental) and global have more spatially consistent model weights. Which should you use? If you’re analyzing one country or want to make accurate comparisons between proximate countries, use the country level. If mapping larger patterns or vastly separated countries, use the global or regional extent (depending on your area of interest). Land Cover 2050 - GlobalLand Cover 2050 - RegionalLand Cover 2050 - CountryLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 GlobalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 RegionalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 CountryWhat these layers model (and what they don’t model)The model focuses on human-based land cover changes and projects the extent of these changes to the year 2050. It seeks to find where agricultural and urban land cover will cover the planet in that year, and what areas are most vulnerable to change due to the expansion of the human footprint. It does not predict changes to other land cover types such as forests or other natural vegetation during that time period unless it is replaced by agriculture or urban land cover. It also doesn’t predict sea level rise unless the model detected a pattern in changes in bodies of water between 2010 and 2018. A few 300m pixels might have changed due to sea level rise during that timeframe, but not many.The model predicts land cover changes based upon patterns it found in the period 2010-2018. But it cannot predict future land use. This is partly because current land use is not necessarily a model input. In this model, land set aside as a result of political decisions, for example military bases or nature reserves, may be found to be filled in with urban or agricultural areas in 2050. This is because the model is blind to the political decisions that affect land use.Quantitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomassCrop SuitabilityDistance to AirportsDistance to Cropland 2010Distance to Primary RoadsDistance to RailroadsDistance to Secondary RoadsDistance to Settled AreasDistance to Urban 2010ElevationGDPHuman Influence IndexPopulation DensityPrecipitationRegions SlopeTemperatureQualitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomesEcoregionsIrrigated CropsProtected AreasContinentCountryRainfed CropsSoil ClassificationSoil DepthSoil DrainageSoil pHSoil Texture

The Gridded Population of the World, Version 4 (GPWv4): National Identifier Grid, Revision 10 is a raster representation of nation-states in GPWv4 for use in aggregating population data. This data set was produced from the input census units which were used to create a raster surface where pixels that cover the same census data source (most often a country or territory) have the same value. Note that these data are not official representations of country boundaries; rather, they represent the area covered by the input data. In cases where multiple countries overlapped a given pixel (e.g. on national borders), the pixels were assigned the country code of the input data set which made up the majority of the land area. The data file was produced as a global raster at 30 arc-second (~1 km at the equator) resolution. To enable faster global processing, and in support of research communities, the 30 arc-second data were aggregated to 2.5 arc-minute, 15 arc-minute, 30 arc-minute and 1 degree resolutions. Each level of aggregation results in the loss of one or more countries with areas smaller than the cell size of the final raster. Rasters of all resolutions were also converted to polygon shapefiles.