This dataset includes data on 25 transitions of a matrix demographic model of the invasive species Vincetoxicum nigrum (L.) Moench (black swallow-wort or black dog-strangling vine) and Vincetoxicum rossicum (Kleopow) Barb. (pale swallow-wort or dog-strangling vine) (Apocynaceae, subfamily Asclepiadoideae), two invasive perennial vines in the northeastern U.S.A. and southeastern Canada. The matrix model was developed for projecting population growth rates as a result of changes to lower-level vital rates from biological control although the model is generalizable to any control tactic. Transitions occurred among the five life stages of seeds, seedlings, vegetative juveniles (defined as being in at least their second season of growth), small flowering plants (having 1–2 stems), and large flowering plants (having 3 or more stems). Transition values were calculated using deterministic equations and data from 20 lower-level vital rates collected from 2009-2012 from two open field and two forest understory populations of V. rossicum (43°51’N, 76°17’W; 42°48'N, 76°40'W) and two open field populations of V. nigrum (41°46’N, 73°44’W; 41°18’N, 73°58’W) in New York State. Sites varied in plant densities, soil depth, and light levels (forest populations). Detailed descriptions of vital rate data collection may be found in: Milbrath et al. 2017. Northeastern Naturalist 24(1):37-53. Five replicate sets of transition data obtained from five separate spatial regions of a particular infestation were produced for each of the six populations. Note: Added new excel file of vital rate data on 12/7/2018. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Matrix model transition data for Vincetoxicum species. File Name: Matrix_model_transition_data.csvResource Description: This data set includes data on 25 transitions of a matrix demographic model of two invasive Vincetoxicum species from six field and forest populations in New York State.Resource Title: Variable definitions. File Name: Matrix_model_metadata.csvResource Description: Definitions of variables including equations for each transition and definitions of the lower-level vital rates in the equationsResource Title: Vital Rate definitions. File Name: Vital_Rate.csvResource Description: Vital Rate definitions of lower-level vital rates used in transition equations - to be substituted into the Data Dictionary for full definition of each transition equation.Resource Title: Data Dictionary. File Name: Matrix_Model_transition_data_DD.csvResource Description: See Vital Rate resource for definitions of lower-level vital rates used in transition equations where noted.Resource Title: Matrix model vital rate data for Vincetoxicum species. File Name: Matrix_model_vital rate_data.csvResource Description: This data set includes data on 20 lower-level vital rates used in the calculation of transitions of a matrix demographic model of two invasive Vincetoxicum species in New York State as well as definitions of the vital rates. (File added on 12/7/2018)Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://office.microsoft.com/excel/

Welcome to the Retail Sales and Customer Demographics Dataset! This synthetic dataset has been meticulously crafted to simulate a dynamic retail environment, providing an ideal playground for those eager to sharpen their data analysis skills through exploratory data analysis (EDA). With a focus on retail sales and customer characteristics, this dataset invites you to unravel intricate patterns, draw insights, and gain a deeper understanding of customer behavior.

****Dataset Overview:**

This dataset is a snapshot of a fictional retail landscape, capturing essential attributes that drive retail operations and customer interactions. It includes key details such as Transaction ID, Date, Customer ID, Gender, Age, Product Category, Quantity, Price per Unit, and Total Amount. These attributes enable a multifaceted exploration of sales trends, demographic influences, and purchasing behaviors.

Why Explore This Dataset?

• Realistic Representation: Though synthetic, the dataset mirrors real-world retail scenarios, allowing you to practice analysis within a familiar context.
• Diverse Insights: From demographic insights to product preferences, the dataset offers a broad spectrum of factors to investigate.
• Hypothesis Generation: As you perform EDA, you'll have the chance to formulate hypotheses that can guide further analysis and experimentation.
• Applied Learning: Uncover actionable insights that retailers could use to enhance their strategies and customer experiences.

Questions to Explore:

• How does customer age and gender influence their purchasing behavior?
• Are there discernible patterns in sales across different time periods?
• Which product categories hold the highest appeal among customers?
• What are the relationships between age, spending, and product preferences?
• How do customers adapt their shopping habits during seasonal trends?
• Are there distinct purchasing behaviors based on the number of items bought per transaction?
• What insights can be gleaned from the distribution of product prices within each category?

Your EDA Journey:

Prepare to immerse yourself in a world of data-driven exploration. Through data visualization, statistical analysis, and correlation examination, you'll uncover the nuances that define retail operations and customer dynamics. EDA isn't just about numbers—it's about storytelling with data and extracting meaningful insights that can influence strategic decisions.

Embrace the Retail Sales and Customer Demographics Dataset as your canvas for discovery. As you traverse the landscape of this synthetic retail environment, you'll refine your analytical skills, pose intriguing questions, and contribute to the ever-evolving narrative of the retail industry. Happy exploring!

PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY In the United States, voting is largely a private matter. A registered voter is given a randomized ballot form or machine to prevent linkage between their voting choices and their identity. This disconnect supports confidence in the election process, but it provides obstacles to an election's analysis. A common solution is to field exit polls, interviewing voters immediately after leaving their polling location. This method is rife with bias, however, and functionally limited in direct demographics data collected. For the 2020 general election, though, most states published their election results for each voting location. These publications were additionally supported by the geographical areas assigned to each location, the voting precincts. As a result, geographic processing can now be applied to project precinct election results onto Census block groups. While precinct have few demographic traits directly, their geographies have characteristics that make them projectable onto U.S. Census geographies. Both state voting precincts and U.S. Census block groups: are exclusive, and do not overlap are adjacent, fully covering their corresponding state and potentially county have roughly the same size in area, population and voter presence Analytically, a projection of local demographics does not allow conclusions about voters themselves. However, the dataset does allow statements related to the geographies that yield voting behavior. One could say, for example, that an area dominated by a particular voting pattern would have mean traits of age, race, income or household structure. The dataset that results from this programming provides voting results allocated by Census block groups. The block group identifier can be joined to Census Decennial and American Community Survey demographic estimates. DATA SOURCES The state election results and geographies have been compiled by Voting and Election Science team on Harvard's dataverse. State voting precincts lie within state and county boundaries. The Census Bureau, on the other hand, publishes its estimates across a variety of geographic definitions including a hierarchy of states, counties, census tracts and block groups. Their definitions can be found here. The geometric shapefiles for each block group are available here. The lowest level of this geography changes often and can obsolesce before the next census survey (Decennial or American Community Survey programs). The second to lowest census level, block groups, have the benefit of both granularity and stability however. The 2020 Decennial survey details US demographics into 217,740 block groups with between a few hundred and a few thousand people. Dataset Structure The dataset's columns include: Column Definition BLOCKGROUP_GEOID 12 digit primary key. Census GEOID of the block group row. This code concatenates: 2 digit state 3 digit county within state 6 digit Census Tract identifier 1 digit Census Block Group identifier within tract STATE State abbreviation, redundent with 2 digit state FIPS code above REP Votes for Republican party candidate for president DEM Votes for Democratic party candidate for president LIB Votes for Libertarian party candidate for president OTH Votes for presidential candidates other than Republican, Democratic or Libertarian AREA square kilometers of area associated with this block group GAP total area of the block group, net of area attributed to voting precincts PRECINCTS Number of voting precincts that intersect this block group ASSUMPTIONS, NOTES AND CONCERNS: Votes are attributed based upon the proportion of the precinct's area that intersects the corresponding block group. Alternative methods are left to the analyst's initiative. 50 states and the District of Columbia are in scope as those U.S. possessions voting in the general election for the U.S. Presidency. Three states did not report their results at the precinct level: South Dakota, Kentucky and West Virginia. A dummy block group is added for each of these states to maintain national totals. These states represent 2.1% of all votes cast. Counties are commonly coded using FIPS codes. However, each election result file may have the county field named differently. Also, three states do not share county definitions - Delaware, Massachusetts, Alaska and the District of Columbia. Block groups may be used to capture geographies that do not have population like bodies of water. As a result, block groups without intersection voting precincts are not uncommon. In the U.S., elections are administered at a state level with the Federal Elections Commission compiling state totals against the Electoral College weights. The states have liberty, though, to define and change their own voting precincts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_precinct. The Census Bureau... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/sha256%3A05707c1dc04a814129f751937a6ea56b08413546b18b351a85bc96da16a7f8b5 for complete metadata about this dataset.

Per RCW 47.04.010, "population center" includes incorporated cities and towns, including their urban growth areas, and census-designated places in Washington State. The WSDOT Population Center dataset combines the WSDOT Incorporated City Limits dataset (May 2021) with the Office of Financial Management’s Census Designated Places (2020 Census) Dataset. Identification of Population Centers enables WSDOT to address the Complete Streets requirement under RCW 47.04.035 and to otherwise identify locations prioritized in the 2021 WSDOT Active Transportation Plan (ATP). WSDOT may also recognize other developed areas as exhibiting land use patterns consistent with the definition of population center, that are not currently captured by this data layer.This data layer assists WSDOT in prioritizing active transportation improvements in areas where people congregate and access destinations, and where travel distances between destinations align with typical distances travelled by users of pedestrian and bicycle modes. These areas are a priority because they serve the broadest range of users and potential users of the transportation system, including the very young, very old, and people with disabilities. In this dataset, each Population Center includes information for the “Place Name”, the “Place Type” (city/town, Urban Growth Area outside of city limits, or Census Designated Place), and whether or not the Population Center intersects a State Route (“yes” indicates that there is an intersection with a State Route, “no” indicates that there is no intersection.). The dataset will be updated as needed. Please direct questions about the Population Centers dataset to: Grace.Young@wsdot.wa.gov.

PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY In the United States, voting is largely a private matter. A registered voter is given a randomized ballot form or machine to prevent linkage between their voting choices and their identity. This disconnect supports confidence in the election process, but it provides obstacles to an election's analysis. A common solution is to field exit polls, interviewing voters immediately after leaving their polling location. This method is rife with bias, however, and functionally limited in direct demographics data collected. For the 2020 general election, though, most states published their election results for each voting location. These publications were additionally supported by the geographical areas assigned to each location, the voting precincts. As a result, geographic processing can now be applied to project precinct election results onto Census block groups. While precinct have few demographic traits directly, their geographies have characteristics that make them projectable onto U.S. Census geographies. Both state voting precincts and U.S. Census block groups: are exclusive, and do not overlap are adjacent, fully covering their corresponding state and potentially county have roughly the same size in area, population and voter presence Analytically, a projection of local demographics does not allow conclusions about voters themselves. However, the dataset does allow statements related to the geographies that yield voting behavior. One could say, for example, that an area dominated by a particular voting pattern would have mean traits of age, race, income or household structure. The dataset that results from this programming provides voting results allocated by Census block groups. The block group identifier can be joined to Census Decennial and American Community Survey demographic estimates. DATA SOURCES The state election results and geographies have been compiled by Voting and Election Science team on Harvard's dataverse. State voting precincts lie within state and county boundaries. The Census Bureau, on the other hand, publishes its estimates across a variety of geographic definitions including a hierarchy of states, counties, census tracts and block groups. Their definitions can be found here. The geometric shapefiles for each block group are available here. The lowest level of this geography changes often and can obsolesce before the next census survey (Decennial or American Community Survey programs). The second to lowest census level, block groups, have the benefit of both granularity and stability however. The 2020 Decennial survey details US demographics into 217,740 block groups with between a few hundred and a few thousand people. Dataset Structure The dataset's columns include: Column Definition BLOCKGROUP_GEOID 12 digit primary key. Census GEOID of the block group row. This code concatenates: 2 digit state 3 digit county within state 6 digit Census Tract identifier 1 digit Census Block Group identifier within tract STATE State abbreviation, redundent with 2 digit state FIPS code above REP Votes for Republican party candidate for president DEM Votes for Democratic party candidate for president LIB Votes for Libertarian party candidate for president OTH Votes for presidential candidates other than Republican, Democratic or Libertarian AREA square kilometers of area associated with this block group GAP total area of the block group, net of area attributed to voting precincts PRECINCTS Number of voting precincts that intersect this block group ASSUMPTIONS, NOTES AND CONCERNS: Votes are attributed based upon the proportion of the precinct's area that intersects the corresponding block group. Alternative methods are left to the analyst's initiative. 50 states and the District of Columbia are in scope as those U.S. possessions voting in the general election for the U.S. Presidency. Three states did not report their results at the precinct level: South Dakota, Kentucky and West Virginia. A dummy block group is added for each of these states to maintain national totals. These states represent 2.1% of all votes cast. Counties are commonly coded using FIPS codes. However, each election result file may have the county field named differently. Also, three states do not share county definitions - Delaware, Massachusetts, Alaska and the District of Columbia. Block groups may be used to capture geographies that do not have population like bodies of water. As a result, block groups without intersection voting precincts are not uncommon. In the U.S., elections are administered at a state level with the Federal Elections Commission compiling state totals against the Electoral College weights. The states have liberty, though, to define and change their own voting precincts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_precinct. The Census Bureau practices "data suppression", filtering some block groups from demographic publication because they do not meet a population threshold. This practice...

Dataset contains counts for territorial authority local board area (TALB) of usual residence by TALB of usual residence address one year ago and five years ago, and by life cycle age group, for the census usually resident population count, 2023 Census.

​

This dataset compares usual residence at the 2023 Census with usual residence one and five years earlier to show population mobility and internal migration patterns of people within New Zealand.

‘Usual residence address’ is the address of the dwelling where a person considers that they usually live.

‘Usual residence one year ago address’ identifies an individual’s usual residence on 7 March 2022, which may be different to their current usual residence on census night 2023 (7 March 2023).

‘Usual residence five years ago address’ identifies an individual’s usual residence on 6 March 2018, which may be different to their current usual residence on census night 2023 (7 March 2023).

Note: This dataset only includes usual residence address information for individuals whose usual residence address one year ago and five years ago is available at TALB.

​

Life cycle age groups are categorised as:

• under 15 years
• 15–29 years
• 30–64 years
• 65 years and over.

​

This dataset can be used in conjunction with the following spatial files by joining on the TALB code values:

• Territorial authority local board (generalised)

​

Footnotes

Geographical boundaries

Statistical standard for geographic areas 2023 (updated December 2023) has information about geographic boundaries as of 1 January 2023. Address data from 2013 and 2018 Censuses was updated to be consistent with the 2023 areas. Due to the changes in area boundaries and coding methodologies, 2013 and 2018 counts published in 2023 may be slightly different to those published in 2013 or 2018.

​

Subnational census usually resident population

The census usually resident population count of an area (subnational count) is a count of all people who usually live in that area and were present in New Zealand on census night. It excludes visitors from overseas, visitors from elsewhere in New Zealand, and residents temporarily overseas on census night. For example, a person who usually lives in Christchurch city and is visiting Wellington city on census night will be included in the census usually resident population count of Christchurch city. 

​

Population counts

Stats NZ publishes a number of different population counts, each using a different definition and methodology. Population statistics – user guide has more information about different counts. 

​

Rows excluded from the dataset

Rows show TALB of usual residence by TALB of usual residence one year ago and five years ago, by life cycle age group. Cells with a number less than six have been confidentialised. Responses to categories unable to be mapped, such as response unidentifiable, not stated, and Auckland (not further defined), have also been excluded from this dataset.

​

About the 2023 Census dataset

For information on the 2023 dataset see Using a combined census model for the 2023 Census. We combined data from the census forms with administrative data to create the 2023 Census dataset, which meets Stats NZ's quality criteria for population structure information. We added real data about real people to the dataset where we were confident the people who hadn’t completed a census form (which is known as admin enumeration) will be counted. We also used data from the 2018 and 2013 Censuses, administrative data sources, and statistical imputation methods to fill in some missing characteristics of people and dwellings.

​

Data quality

The quality of data in the 2023 Census is assessed using the quality rating scale and the quality assurance framework to determine whether data is fit for purpose and suitable for release. Data quality assurance in the 2023 Census has more information.

​

Quality rating of a variable

The quality rating of a variable provides an overall evaluation of data quality for that variable, usually at the highest levels of classification. The quality ratings shown are for the 2023 Census unless stated. There is variability in the quality of data at smaller geographies. Data quality may also vary between censuses, for subpopulations, or when cross tabulated with other variables or at lower levels of the classification. Data quality ratings for 2023 Census variables has more information on quality ratings by variable.

​

Age quality rating

Age is rated as very high quality.

Age – 2023 Census: Information by concept has more information, for example, definitions and data quality.

​

Census usually resident population quality rating

The census usually resident population count is rated as very high quality.

Census usually resident population count – 2023 Census: Information by concept has more information, for example, definitions and data quality.

​

Usual residence address quality rating

Usual residence address is rated as high quality.

Usual residence address – 2023 Census: Information by concept has more information, for example, definitions and data quality.

​

Usual residence one year ago quality rating

Usual residence one year ago area is rated as high quality.

Usual residence one year ago – 2023 Census: Information by concept has more information, for example, definitions and data quality.

​

Usual residence five years ago quality rating

Usual residence five years ago area is rated as high quality.

Usual residence five years ago – 2023 Census: Information by concept has more information, for example, definitions and data quality.

​

Using data for good

Stats NZ expects that, when working with census data, it is done so with a positive purpose, as outlined in the Māori Data Governance Model (Data Iwi Leaders Group, 2023). This model states that "data should support transformative outcomes and should uplift and strengthen our relationships with each other and with our environments. The avoidance of harm is the minimum expectation for data use. Māori data should also contribute to iwi and hapū tino rangatiratanga”.

​

Confidentiality

The 2023 Census confidentiality rules have been applied to 2013, 2018, and 2023 data. These rules protect the confidentiality of individuals, families, households, dwellings, and undertakings in 2023 Census data. Counts are calculated using fixed random rounding to base 3 (FRR3) and suppression of ‘sensitive’ counts less than six, where tables report multiple geographic variables and/or small populations. Individual figures may not always sum to stated totals. Applying confidentiality rules to 2023 Census data and summary of changes since 2018 and 2013 Censuses has more information about 2023 Census confidentiality rules.

​

Symbol

-999 Confidential

​

Inconsistencies in definitions

Please note that there may be differences in definitions between census classifications and those used for other data collections.

a CMR1 = capture-mark-recapture model 1, see Table 1.b A linear model fitted to population size estimates from real census counts (1986 to 2013) gave proportional change in population size per year (λ) as -0.03.Definitions of Atlantic Puffin demographic model terms and specified parameter values.

This archive contains the model code and input files for the simulation experiments, as well as their output data, published in: Ayllón, Railsback, Harvey, Nicola, Elvira, Almodóvar. Behavioural plasticity in circadian foraging patterns increases resistance of brown trout populations to environmental change. Individual-based Ecology.The archive consists of:1. Two zip files containing the NetLogo code and all files needed to run the simulations with the Circadian-feeding and Diurnal-Feeding model versions: input files to define the stream reach and perform the hydraulic modelling (two csv files), input files defining the temperature and flow time series for each of the four environmental scenarios simulated (four csv files), one input file defining the simulated brown trout population at initialization (one csv file), and input files defining parameter values for each model version and environmental scenario (four nls files).2. Two RData files containing the demographic and behavioural outputs of each simulation experiment performed with the Circadian-feeding model version, in data frame format. Output values are the average of the six replicates.3. One RData file containing the normalized demographic outputs of each simulation experiment performed with the Circadian-feeding and Diurnal-Feeding model versions, in data frame format. Normalized output values are the average of the six replicates. Normalized demographic outputs are expressed as the ratio between the tested and the baseline scenario (mean value of tested scenario/mean value of baseline scenario).

Processed LiDAR data and environmental covariates from 2015 and 2019 LiDAR scans in the Vicinity of Snodgrass Mountain (Western Colorado, USA), in a geographic subset used in primary analysis for the research paper.This package contains LiDAR-derived canopy height maps for 2015 and 2019, crown polygons derived from the height maps using a segmentation algorithm, and environmental covariates supporting the model of forest growth. Source datasets include August 2015 and August 2019 discrete-return LiDAR point clouds collected by Quantum Geospatial for terrain mapping purposes on behalf of the Colorado Hazard Mapping Program and the Colorado Water Conservation Board. Both datasets adhere to the USGS QL2 quality standard. The point cloud data were processed using the R package lidR to generate a canopy height model representing maximum vegetation height above the ground surface, using a pit-free algorithm.This dataset was compiled to assess how spatial patterns of tree growth in montane and subalpine forests are influenced by water and energy availability. Understanding these growth patterns can provide insight into forest dynamics in the Southern Rocky Mountains under changing climatic conditions.This dataset contains .tif, .csv, and .txt files. This dataset additionally includes a file-level metadata (flmd.csv) file that lists each file contained in the dataset with associated metadata; and a data dictionary (dd.csv) file that contains column/row headers used throughout the files along with a definition, units, and data type.

High-throughput sequencing and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping can be used to infer complex population structures. Fine-scale population structure analysis tracing individual ancestry remains one of the major challenges. Based on network theory and recent advances in SNP chip technology, we investigated an unsupervised network clustering method called Super Paramagnetic Clustering (Spc). When applied to whole-genome marker data it identifies the natural divisions of groups of individuals into population clusters without use of prior ancestry information. Furthermore, we optimised an analysis pipeline called NetView, a high-definition network visualization, starting with computation of genetic distance, followed clustering using Spc and finally visualization of clusters with Cytoscape. We compared NetView against commonly used methodologies including Principal Component Analyses (PCA) and a model-based algorithm, Admixture, on whole-genome-wide SNP data derived from three previously described data sets: simulated (2.5 million SNPs, 5 populations), human (1.4 million SNPs, 11 populations) and cattle (32,653 SNPs, 19 populations). We demonstrate that individuals can be effectively allocated to their correct population whilst simultaneously revealing fine-scale structure within the populations. Analyzing the human HapMap populations, we identified unexpected genetic relatedness among individuals, and population stratification within the Indian, African and Mexican samples. In the cattle data set, we correctly assigned all individuals to their respective breeds and detected fine-scale population sub-structures reflecting different sample origins and phenotypes. The NetView pipeline is computationally extremely efficient and can be easily applied on large-scale genome-wide data sets to assign individuals to particular populations and to reproduce fine-scale population structures without prior knowledge of individual ancestry. NetView can be used on any data from which a genetic relationship/distance between individuals can be calculated.

This is the data dictionary related to the datasets located in the same collection (https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.7901285). This dataset was used in a Global Burden of Animal Diseases (GBADs) case study, estimating the burden of diseases in shrimp in Indonesia.This dictionary was adapted for this specific case study from the generic GBAD's data dictionary. The generic dictionary may be found here: https://github.com/GBADsInformatics/DataDictionary.

Mean values for variables groups in landscape and commodities macro levels using deforestation (DEF) and reforestation (REF) datasets.

Cooking methods can change the composition of foods and have important effects on human health. The Chinese people have developed many distinct and unique cooking methods. However, the daily cooking patterns of Chinese people and the characteristics and evolution of trends in cooking patterns commonly used by Chinese consumers remain unclear. The objective of this study was to identify the major cooking patterns and discuss their effects on human health, as well as to identify the cooking pattern consumer clusters and the evolution of trends in Chinese consumer cooking patterns. From March to June 2021, this study interviewed 4,710 residents in Eastern China regarding the consumption frequency of each cooking method when food is prepared at home or when eating out. Exploratory factor analysis, K-Means cluster analysis, Chi-square test, pairwise comparisons of multiple sample rates, and multivariate linear regression were used to identify the cooking patterns and cooking pattern consumer clusters, to assess differences in consumption preferences between consumer clusters, and to examine the relationship between demographic characteristic variables and different cooking patterns. Results revealed three major cooking patterns, namely traditional Chinese (cooking methods with native Chinese characteristics), bland, and high-temperature cooking patterns, as well as seven cooking pattern consumer clusters and their demographic characteristics in the Eastern Chinese population. With increases in age, education level, and income, consumers tended to choose the healthy “Bland” cooking pattern. Further, there was a higher proportion of people aged 36–65 years in the C3 cluster, which is characterized by the “Bland” cooking pattern. However, participants who were male and younger made fewer healthy choices in their cooking patterns. Specifically, a higher proportion of participants aged 21–35 years were found in the C5 cluster, which is characterized by the unhealthy “High-temperature” cooking pattern. Therefore, culinary health education should focus on individuals who are male and young. Specifically, the shift in cooking patterns among people aged 21–35 years should receive special attention.

This map shows electricity access in Asia and the Pacific. The data source is from the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook. The International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook first constructed a database on electrification rates for WEO-2002. The database once again was updated for WEO-2015, showing detailed data on national, urban and rural electrification.

The general paucity of data on electricity access means that it must be gathered through a combination of sources, including: IEA energy statistics; a network of contacts spanning governments, multilateral development banks and country-level representatives of various international organisations; and, other publicly available statistics, such as US Agency for International Development (USAID) supported DHS survey data, the World Bank’s Living Standards Measurement Surveys (LSMS), the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean’s (ECLAC) statistical publications, and data from national statistics agencies. In the small number of cases where no data could be provided through these channels other sources were used. If electricity access data for 2013 was not available, data for the latest available year was used.

For many countries, data on the urban and rural breakdown was collected, but if not available an estimate was made on the basis of pre-existing data or a comparison to the average correlation between urban and national electrification rates. Often only the percentage of households with a connection is known and assumptions about an average household size are used to determine access rates as a percentage of the population. To estimate the number of people without access, population data comes from OECD statistics in conjunction with the United Nations Population Division reports World Urbanization Prospects: the 2014 Revision Population Database, and World Population Prospects: the 2012 Revision. Electricity access data is adjusted to be consistent with demographic patterns of urban and rural population. Due to differences in definitions and methodology from different sources, data quality may vary from country to country. Where country data appeared contradictory, outdated or unreliable, the IEA Secretariat made estimates based on cross-country comparisons and earlier surveys.