The world population surpassed eight billion people in 2022, having doubled from its figure less than 50 years previously. Looking forward, it is projected that the world population will reach nine billion in 2038, and 10 billion in 2060, but it will peak around 10.3 billion in the 2080s before it then goes into decline. Regional variations The global population has seen rapid growth since the early 1800s, due to advances in areas such as food production, healthcare, water safety, education, and infrastructure, however, these changes did not occur at a uniform time or pace across the world. Broadly speaking, the first regions to undergo their demographic transitions were Europe, North America, and Oceania, followed by Latin America and Asia (although Asia's development saw the greatest variation due to its size), while Africa was the last continent to undergo this transformation. Because of these differences, many so-called "advanced" countries are now experiencing population decline, particularly in Europe and East Asia, while the fastest population growth rates are found in Sub-Saharan Africa. In fact, the roughly two billion difference in population between now and the 2080s' peak will be found in Sub-Saharan Africa, which will rise from 1.2 billion to 3.2 billion in this time (although populations in other continents will also fluctuate). Changing projections The United Nations releases their World Population Prospects report every 1-2 years, and this is widely considered the foremost demographic dataset in the world. However, recent years have seen a notable decline in projections when the global population will peak, and at what number. Previous reports in the 2010s had suggested a peak of over 11 billion people, and that population growth would continue into the 2100s, however a sooner and shorter peak is now projected. Reasons for this include a more rapid population decline in East Asia and Europe, particularly China, as well as a prolongued development arc in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset tabulates the United States population distribution across 18 age groups. It lists the population in each age group along with the percentage population relative of the total population for United States. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of United States by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in United States.
Key observations
The largest age group in United States was for the group of age 25-29 years with a population of 22,854,328 (6.93%), according to the 2021 American Community Survey. At the same time, the smallest age group in United States was the 80-84 years with a population of 5,932,196 (1.80%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.
Age groups:
Variables / Data Columns
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for United States Population by Age. You can refer the same here
How much time do people spend on social media? As of 2025, the average daily social media usage of internet users worldwide amounted to 141 minutes per day, down from 143 minutes in the previous year. Currently, the country with the most time spent on social media per day is Brazil, with online users spending an average of 3 hours and 49 minutes on social media each day. In comparison, the daily time spent with social media in the U.S. was just 2 hours and 16 minutes. Global social media usageCurrently, the global social network penetration rate is 62.3 percent. Northern Europe had an 81.7 percent social media penetration rate, topping the ranking of global social media usage by region. Eastern and Middle Africa closed the ranking with 10.1 and 9.6 percent usage reach, respectively. People access social media for a variety of reasons. Users like to find funny or entertaining content and enjoy sharing photos and videos with friends, but mainly use social media to stay in touch with current events friends. Global impact of social mediaSocial media has a wide-reaching and significant impact on not only online activities but also offline behavior and life in general. During a global online user survey in February 2019, a significant share of respondents stated that social media had increased their access to information, ease of communication, and freedom of expression. On the flip side, respondents also felt that social media had worsened their personal privacy, increased a polarization in politics and heightened everyday distractions.
U.S. Government Workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
License information was derived automatically
Note: DPH is updating and streamlining the COVID-19 cases, deaths, and testing data. As of 6/27/2022, the data will be published in four tables instead of twelve.
The COVID-19 Cases, Deaths, and Tests by Day dataset contains cases and test data by date of sample submission. The death data are by date of death. This dataset is updated daily and contains information back to the beginning of the pandemic. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Cases-Deaths-and-Tests-by-Day/g9vi-2ahj.
The COVID-19 State Metrics dataset contains over 93 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 21, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-State-Level-Data/qmgw-5kp6 .
The COVID-19 County Metrics dataset contains 25 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-County-Level-Data/ujiq-dy22 .
The COVID-19 Town Metrics dataset contains 16 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Town-Level-Data/icxw-cada . To protect confidentiality, if a town has fewer than 5 cases or positive NAAT tests over the past 7 days, those data will be suppressed.
This dataset includes a count and rate per 100,000 population for COVID-19 cases, a count of COVID-19 molecular diagnostic tests, and a percent positivity rate for tests among people living in community settings for the previous two-week period. Dates are based on date of specimen collection (cases and positivity).
A person is considered a new case only upon their first COVID-19 testing result because a case is defined as an instance or bout of illness. If they are tested again subsequently and are still positive, it still counts toward the test positivity metric but they are not considered another case.
Percent positivity is calculated as the number of positive tests among community residents conducted during the 14 days divided by the total number of positive and negative tests among community residents during the same period. If someone was tested more than once during that 14 day period, then those multiple test results (regardless of whether they were positive or negative) are included in the calculation.
These case and test counts do not include cases or tests among people residing in congregate settings, such as nursing homes, assisted living facilities, or correctional facilities.
These data are updated weekly and reflect the previous two full Sunday-Saturday (MMWR) weeks (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/document/MMWR_week_overview.pdf).
DPH note about change from 7-day to 14-day metrics: Prior to 10/15/2020, these metrics were calculated using a 7-day average rather than a 14-day average. The 7-day metrics are no longer being updated as of 10/15/2020 but the archived dataset can be accessed here: https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-case-rate-per-100-000-population-and-perc/s22x-83rd
As you know, we are learning more about COVID-19 all the time, including the best ways to measure COVID-19 activity in our communities. CT DPH has decided to shift to 14-day rates because these are more stable, particularly at the town level, as compared to 7-day rates. In addition, since the school indicators were initially published by DPH last summer, CDC has recommended 14-day rates and other states (e.g., Massachusetts) have started to implement 14-day metrics for monitoring COVID transmission as well.
With respect to geography, we also have learned that many people are looking at the town-level data to inform decision making, despite emphasis on the county-level metrics in the published addenda. This is understandable as there has been variation within counties in COVID-19 activity (for example, rates that are higher in one town than in most other towns in the county).
Additional notes: As of 11/5/2020, CT DPH has added antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 to reported test counts in this dataset. The tests included in this dataset include both molecular and antigen datasets. Molecular tests reported include polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and nucleic acid amplicfication (NAAT) tests.
The population data used to calculate rates is based on the CT DPH population statistics for 2019, which is available online here: https://portal.ct.gov/DPH/Health-Information-Systems--Reporting/Population/Population-Statistics. Prior to 5/10/2021, the population estimates from 2018 were used.
Data suppression is applied when the rate is <5 cases per 100,000 or if there are <5 cases within the town. Information on why data suppression rules are applied can be found online here: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/uscs/technical_notes/stat_methods/suppression.htm
https://www.usa.gov/government-workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
Reporting of new Aggregate Case and Death Count data was discontinued May 11, 2023, with the expiration of the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. This dataset will receive a final update on June 1, 2023, to reconcile historical data through May 10, 2023, and will remain publicly available.
Aggregate Data Collection Process Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, data have been gathered through a robust process with the following steps:
Methodology Changes Several differences exist between the current, weekly-updated dataset and the archived version:
Confirmed and Probable Counts In this dataset, counts by jurisdiction are not displayed by confirmed or probable status. Instead, confirmed and probable cases and deaths are included in the Total Cases and Total Deaths columns, when available. Not all jurisdictions report probable cases and deaths to CDC.* Confirmed and probable case definition criteria are described here:
Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (ymaws.com).
Deaths CDC reports death data on other sections of the website: CDC COVID Data Tracker: Home, CDC COVID Data Tracker: Cases, Deaths, and Testing, and NCHS Provisional Death Counts. Information presented on the COVID Data Tracker pages is based on the same source (total case counts) as the present dataset; however, NCHS Death Counts are based on death certificates that use information reported by physicians, medical examiners, or coroners in the cause-of-death section of each certificate. Data from each of these pages are considered provisional (not complete and pending verification) and are therefore subject to change. Counts from previous weeks are continually revised as more records are received and processed.
Number of Jurisdictions Reporting There are currently 60 public health jurisdictions reporting cases of COVID-19. This includes the 50 states, the District of Columbia, New York City, the U.S. territories of American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S Virgin Islands as well as three independent countries in compacts of free association with the United States, Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of the Marshall Islands, and Republic of Palau. New York State’s reported case and death counts do not include New York City’s counts as they separately report nationally notifiable conditions to CDC.
CDC COVID-19 data are available to the public as summary or aggregate count files, including total counts of cases and deaths, available by state and by county. These and other data on COVID-19 are available from multiple public locations, such as:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html
https://www.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/index.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covidview/index.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/open-america/surveillance-data-analytics.html
Additional COVID-19 public use datasets, include line-level (patient-level) data, are available at: https://data.cdc.gov/browse?tags=covid-19.
Archived Data Notes:
November 3, 2022: Due to a reporting cadence issue, case rates for Missouri counties are calculated based on 11 days’ worth of case count data in the Weekly United States COVID-19 Cases and Deaths by State data released on November 3, 2022, instead of the customary 7 days’ worth of data.
November 10, 2022: Due to a reporting cadence change, case rates for Alabama counties are calculated based on 13 days’ worth of case count data in the Weekly United States COVID-19 Cases and Deaths by State data released on November 10, 2022, instead of the customary 7 days’ worth of data.
November 10, 2022: Per the request of the jurisdiction, cases and deaths among non-residents have been removed from all Hawaii county totals throughout the entire time series. Cumulative case and death counts reported by CDC will no longer match Hawaii’s COVID-19 Dashboard, which still includes non-resident cases and deaths.
November 17, 2022: Two new columns, weekly historic cases and weekly historic deaths, were added to this dataset on November 17, 2022. These columns reflect case and death counts that were reported that week but were historical in nature and not reflective of the current burden within the jurisdiction. These historical cases and deaths are not included in the new weekly case and new weekly death columns; however, they are reflected in the cumulative totals provided for each jurisdiction. These data are used to account for artificial increases in case and death totals due to batched reporting of historical data.
December 1, 2022: Due to cadence changes over the Thanksgiving holiday, case rates for all Ohio counties are reported as 0 in the data released on December 1, 2022.
January 5, 2023: Due to North Carolina’s holiday reporting cadence, aggregate case and death data will contain 14 days’ worth of data instead of the customary 7 days. As a result, case and death metrics will appear higher than expected in the January 5, 2023, weekly release.
January 12, 2023: Due to data processing delays, Mississippi’s aggregate case and death data will be reported as 0. As a result, case and death metrics will appear lower than expected in the January 12, 2023, weekly release.
January 19, 2023: Due to a reporting cadence issue, Mississippi’s aggregate case and death data will be calculated based on 14 days’ worth of data instead of the customary 7 days in the January 19, 2023, weekly release.
January 26, 2023: Due to a reporting backlog of historic COVID-19 cases, case rates for two Michigan counties (Livingston and Washtenaw) were higher than expected in the January 19, 2023 weekly release.
January 26, 2023: Due to a backlog of historic COVID-19 cases being reported this week, aggregate case and death counts in Charlotte County and Sarasota County, Florida, will appear higher than expected in the January 26, 2023 weekly release.
January 26, 2023: Due to data processing delays, Mississippi’s aggregate case and death data will be reported as 0 in the weekly release posted on January 26, 2023.
February 2, 2023: As of the data collection deadline, CDC observed an abnormally large increase in aggregate COVID-19 cases and deaths reported for Washington State. In response, totals for new cases and new deaths released on February 2, 2023, have been displayed as zero at the state level until the issue is addressed with state officials. CDC is working with state officials to address the issue.
February 2, 2023: Due to a decrease reported in cumulative case counts by Wyoming, case rates will be reported as 0 in the February 2, 2023, weekly release. CDC is working with state officials to verify the data submitted.
February 16, 2023: Due to data processing delays, Utah’s aggregate case and death data will be reported as 0 in the weekly release posted on February 16, 2023. As a result, case and death metrics will appear lower than expected and should be interpreted with caution.
February 16, 2023: Due to a reporting cadence change, Maine’s
Attribution-NoDerivs 4.0 (CC BY-ND 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
PerCapita_CO2_Footprint_InDioceses_FULLBurhans, Molly A., Cheney, David M., Gerlt, R.. . “PerCapita_CO2_Footprint_InDioceses_FULL”. Scale not given. Version 1.0. MO and CT, USA: GoodLands Inc., Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., 2019.MethodologyThis is the first global Carbon footprint of the Catholic population. We will continue to improve and develop these data with our research partners over the coming years. While it is helpful, it should also be viewed and used as a "beta" prototype that we and our research partners will build from and improve. The years of carbon data are (2010) and (2015 - SHOWN). The year of Catholic data is 2018. The year of population data is 2016. Care should be taken during future developments to harmonize the years used for catholic, population, and CO2 data.1. Zonal Statistics: Esri Population Data and Dioceses --> Population per dioceses, non Vatican based numbers2. Zonal Statistics: FFDAS and Dioceses and Population dataset --> Mean CO2 per Diocese3. Field Calculation: Population per Diocese and Mean CO2 per diocese --> CO2 per Capita4. Field Calculation: CO2 per Capita * Catholic Population --> Catholic Carbon FootprintAssumption: PerCapita CO2Deriving per-capita CO2 from mean CO2 in a geography assumes that people's footprint accounts for their personal lifestyle and involvement in local business and industries that are contribute CO2. Catholic CO2Assumes that Catholics and non-Catholic have similar CO2 footprints from their lifestyles.Derived from:A multiyear, global gridded fossil fuel CO2 emission data product: Evaluation and analysis of resultshttp://ffdas.rc.nau.edu/About.htmlRayner et al., JGR, 2010 - The is the first FFDAS paper describing the version 1.0 methods and results published in the Journal of Geophysical Research.Asefi et al., 2014 - This is the paper describing the methods and results of the FFDAS version 2.0 published in the Journal of Geophysical Research.Readme version 2.2 - A simple readme file to assist in using the 10 km x 10 km, hourly gridded Vulcan version 2.2 results.Liu et al., 2017 - A paper exploring the carbon cycle response to the 2015-2016 El Nino through the use of carbon cycle data assimilation with FFDAS as the boundary condition for FFCO2."S. Asefi‐Najafabady P. J. Rayner K. R. Gurney A. McRobert Y. Song K. Coltin J. Huang C. Elvidge K. BaughFirst published: 10 September 2014 https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD021296 Cited by: 30Link to FFDAS data retrieval and visualization: http://hpcg.purdue.edu/FFDAS/index.phpAbstractHigh‐resolution, global quantification of fossil fuel CO2 emissions is emerging as a critical need in carbon cycle science and climate policy. We build upon a previously developed fossil fuel data assimilation system (FFDAS) for estimating global high‐resolution fossil fuel CO2 emissions. We have improved the underlying observationally based data sources, expanded the approach through treatment of separate emitting sectors including a new pointwise database of global power plants, and extended the results to cover a 1997 to 2010 time series at a spatial resolution of 0.1°. Long‐term trend analysis of the resulting global emissions shows subnational spatial structure in large active economies such as the United States, China, and India. These three countries, in particular, show different long‐term trends and exploration of the trends in nighttime lights, and population reveal a decoupling of population and emissions at the subnational level. Analysis of shorter‐term variations reveals the impact of the 2008–2009 global financial crisis with widespread negative emission anomalies across the U.S. and Europe. We have used a center of mass (CM) calculation as a compact metric to express the time evolution of spatial patterns in fossil fuel CO2 emissions. The global emission CM has moved toward the east and somewhat south between 1997 and 2010, driven by the increase in emissions in China and South Asia over this time period. Analysis at the level of individual countries reveals per capita CO2 emission migration in both Russia and India. The per capita emission CM holds potential as a way to succinctly analyze subnational shifts in carbon intensity over time. Uncertainties are generally lower than the previous version of FFDAS due mainly to an improved nightlight data set."Global Diocesan Boundaries:Burhans, M., Bell, J., Burhans, D., Carmichael, R., Cheney, D., Deaton, M., Emge, T. Gerlt, B., Grayson, J., Herries, J., Keegan, H., Skinner, A., Smith, M., Sousa, C., Trubetskoy, S. “Diocesean Boundaries of the Catholic Church” [Feature Layer]. Scale not given. Version 1.2. Redlands, CA, USA: GoodLands Inc., Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., 2016.Using: ArcGIS. 10.4. Version 10.0. Redlands, CA: Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., 2016.Boundary ProvenanceStatistics and Leadership DataCheney, D.M. “Catholic Hierarchy of the World” [Database]. Date Updated: August 2019. Catholic Hierarchy. Using: Paradox. Retrieved from Original Source.Catholic HierarchyAnnuario Pontificio per l’Anno .. Città del Vaticano :Tipografia Poliglotta Vaticana, Multiple Years.The data for these maps was extracted from the gold standard of Church data, the Annuario Pontificio, published yearly by the Vatican. The collection and data development of the Vatican Statistics Office are unknown. GoodLands is not responsible for errors within this data. We encourage people to document and report errant information to us at data@good-lands.org or directly to the Vatican.Additional information about regular changes in bishops and sees comes from a variety of public diocesan and news announcements.GoodLands’ polygon data layers, version 2.0 for global ecclesiastical boundaries of the Roman Catholic Church:Although care has been taken to ensure the accuracy, completeness and reliability of the information provided, due to this being the first developed dataset of global ecclesiastical boundaries curated from many sources it may have a higher margin of error than established geopolitical administrative boundary maps. Boundaries need to be verified with appropriate Ecclesiastical Leadership. The current information is subject to change without notice. No parties involved with the creation of this data are liable for indirect, special or incidental damage resulting from, arising out of or in connection with the use of the information. We referenced 1960 sources to build our global datasets of ecclesiastical jurisdictions. Often, they were isolated images of dioceses, historical documents and information about parishes that were cross checked. These sources can be viewed here:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11ANlH1S_aYJOyz4TtG0HHgz0OLxnOvXLHMt4FVOS85Q/edit#gid=0To learn more or contact us please visit: https://good-lands.org/Esri Gridded Population Data 2016DescriptionThis layer is a global estimate of human population for 2016. Esri created this estimate by modeling a footprint of where people live as a dasymetric settlement likelihood surface, and then assigned 2016 population estimates stored on polygons of the finest level of geography available onto the settlement surface. Where people live means where their homes are, as in where people sleep most of the time, and this is opposed to where they work. Another way to think of this estimate is a night-time estimate, as opposed to a day-time estimate.Knowledge of population distribution helps us understand how humans affect the natural world and how natural events such as storms and earthquakes, and other phenomena affect humans. This layer represents the footprint of where people live, and how many people live there.Dataset SummaryEach cell in this layer has an integer value with the estimated number of people likely to live in the geographic region represented by that cell. Esri additionally produced several additional layers World Population Estimate Confidence 2016: the confidence level (1-5) per cell for the probability of people being located and estimated correctly. World Population Density Estimate 2016: this layer is represented as population density in units of persons per square kilometer.World Settlement Score 2016: the dasymetric likelihood surface used to create this layer by apportioning population from census polygons to the settlement score raster.To use this layer in analysis, there are several properties or geoprocessing environment settings that should be used:Coordinate system: WGS_1984. This service and its underlying data are WGS_1984. We do this because projecting population count data actually will change the populations due to resampling and either collapsing or splitting cells to fit into another coordinate system. Cell Size: 0.0013474728 degrees (approximately 150-meters) at the equator. No Data: -1Bit Depth: 32-bit signedThis layer has query, identify, pixel, and export image functions enabled, and is restricted to a maximum analysis size of 30,000 x 30,000 pixels - an area about the size of Africa.Frye, C. et al., (2018). Using Classified and Unclassified Land Cover Data to Estimate the Footprint of Human Settlement. Data Science Journal. 17, p.20. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2018-020.What can you do with this layer?This layer is unsuitable for mapping or cartographic use, and thus it does not include a convenient legend. Instead, this layer is useful for analysis, particularly for estimating counts of people living within watersheds, coastal areas, and other areas that do not have standard boundaries. Esri recommends using the Zonal Statistics tool or the Zonal Statistics to Table tool where you provide input zones as either polygons, or raster data, and the tool will summarize the count of population within those zones. https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/arcgis-living-atlas/data-management/2016-world-population-estimate-services-are-now-available/
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset presents median income data over a decade or more for males and females categorized by Total, Full-Time Year-Round (FT), and Part-Time (PT) employment in Black Earth town. It showcases annual income, providing insights into gender-specific income distributions and the disparities between full-time and part-time work. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based pay disparity trends and explore the variations in income for male and female individuals.
Key observations: Insights from 2023
Based on our analysis ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates, we present the following observations: - All workers, aged 15 years and older: In Black Earth town, the median income for all workers aged 15 years and older, regardless of work hours, was $68,125 for males and $58,750 for females.
Based on these incomes, we observe a gender gap percentage of approximately 14%, indicating a significant disparity between the median incomes of males and females in Black Earth town. Women, regardless of work hours, still earn 86 cents to each dollar earned by men, highlighting an ongoing gender-based wage gap.
- Full-time workers, aged 15 years and older: In Black Earth town, among full-time, year-round workers aged 15 years and older, males earned a median income of $93,000, while females earned $78,542, leading to a 16% gender pay gap among full-time workers. This illustrates that women earn 84 cents for each dollar earned by men in full-time roles. This analysis indicates a widening gender pay gap, showing a substantial income disparity where women, despite working full-time, face a more significant wage discrepancy compared to men in the same roles.Remarkably, across all roles, including non-full-time employment, women displayed a lower gender pay gap percentage. This indicates that Black Earth town offers better opportunities for women in non-full-time positions.
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.
Gender classifications include:
Employment type classifications include:
Variables / Data Columns
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Black Earth town median household income by race. You can refer the same here
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset presents median income data over a decade or more for males and females categorized by Total, Full-Time Year-Round (FT), and Part-Time (PT) employment in Lincoln township. It showcases annual income, providing insights into gender-specific income distributions and the disparities between full-time and part-time work. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based pay disparity trends and explore the variations in income for male and female individuals.
Key observations: Insights from 2023
Based on our analysis ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates, we present the following observations: - All workers, aged 15 years and older: In Lincoln township, the median income for all workers aged 15 years and older, regardless of work hours, was $49,792 for males and $23,500 for females.
These income figures highlight a substantial gender-based income gap in Lincoln township. Women, regardless of work hours, earn 47 cents for each dollar earned by men. This significant gender pay gap, approximately 53%, underscores concerning gender-based income inequality in the township of Lincoln township.
- Full-time workers, aged 15 years and older: In Lincoln township, among full-time, year-round workers aged 15 years and older, males earned a median income of $75,000, while females earned $56,250, leading to a 25% gender pay gap among full-time workers. This illustrates that women earn 75 cents for each dollar earned by men in full-time roles. This analysis indicates a widening gender pay gap, showing a substantial income disparity where women, despite working full-time, face a more significant wage discrepancy compared to men in the same roles.Surprisingly, the gender pay gap percentage was higher across all roles, including non-full-time employment, for women compared to men. This suggests that full-time employment offers a more equitable income scenario for women compared to other employment patterns in Lincoln township.
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.
Gender classifications include:
Employment type classifications include:
Variables / Data Columns
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Lincoln township median household income by race. You can refer the same here
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset presents the detailed breakdown of the count of individuals within distinct income brackets, categorizing them by gender (men and women) and employment type - full-time (FT) and part-time (PT), offering valuable insights into the diverse income landscapes within Black Earth town. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based income distribution within the Black Earth town population, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..
Key observations
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.
Income brackets:
Variables / Data Columns
Employment type classifications include:
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Black Earth town median household income by race. You can refer the same here
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset presents median income data over a decade or more for males and females categorized by Total, Full-Time Year-Round (FT), and Part-Time (PT) employment in Blue Earth County. It showcases annual income, providing insights into gender-specific income distributions and the disparities between full-time and part-time work. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based pay disparity trends and explore the variations in income for male and female individuals.
Key observations: Insights from 2023
Based on our analysis ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates, we present the following observations: - All workers, aged 15 years and older: In Blue Earth County, the median income for all workers aged 15 years and older, regardless of work hours, was $42,075 for males and $27,496 for females.
These income figures highlight a substantial gender-based income gap in Blue Earth County. Women, regardless of work hours, earn 65 cents for each dollar earned by men. This significant gender pay gap, approximately 35%, underscores concerning gender-based income inequality in the county of Blue Earth County.
- Full-time workers, aged 15 years and older: In Blue Earth County, among full-time, year-round workers aged 15 years and older, males earned a median income of $61,546, while females earned $50,159, leading to a 19% gender pay gap among full-time workers. This illustrates that women earn 81 cents for each dollar earned by men in full-time roles. This analysis indicates a widening gender pay gap, showing a substantial income disparity where women, despite working full-time, face a more significant wage discrepancy compared to men in the same roles.Surprisingly, the gender pay gap percentage was higher across all roles, including non-full-time employment, for women compared to men. This suggests that full-time employment offers a more equitable income scenario for women compared to other employment patterns in Blue Earth County.
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.
Gender classifications include:
Employment type classifications include:
Variables / Data Columns
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Blue Earth County median household income by race. You can refer the same here
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset presents median income data over a decade or more for males and females categorized by Total, Full-Time Year-Round (FT), and Part-Time (PT) employment in Earth. It showcases annual income, providing insights into gender-specific income distributions and the disparities between full-time and part-time work. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based pay disparity trends and explore the variations in income for male and female individuals.
Key observations: Insights from 2023
Based on our analysis ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates, we present the following observations: - All workers, aged 15 years and older: In Earth, the median income for all workers aged 15 years and older, regardless of work hours, was $37,763 for males and $16,019 for females.
These income figures highlight a substantial gender-based income gap in Earth. Women, regardless of work hours, earn 42 cents for each dollar earned by men. This significant gender pay gap, approximately 58%, underscores concerning gender-based income inequality in the city of Earth.
- Full-time workers, aged 15 years and older: In Earth, among full-time, year-round workers aged 15 years and older, males earned a median income of $49,236, while females earned $35,750, leading to a 27% gender pay gap among full-time workers. This illustrates that women earn 73 cents for each dollar earned by men in full-time roles. This analysis indicates a widening gender pay gap, showing a substantial income disparity where women, despite working full-time, face a more significant wage discrepancy compared to men in the same roles.Surprisingly, the gender pay gap percentage was higher across all roles, including non-full-time employment, for women compared to men. This suggests that full-time employment offers a more equitable income scenario for women compared to other employment patterns in Earth.
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.
Gender classifications include:
Employment type classifications include:
Variables / Data Columns
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Earth median household income by race. You can refer the same here
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The dataset and the validation are fully described in a Nature Scientific Data Descriptor https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-019-0265-5
If you want to use this dataset in an interactive environment, then use this link https://mybinder.org/v2/gh/GeographerAtLarge/TravelTime/HEAD
The following text is a summary of the information in the above Data Descriptor.
The dataset is a suite of global travel-time accessibility indicators for the year 2015, at approximately one-kilometre spatial resolution for the entire globe. The indicators show an estimated (and validated), land-based travel time to the nearest city and nearest port for a range of city and port sizes.
The datasets are in GeoTIFF format and are suitable for use in Geographic Information Systems and statistical packages for mapping access to cities and ports and for spatial and statistical analysis of the inequalities in access by different segments of the population.
These maps represent a unique global representation of physical access to essential services offered by cities and ports.
The datasets travel_time_to_cities_x.tif (where x has values from 1 to 12) The value of each pixel is the estimated travel time in minutes to the nearest urban area in 2015. There are 12 data layers based on different sets of urban areas, defined by their population in year 2015 (see PDF report).
travel_time_to_ports_x (x ranges from 1 to 5)
The value of each pixel is the estimated travel time to the nearest port in 2015. There are 5 data layers based on different port sizes.
Format Raster Dataset, GeoTIFF, LZW compressed Unit Minutes
Data type Byte (16 bit Unsigned Integer)
No data value 65535
Flags None
Spatial resolution 30 arc seconds
Spatial extent
Upper left -180, 85
Lower left -180, -60 Upper right 180, 85 Lower right 180, -60 Spatial Reference System (SRS) EPSG:4326 - WGS84 - Geographic Coordinate System (lat/long)
Temporal resolution 2015
Temporal extent Updates may follow for future years, but these are dependent on the availability of updated inputs on travel times and city locations and populations.
Methodology Travel time to the nearest city or port was estimated using an accumulated cost function (accCost) in the gdistance R package (van Etten, 2018). This function requires two input datasets: (i) a set of locations to estimate travel time to and (ii) a transition matrix that represents the cost or time to travel across a surface.
The set of locations were based on populated urban areas in the 2016 version of the Joint Research Centre’s Global Human Settlement Layers (GHSL) datasets (Pesaresi and Freire, 2016) that represent low density (LDC) urban clusters and high density (HDC) urban areas (https://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/datasets.php). These urban areas were represented by points, spaced at 1km distance around the perimeter of each urban area.
Marine ports were extracted from the 26th edition of the World Port Index (NGA, 2017) which contains the location and physical characteristics of approximately 3,700 major ports and terminals. Ports are represented as single points
The transition matrix was based on the friction surface (https://map.ox.ac.uk/research-project/accessibility_to_cities) from the 2015 global accessibility map (Weiss et al, 2018).
Code The R code used to generate the 12 travel time maps is included in the zip file that can be downloaded with these data layers. The processing zones are also available.
Validation The underlying friction surface was validated by comparing travel times between 47,893 pairs of locations against journey times from a Google API. Our estimated journey times were generally shorter than those from the Google API. Across the tiles, the median journey time from our estimates was 88 minutes within an interquartile range of 48 to 143 minutes while the median journey time estimated by the Google API was 106 minutes within an interquartile range of 61 to 167 minutes. Across all tiles, the differences were skewed to the left and our travel time estimates were shorter than those reported by the Google API in 72% of the tiles. The median difference was −13.7 minutes within an interquartile range of −35.5 to 2.0 minutes while the absolute difference was 30 minutes or less for 60% of the tiles and 60 minutes or less for 80% of the tiles. The median percentage difference was −16.9% within an interquartile range of −30.6% to 2.7% while the absolute percentage difference was 20% or less in 43% of the tiles and 40% or less in 80% of the tiles.
This process and results are included in the validation zip file.
Usage Notes The accessibility layers can be visualised and analysed in many Geographic Information Systems or remote sensing software such as QGIS, GRASS, ENVI, ERDAS or ArcMap, and also by statistical and modelling packages such as R or MATLAB. They can also be used in cloud-based tools for geospatial analysis such as Google Earth Engine.
The nine layers represent travel times to human settlements of different population ranges. Two or more layers can be combined into one layer by recording the minimum pixel value across the layers. For example, a map of travel time to the nearest settlement of 5,000 to 50,000 people could be generated by taking the minimum of the three layers that represent the travel time to settlements with populations between 5,000 and 10,000, 10,000 and 20,000 and, 20,000 and 50,000 people.
The accessibility layers also permit user-defined hierarchies that go beyond computing the minimum pixel value across layers. A user-defined complete hierarchy can be generated when the union of all categories adds up to the global population, and the intersection of any two categories is empty. Everything else is up to the user in terms of logical consistency with the problem at hand.
The accessibility layers are relative measures of the ease of access from a given location to the nearest target. While the validation demonstrates that they do correspond to typical journey times, they cannot be taken to represent actual travel times. Errors in the friction surface will be accumulated as part of the accumulative cost function and it is likely that locations that are further away from targets will have greater a divergence from a plausible travel time than those that are closer to the targets. Care should be taken when referring to travel time to the larger cities when the locations of interest are extremely remote, although they will still be plausible representations of relative accessibility. Furthermore, a key assumption of the model is that all journeys will use the fastest mode of transport and take the shortest path.
The total amount of data created, captured, copied, and consumed globally is forecast to increase rapidly, reaching *** zettabytes in 2024. Over the next five years up to 2028, global data creation is projected to grow to more than *** zettabytes. In 2020, the amount of data created and replicated reached a new high. The growth was higher than previously expected, caused by the increased demand due to the COVID-19 pandemic, as more people worked and learned from home and used home entertainment options more often. Storage capacity also growing Only a small percentage of this newly created data is kept though, as just * percent of the data produced and consumed in 2020 was saved and retained into 2021. In line with the strong growth of the data volume, the installed base of storage capacity is forecast to increase, growing at a compound annual growth rate of **** percent over the forecast period from 2020 to 2025. In 2020, the installed base of storage capacity reached *** zettabytes.
The World Religion Project (WRP) aims to provide detailed information about religious adherence worldwide since 1945. It contains data about the number of adherents by religion in each of the states in the international system. These numbers are given for every half-decade period (1945, 1950, etc., through 2010). Percentages of the states' populations that practice a given religion are also provided. (Note: These percentages are expressed as decimals, ranging from 0 to 1, where 0 indicates that 0 percent of the population practices a given religion and 1 indicates that 100 percent of the population practices that religion.) Some of the religions (as detailed below) are divided into religious families. To the extent data are available, the breakdown of adherents within a given religion into religious families is also provided.
The project was developed in three stages. The first stage consisted of the formation of a religion tree. A religion tree is a systematic classification of major religions and of religious families within those major religions. To develop the religion tree we prepared a comprehensive literature review, the aim of which was (i) to define a religion, (ii) to find tangible indicators of a given religion of religious families within a major religion, and (iii) to identify existing efforts at classifying world religions. (Please see the original survey instrument to view the structure of the religion tree.) The second stage consisted of the identification of major data sources of religious adherence and the collection of data from these sources according to the religion tree classification. This created a dataset that included multiple records for some states for a given point in time. It also contained multiple missing data for specific states, specific time periods and specific religions. The third stage consisted of cleaning the data, reconciling discrepancies of information from different sources and imputing data for the missing cases.
The Global Religion Dataset: This dataset uses a religion-by-five-year unit. It aggregates the number of adherents of a given religion and religious group globally by five-year periods.
This dataset contains crash information from the last five years to the current date. The data is based on the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS). The data is dynamic, allowing for additions, deletions and modifications at any time, resulting in more accurate information in the database. Due to ongoing and continuous data entry, the numbers of records in subsequent extractions are subject to change.About Crash DataThe Cary Police Department strives to make crash data as accurate as possible, but there is no avoiding the introduction of errors into this process, which relies on data furnished by many people and that cannot always be verified. As the data is updated on this site there will be instances of adding new incidents and updating existing data with information gathered through the investigative process.Not surprisingly, crash data becomes more accurate over time, as new crashes are reported and more information comes to light during investigations.This dynamic nature of crash data means that content provided here today will probably differ from content provided a week from now. Likewise, content provided on this site will probably differ somewhat from crime statistics published elsewhere by the Town of Cary, even though they draw from the same database.About Crash LocationsCrash locations reflect the approximate locations of the crash. Certain crashes may not appear on maps if there is insufficient detail to establish a specific, mappable location.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Analysis of ‘Covid-19 Tests by Race Ethnicity and Date’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/68410b4b-052f-4ce3-8d0c-873b5664f1a4 on 27 January 2022.
--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---
Note: As of April 16, 2021, this dataset will update daily with a five-day data lag.
A. SUMMARY This dataset includes San Francisco COVID-19 tests by race/ ethnicity and date. For each day, this dataset represents the daily count of tests collected by race/ethnicity, and how many of those were positive, negative, and indeterminate. Tests in this dataset include all tests collected from San Francisco residents who listed a San Francisco home address at the time of testing, and tests that were collected in San Francisco but had a missing home address. Data are based on information collected at the time of testing.
For recent data, about 25-30% of tests are missing race/ ethnicity information. Tests where the race/ ethnicity of the patient is unknown are included in the dataset under the "Unknown" category.
This data was de-duplicated by individual and date, so if a person gets tested multiple times on different dates, all tests will be included in this dataset (on the day each test was collected).
The total number of positive test results is not equal to the total number of COVID-19 cases in San Francisco. Each positive test result is investigated. During this investigation, some test results are found to be for persons living outside of San Francisco and some people in San Francisco may be tested multiple times. In both cases, these results are not included in San Francisco’s total COVID-19 case count. To track the number of cases by race/ ethnicity, see this dashboard: https://data.sfgov.org/stories/s/w6za-6st8
B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED COVID-19 laboratory test data is based on electronic laboratory test reports. Deduplication, quality assurance measures and other data verification processes maximize accuracy of laboratory test information.
C. UPDATE PROCESS Updates automatically at 05:00 Pacific Time each day. Redundant runs are scheduled at 07:00 and 09:00 in case of pipeline failure.
D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET Due to the high degree of variation in the time needed to complete tests by different labs there is a delay in this reporting. On March 24 the Health Officer ordered all labs in the City to report complete COVID-19 testing information to the local and state health departments.
In order to track trends over time, a data user can analyze this data by "specimen_collection_date".
Calculating Percent Positivity: The positivity rate is the percentage of tests that return a positive result for COVID-19 (positive tests divided by the sum of positive and negative tests). Indeterminate results, which could not conclusively determine whether COVID-19 virus was present, are not included in the calculation of percent positive. When there are fewer than 20 positives tests for a given race/ethnicity and time period, the positivity rate is not calculated for the public tracker because rates of small test counts are less reliable.
Calculating Testing Rates: To calculate the testing rate per 10,000 residents, divide the total number of tests collected (positive, negative, and indeterminate results) for the specified race/ ethnicity by the total number of residents who identify as that race/ ethnicity (according to the 2018 5-year estimates from the American Community Survey), then multiply by 10,000. When there are fewer than 20 total tests for a given race/ethnicity and time period, the testing rate is not calculated for the public tracker because rates of small test counts are less reliable.
Read more about how this data is updated and validated daily: https://data.sfgov.org/stories/s/nudz-9tg2
There are two other datasets related to tests: 1. COVID-19 Tests 2. <a href="https://data.sfgov.org/dataset/Covid-19-Testing-by
--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---
MIT Licensehttps://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
License information was derived automatically
This datas real-world trends in children's screen time usage. It includes data on educational, recreational, and total screen time for children aged 5 to 15 years, with breakdowns by gender (Male, Female, Other/Prefer not to say) and day type (Weekday, Weekend). The dataset follows expected behavioral patterns:
Screen time increases with age (~1.5 hours/day at age 5 to 6+ hours/day at age 15).
Recreational screen time dominates, making up 65–80% of total screen time.
Weekend screen time is 20–30% higher than weekdays, with a larger increase for teenagers.
Slight gender-based variations in recreational screen time.
The dataset contains natural variability, ensuring realism, and the sample size decreases slightly with age (e.g., 500 respondents at age 5, 300 at age 15).
This dataset is ideal for data analysis, visualization, and machine learning experiments related to children's digital habits. 🚀
People Data Labs is an aggregator of B2B person and company data. We source our globally compliant person dataset via our "Data Union".
The "Data Union" is our proprietary data sharing co-op. Customers opt-in to sharing their data and warrant that their data is fully compliant with global data privacy regulations. Some data sources are provided as a one time dump, others are refreshed every time we do a new data build. Our data sources come from a variety of verticals including HR Tech, Real Estate Tech, Identity/Anti-Fraud, Martech, and others. People Data Labs works with customers on compliance based topics. If a customer wishes to ensure anonymity, we work with them to anonymize the data.
Our person data has over 100 fields including resume data (work history, education), contact information (email, phone), demographic info (name, gender, birth date) and social profile information (linkedin, github, twitter, facebook, etc...).
As of January 2024, Instagram was slightly more popular with men than women, with men accounting for 50.6 percent of the platform’s global users. Additionally, the social media app was most popular amongst younger audiences, with almost 32 percent of users aged between 18 and 24 years.
Instagram’s Global Audience
As of January 2024, Instagram was the fourth most popular social media platform globally, reaching two billion monthly active users (MAU). This number is projected to keep growing with no signs of slowing down, which is not a surprise as the global online social penetration rate across all regions is constantly increasing.
As of January 2024, the country with the largest Instagram audience was India with 362.9 million users, followed by the United States with 169.7 million users.
Who is winning over the generations?
Even though Instagram’s audience is almost twice the size of TikTok’s on a global scale, TikTok has shown itself to be a fierce competitor, particularly amongst younger audiences. TikTok was the most downloaded mobile app globally in 2022, generating 672 million downloads. As of 2022, Generation Z in the United States spent more time on TikTok than on Instagram monthly.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Historical chart and dataset showing World death rate by year from 1950 to 2025.
The world population surpassed eight billion people in 2022, having doubled from its figure less than 50 years previously. Looking forward, it is projected that the world population will reach nine billion in 2038, and 10 billion in 2060, but it will peak around 10.3 billion in the 2080s before it then goes into decline. Regional variations The global population has seen rapid growth since the early 1800s, due to advances in areas such as food production, healthcare, water safety, education, and infrastructure, however, these changes did not occur at a uniform time or pace across the world. Broadly speaking, the first regions to undergo their demographic transitions were Europe, North America, and Oceania, followed by Latin America and Asia (although Asia's development saw the greatest variation due to its size), while Africa was the last continent to undergo this transformation. Because of these differences, many so-called "advanced" countries are now experiencing population decline, particularly in Europe and East Asia, while the fastest population growth rates are found in Sub-Saharan Africa. In fact, the roughly two billion difference in population between now and the 2080s' peak will be found in Sub-Saharan Africa, which will rise from 1.2 billion to 3.2 billion in this time (although populations in other continents will also fluctuate). Changing projections The United Nations releases their World Population Prospects report every 1-2 years, and this is widely considered the foremost demographic dataset in the world. However, recent years have seen a notable decline in projections when the global population will peak, and at what number. Previous reports in the 2010s had suggested a peak of over 11 billion people, and that population growth would continue into the 2100s, however a sooner and shorter peak is now projected. Reasons for this include a more rapid population decline in East Asia and Europe, particularly China, as well as a prolongued development arc in Sub-Saharan Africa.