Monaco led the ranking for countries with the highest population density in 2024, with nearly 26,000 residents per square kilometer. The Special Administrative Region of Macao came in second, followed by Singapore. The world’s second smallest country Monaco is the world’s second-smallest country, with an area of about two square kilometers and a population of only around 40,000. It is a constitutional monarchy located by the Mediterranean Sea, and while Monaco is not part of the European Union, it does participate in some EU policies. The country is perhaps most famous for the Monte Carlo casino and for hosting the Monaco Grand Prix, the world's most prestigious Formula One race. The global population Globally, the population density per square kilometer is about 60 inhabitants, and Asia is the most densely populated region in the world. The global population is increasing rapidly, so population density is only expected to increase. In 1950, for example, the global population stood at about 2.54 billion people, and it reached over eight billion during 2023.

As of July 2023, Monaco is the country with the highest population density worldwide, with an estimated population of nearly ****** per square kilometer.

In 2023, Washington, D.C. had the highest population density in the United States, with 11,130.69 people per square mile. As a whole, there were about 94.83 residents per square mile in the U.S., and Alaska was the state with the lowest population density, with 1.29 residents per square mile. The problem of population density Simply put, population density is the population of a country divided by the area of the country. While this can be an interesting measure of how many people live in a country and how large the country is, it does not account for the degree of urbanization, or the share of people who live in urban centers. For example, Russia is the largest country in the world and has a comparatively low population, so its population density is very low. However, much of the country is uninhabited, so cities in Russia are much more densely populated than the rest of the country. Urbanization in the United States While the United States is not very densely populated compared to other countries, its population density has increased significantly over the past few decades. The degree of urbanization has also increased, and well over half of the population lives in urban centers.

As of 2025, Barbados was the most densely populated country in Latin America and the Caribbean, with approximately 657.16 people per square kilometer. In that same year, Argentina's population density was estimated at approximately 16.75 people per square kilometer.

This is a Dataset of the World Population Consisting of Each and Every Country. I have attempted to analyze the same data to bring some insights out of it. The dataset consists of 234 rows and 17 columns. I will analyze the same data and bring the below pieces of information regarding the same.

1. Continent Population Characteristics Analysis.
2. Analysis of Countries.
   • Top 10 Most Populated and Least Populated Countries
   • Top 10 Largest and Smallest Countries as per Area
   • Population Growth From 1970 to 2020 (50 Years)
3. Countries Represent % Of World Population.
   • Countries that represent below 0.1% of the World Population.
   • Countries that represent above 2% of the world Population
   • Top 10 Over Populated Countries based on Density Per Sq KM.
   • Top 10 Least Populated Countries based on Density Per Sq KM.

As of 2023, the population density in London was by far the highest number of people per square km in the UK, at *****. Of the other regions and countries which constitute the United Kingdom, North West England was the next most densely populated area at *** people per square kilometer. Scotland, by contrast, is the most sparsely populated country or region in the United Kingdom, with only ** people per square kilometer. Countries, regions, and cities According to the official mid-year population estimate, the population of the United Kingdom was just almost **** million in 2022. Most of the population lived in England, where an estimated **** million people resided, followed by Scotland at **** million, Wales at **** million and finally Northern Ireland at just over *** million. Within England, the South East was the region with the highest population at almost **** million, followed by the London region at around *** million. In terms of urban areas, Greater London is the largest city in the United Kingdom, followed by Greater Manchester and Birmingham in the North West and West Midlands regions of England. London calling London's huge size in relation to other UK cities is also reflected by its economic performance. In 2021, London's GDP was approximately *** billion British pounds, almost a quarter of UK GDP overall. In terms of GDP per capita, Londoners had a GDP per head of ****** pounds, compared with an average of ****** for the country as a whole. Productivity, expressed as by output per hour worked, was also far higher in London than the rest of the country. In 2021, London was around **** percent more productive than the rest of the country, with South East England the only other region where productivity was higher than the national average.

this graph was created in R:

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2F55a15c27e578216565ab65e502f9ecf8%2Fgraph1.png?generation=1730674251775717&alt=media" alt=""> https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2F0b481e4d397700978fe5cf15932dbc68%2Fgraph2.png?generation=1730674259213775&alt=media" alt="">

driven primarily by high birth rates in developing countries and advancements in healthcare. According to the United Nations, the global population surpassed 8 billion in 2023, marking a critical milestone in human history. This growth, however, is unevenly distributed across continents and countries, leading to varied population densities and urban pressures.

Surface area and population density play vital roles in shaping the demographic and economic landscape of each country. For instance, countries with large land masses such as Russia, Canada, and Australia have low population densities despite their significant populations, as vast portions of their land are sparsely populated or uninhabitable. Conversely, nations like Bangladesh and South Korea exhibit extremely high population densities due to smaller land areas combined with large populations.

Population density, measured as the number of people per square kilometer, affects resource availability, environmental sustainability, and quality of life. High-density areas face greater challenges in housing, infrastructure, and environmental management, often experiencing increased pollution and resource strain. In contrast, low-density areas may struggle with underdeveloped infrastructure and limited access to services due to the dispersed population.

Urbanization trends are another important aspect of these dynamics. As people migrate to cities seeking better economic opportunities, urban areas grow more densely populated, amplifying the need for efficient land use and sustainable urban planning. The UN reports that over half of the world’s population currently resides in urban areas, with this figure expected to rise to nearly 70% by 2050. This shift requires nations to balance population growth and density with sustainable development strategies to ensure a higher quality of life and environmental stewardship for future generations.

Through an understanding of population size, surface area, and density, policymakers can better address challenges related to urban development, rural depopulation, and resource allocation, supporting a balanced approach to population management and economic development.

United States US: Population Density: People per Square Km data was reported at 35.608 Person/sq km in 2017. This records an increase from the previous number of 35.355 Person/sq km for 2016. United States US: Population Density: People per Square Km data is updated yearly, averaging 26.948 Person/sq km from Dec 1961 (Median) to 2017, with 57 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 35.608 Person/sq km in 2017 and a record low of 20.056 Person/sq km in 1961. United States US: Population Density: People per Square Km data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Population and Urbanization Statistics. Population density is midyear population divided by land area in square kilometers. Population is based on the de facto definition of population, which counts all residents regardless of legal status or citizenship--except for refugees not permanently settled in the country of asylum, who are generally considered part of the population of their country of origin. Land area is a country's total area, excluding area under inland water bodies, national claims to continental shelf, and exclusive economic zones. In most cases the definition of inland water bodies includes major rivers and lakes.; ; Food and Agriculture Organization and World Bank population estimates.; Weighted average;

United Kingdom UK: Population Density: People per Square Km data was reported at 272.898 Person/sq km in 2017. This records an increase from the previous number of 271.134 Person/sq km for 2016. United Kingdom UK: Population Density: People per Square Km data is updated yearly, averaging 235.922 Person/sq km from Dec 1961 (Median) to 2017, with 57 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 272.898 Person/sq km in 2017 and a record low of 218.245 Person/sq km in 1961. United Kingdom UK: Population Density: People per Square Km data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United Kingdom – Table UK.World Bank.WDI: Population and Urbanization Statistics. Population density is midyear population divided by land area in square kilometers. Population is based on the de facto definition of population, which counts all residents regardless of legal status or citizenship--except for refugees not permanently settled in the country of asylum, who are generally considered part of the population of their country of origin. Land area is a country's total area, excluding area under inland water bodies, national claims to continental shelf, and exclusive economic zones. In most cases the definition of inland water bodies includes major rivers and lakes.; ; Food and Agriculture Organization and World Bank population estimates.; Weighted average;

This graph shows the population density of the United States of America from 1790 to 2019. In 2019, the population density was approximately 92.9 residents per square mile of land area. Population density in the United States Population density has been tracked for over two hundred years in the United States. Over the last two centuries, the number of people living in the United States per square mile has grown from 4.5 in 1790 to 87.4 in 2010. After examining the data in detail, it becomes clear that a major population increase started around 1870. Population density was roughly 11 at the time and has doubled in the last century. Since then, population density grew by about 16 percent each decade. Population density doubled in 1900, and grew in total by around 800 percent until 2010.

The population density of the United States varies from state to state. The most densely populated state is New Jersey, with 1,208 people per square mile living there. Rhode Island is the second most densely populated state, with slightly over 1,000 inhabitants per square mile. A number of New England states follow at the top of the ranking, making the northeastern region of the United States the most densely populated region of the country.

The least populated U.S. state is the vast territory of Alaska. Only 1.3 inhabitants per square mile reside in the largest state of the U.S.

Compared to other countries around the world, the United States does not rank within the top 50, in terms of population density. Most of the leading countries and territories are city states. However, the U.S. is one of the most populous countries in the world, with a total population of over 327 million inhabitants, as of 2018.

This layer presents population density data by county for states bordering the U.S. Gulf, sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2020 Census Demographic and Housing Characteristics. Population density is displayed as the number of people per square kilometer. Broadly speaking, population density indicates how many people would inhabit one square kilometer if the population were evenly distributed across the area. However, population distribution is uneven. People tend to cluster in urban areas, while those in rural regions are spread out over a much more sparsely populated landscape. Population density is a crucial metric for understanding and managing human population dynamics and their effects on society and the environment. It helps assess various environmental challenges, including urban sprawl, pollution, habitat loss, and resource depletion. Coastal areas frequently experience high population density due to urbanization, influencing land use, housing, and infrastructure development. This density can also stimulate tourism and recreation, necessitating careful planning for facilities, transportation, and environmental protection. Additionally, coastal regions are more susceptible to natural disasters such as hurricanes and flooding, making population density data essential for developing effective evacuation plans and emergency services. Data: U.S. Census BureauDocumentation: U.S. Census Bureau This is a component of the Gulf Data Atlas (V2.0) for the Socioeconomic Conditions topic area.

Mauritius had the highest population density level in Africa as of 2023, with nearly *** inhabitants per square kilometer. The country has also one of the smallest territories on the continent, which contributes to the high density. As a matter of fact, the majority of African countries with the largest concentration of people per square kilometer have the smallest geographical area as well. The exception is Nigeria, which ranks among the largest territorial countries in Africa and is very densely populated at the same time. After all, Nigeria has also the largest population on the continent.

Global Share of Population Having at Least Completed Primary Education by Country, 2023 Discover more data with ReportLinker!

In 2022, Canada had a population density of about 4.43 people per square kilometer. The country has one of the lowest population densities in the world, as the total population is very small in relation to the dimensions of the land. Canada has a relatively stable population size, consistently with a growth of around one percent compared to the previous year. A small population in a large territory In terms of total area, Canada is the second largest country in the world. Its ten provinces and three territories extend from the Pacific to the Atlantic and northward to the Arctic Ocean, and this in total covers about 9.9 million square miles. The most densely populated area of Canada is what’s known as the Quebec City-Windsor Corridor in the provinces of Quebec and Ontario. Canada has a degree of urbanization of around 81 percent, because most Canadians prefer to live in cities where opportunities for work and leisure are in close proximity to each other and conditions are less rough.

Global patterns of current and future road infrastructure - Supplementary spatial data

Authors: Johan Meijer, Mark Huijbregts, Kees Schotten, Aafke Schipper

Research paper summary: Georeferenced information on road infrastructure is essential for spatial planning, socio-economic assessments and environmental impact analyses. Yet current global road maps are typically outdated or characterized by spatial bias in coverage. In the Global Roads Inventory Project we gathered, harmonized and integrated nearly 60 geospatial datasets on road infrastructure into a global roads dataset. The resulting dataset covers 222 countries and includes over 21 million km of roads, which is two to three times the total length in the currently best available country-based global roads datasets. We then related total road length per country to country area, population density, GDP and OECD membership, resulting in a regression model with adjusted R2 of 0.90, and found that that the highest road densities are associated with densely populated and wealthier countries. Applying our regression model to future population densities and GDP estimates from the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios, we obtained a tentative estimate of 3.0–4.7 million km additional road length for the year 2050. Large increases in road length were projected for developing nations in some of the world's last remaining wilderness areas, such as the Amazon, the Congo basin and New Guinea. This highlights the need for accurate spatial road datasets to underpin strategic spatial planning in order to reduce the impacts of roads in remaining pristine ecosystems.

Contents: The GRIP dataset consists of global and regional vector datasets in ESRI filegeodatabase and shapefile format, and global raster datasets of road density at a 5 arcminutes resolution (~8x8km). The GRIP dataset is mainly aimed at providing a roads dataset that is easily usable for scientific global environmental and biodiversity modelling projects. The dataset is not suitable for navigation. GRIP4 is based on many different sources (including OpenStreetMap) and to the best of our ability we have verified their public availability, as a criteria in our research. The UNSDI-Transportation datamodel was applied for harmonization of the individual source datasets. GRIP4 is provided under a Creative Commons License (CC-0) and is free to use. The GRIP database and future global road infrastructure scenario projections following the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) are described in the paper by Meijer et al (2018). Due to shapefile file size limitations the global file is only available in ESRI filegeodatabase format.

Regional coding of the other vector datasets in shapefile and ESRI fgdb format:

• Region 1: North America
• Region 2: Central and South America
• Region 3: Africa
• Region 4: Europe
• Region 5: Middle East and Central Asia
• Region 6: South and East Asia
• Region 7: Oceania

Road density raster data:

• Total density, all types combined
• Type 1 density (highways)
• Type 2 density (primary roads)
• Type 3 density (secondary roads)
• Type 4 density (tertiary roads)
• Type 5 density (local roads)

Keyword: global, data, roads, infrastructure, network, global roads inventory project (GRIP), SSP scenarios

This dataset explores the farm population of Canada by province in 1996. 1. Refers to all persons who are members of a farm operator's household, living on a farm in a rural or urban area. 2. Refers to sparsely populated lands lying outside urban areas. 3. Refers to areas with minimum population concentrations of 1,000 and a population density of at least 400 per square kilometre, based on the previous census population counts. All territory outside urban areas is considered rural. Taken together, urban and rural areas cover all of Canada. Source: Statistics Canada, Censuses of Agriculture and Population. Last modified: 2004-09-29.

The world is continuously urbanising, resulting in clusters of densely populated urban areas and more sparsely populated rural areas. We propose a method for generating spatial fields with controllable levels of clustering of the population. We build a synthetic country, and use this method to generate versions of the country with different clustering levels. Combined with a metapopulation model for infectious disease spread, this allows us to in silico explore how urbanisation affects infectious disease spread. In a baseline scenario with no interventions, the underlying population clustering seems to have little effect on the final size and timing of the epidemic. Under within-country restrictions on non-commuting travel, the final size decreases with increased population clustering. The effect of travel restrictions on reducing the final size is larger with higher clustering. The reduction is larger in the more rural areas. Within-country travel restrictions delay the epidemic, and the delay is largest for lower clustering levels. We implemented three different vaccination strategies—uniform vaccination (in space), preferentially vaccinating urban locations and preferentially vaccinating rural locations. The urban and uniform vaccination strategies were most effective in reducing the final size, while the rural vaccination strategy was clearly inferior. Visual inspection of some European countries shows that many countries already have high population clustering. In the future, they will likely become even more clustered. Hence, according to our model, within-country travel restrictions are likely to be less and less effective in delaying epidemics, while they will be more effective in decreasing final sizes. In addition, to minimise final sizes, it is important not to neglect urban locations when distributing vaccines. To our knowledge, this is the first study to systematically investigate the effect of urbanisation on infectious disease spread and in particular, to examine effectiveness of prevention measures as a function of urbanisation.

Among the regions in Sweden, the the capital region Stockholm county had the highest population density in 2022, with 374.6 inhabitants per square kilometers. In 2021, more than 2.4 million people lived in Stockholm. In terms of highest population density, Stockholm county was followed by Skåne, with 129 inhabitants per square kilometer. The least populated county was Norrbotten, with only 2.6 inhabitants per square kilometer.

Increasing population density

The population in Sweden is increasing steadily and reached 10.52 million inhabitants in 2022. Because of the growing population, the population density in Sweden increased as well over the past 10 years. In 2012, there were 23.4 inhabitants per square kilometer and in 2022 the number had increased to 25.8. Despite this, Sweden is a relatively sparsely populated country.

Highest rent per square meter in Stockholm

As the most densely populated county, the rents for rented dwellings in Stockholm were higher than in Sweden’s other counties. In 2020, the average rent per square meter in Stockholm county amounted to almost 1,300 Swedish kronor, while the rent in Norrbotten, the least populated county, reached an average of 999 Swedish kronor per square meter.

Abstract

The transition from socialism to a market economy has transformed the lives of many people. What are people's perceptions and attitudes to transition? What are the current attitudes to market reforms and political institutions?

To analyze these issues, the EBRD and the World Bank have jointly conducted the comprehensive, region-wide "Life in Transition Survey" (LiTS), which combines traditional household survey features with questions about respondents' attitudes and is carried out through two-stage sampling with a random selection of households and respondents.

The LiTS assesses the impact of transition on people through their personal and professional experiences during the first 15 years of transition. LiTS attempts to understand how these personal experiences of transition relate to people’s attitudes toward market and political reforms, as well as their priorities for the future.

The main objective of the LiTS was to build on existing studies to provide a comprehensive assessment of relationships among life satisfaction and living standards, poverty and inequality, trust in state institutions, satisfaction with public services, attitudes to a market economy and democracy and to provide valuable insights into how transition has affected the lives of people across a region comprising 16 countries in Central and Eastern Europe (“CEE”) and 11 in the Commonwealth of Independent State (“CIS”). Turkey and Mongolia were also included in the survey.

Geographic coverage

The LITS was to be implemented in the following 29 countries: Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), Georgia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Mongolia, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A total of 1,000 face-to-face household interviews per country were to be conducted, with adult (18 years and over) occupants and with no upper limit for age. The sample was to be nationally representative. The EBRD’s preferred procedure was a two stage sampling method, with census enumeration areas (CEA) as primary sampling units and households as secondary sampling units. To the extent possible, the EBRD wished the sampling procedure to apply no more than 2 stages.

The first stage of selection was to use as a sampling frame the list of CEA's generated by the most recent census. Ideally, 50 primary sampling units (PSU's) were to be selected from that sample frame, with probability proportional to size (PPS), using as a measure of size either the population, or the number of households.

The second sampling stage was to select households within each of the primary sampling units, using as a sampling frame a specially developed list of all households in each of the selected PSU's defined above. Households to be interviewed were to be selected from that list by systematic, equal probability sampling. Twenty households were to be selected in each of the 50 PSU's.

The individuals to be interviewed in each household were to be selected at random, within each of the selected households, with no substitution if possible.

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SAMPLE FRAME OF PSU’s

In each country we established the most recent sample frame of PSU’s which would best serve the purposes of the LITS sampling methodology. Details of the PSU sample frames in each country are shown in table 1 (page 10) of the survey report.

In the cases of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Serbia and Uzbekistan, CEA’s were used. In Croatia we also used CEA’s but in this case, because the CEA’s were very small and we would not have been able to complete the targeted number of interviews within each PSU, we merged together adjoining CEA’s and constructed a sample of 1,732 Merged Enumeration Areas. The same was the case in Montenegro.

In Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland and the Slovak Republic we used Eurostat’s NUTS area classification system.

[NOTE: The NUTS (from the French "Nomenclature des territoriales statistiques" or in English ("Nomenclature of territorial units for statistics"), is a uniform and consistent system that runs on five different NUTS levels and is widely used for EU surveys including the Eurobarometer (a comparable survey to the Life in Transition). As a hierarchical system, NUTS subdivides the territory of the country into a defined number of regions on NUTS 1 level (population 3-7 million), NUTS 2 level (800,000-3 million) and NUTS 3 level (150,000-800,000). At a more detailed level NUTS 3 is subdivided into smaller units (districts and municipalities). These are called "Local Administrative Units" (LAU). The LAU is further divided into upper LAU (LAU1 - formerly NUTS 4) and LAU 2 (formerly NUTS 5).]

Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Georgia, Moldova and Romania used the electoral register as the basis for the PSU sample frame. In the other cases, the PSU sample frame was chosen using either local geographical or administrative and territorial classification systems. The total number of PSU sample frames per country varied from 182 in the case of Mongolia to over 48,000 in the case of Turkey. To ensure the safety of our fieldworkers, we excluded from the sample frame PSU’s territories (in countries such as Georgia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Russia, etc) in which there was conflict and political instability. We have also excluded areas which were not easily accessible due to their terrain or were sparsely populated.

In the majority of cases, the source for this information was the national statistical body for the country in question, or the relevant central electoral committee. In establishing the sample frames and to the extent possible, we tried to maintain a uniform measure of size namely, the population aged 18 years and over which was of more pertinence to the LITS methodology. Where the PSU was based on CEA’s, the measure was usually the total population, whereas the electoral register provided data on the population aged 18 years old and above, the normal voting age in all sampled countries. Although the NUTS classification provided data on the total population, we filtered, where possible, the information and used as a measure of size the population aged 18 and above. The other classification systems used usually measure the total population of a country. However, in the case of Azerbaijan, which used CEA’s, and Slovenia, where a classification system based on administrative and territorial areas was employed, the measure of size was the number of households in each PSU.

The accuracy of the PSU information was dependent, to a large extent, on how recently the data has been collected. Where the data were collected recently then the information could be considered as relatively accurate. However, in some countries we believed that more recent information was available, but because the relevant authorities were not prepared to share this with us citing secrecy reasons, we had no alternative than to use less up to date data. In some countries the age of the data available makes the figures less certain. An obvious case in point is Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the latest available figures date back to 1991, before the Balkan wars. The population figures available take no account of the casualties suffered among the civilian population, resulting displacement and subsequent migration of people.

Equally there have been cases where countries have experienced economic migration in recent years, as in the case of those countries that acceded to the European Union in May, 2004, such as Hungary, Poland and the Baltic states, or to other countries within the region e.g. Armenians to Russia, Albanians to Greece and Italy; the available figures may not accurately reflect this. And, as most economic migrants tend to be men, the actual proportion of females in a population was, in many cases, higher than the available statistics would suggest. People migration in recent years has also occurred from rural to urban areas in Albania and the majority of the Asian Republics, as well as in Mongolia on a continuous basis but in this case, because of the nomadic population of the country.

SAMPLING METHODOLOGY

Brief Overview

In broad terms the following sampling methodology was employed: · From the sample frame of PSU’s we selected 50 units · Within each selected PSU, we sampled 20 households, resulting in 1,000 interviews per country · Within each household we sampled 1 and sometimes 2 respondents The sampling procedures were designed to leave no free choice to the interviewers. Details on each of the above steps as well as country specific procedures adapted to suit the availability, depth and quality of the PSU information and local operational issues are described in the following sections.

Selection of PSU’s

The PSU’s of each country (all in electronic format) were sorted first into metropolitan, urban and rural areas (in that order), and within each of these categories by region/oblast/province in alphabetical order. This ensured a consistent sorting methodology across all countries and also that the randomness of the selection process could be supervised.

To select the 50 PSU’s from the sample frame of PSU’s, we employed implicit stratification and sampling was done with PPS. Implicit stratification ensured that the sample of PSU’s was spread across the primary categories of explicit variables and a better representation of the population, without actually stratifying the PSU’s thus, avoiding difficulties in calculating the sampling errors at a later stage. In brief, the PPS involved the

This dataset is a research outcome of a European Research Council, Starting Grant funded (Grant Number 679097, Industrialisation and Urban Growth from the mid-nineteenth century Ottoman Empire to Contemporary Turkey in a Comparative Perspective, 1850-2000, UrbanOccupationsOETR) project. It contains a mid-nineteenth-century urban Ottoman population micro dataset for the city of Bursa.

In recent decades, a "big microdata revolution" has revolutionized access to transcribed historical census data for social science research. Despite this, the population records of the Ottoman Empire, spanning Southeastern Europe, Western Asia, and Northern Africa, remained absent from the big microdata ecosystem due to their prolonged inaccessibility. In fact, like other modernizing states in the nineteenth century, the Ottoman Empire started to enumerate its population in population registers (nüfus defterleri) in 1830, which recorded only males of all ages for conscription and taxation purposes. These registers were completed and updated in two waves, one in 1830-1838 and the other in the 1839-1865 period. Following this experience, the Empire implemented its first modern census, which included females, in 1881/1882 for more comprehensive statistical and governance reasons to converge with European census-taking practices and account for the increasing participation of females in economic and social spheres.

The pre-census population registers were opened to researchers in 2011. There are around 11.000 registers today. The microdata of the late Ottoman censuses is still not available. Still, unfortunately, the majority of the existing literature using the population registers superficially utilized and failed to tabulate the microdata. Most works using these valuable sources contented with transcribing the microdata from Ottoman to Latin script and presenting their data in raw and unstyled fashion without publishing them in a separate repository.

Our dataset marks the inaugural release of complete population data for an Ottoman urban center, the city of Bursa, derived from the 1839 population registers. It presents originally non-tabulated register data in a tabular format integrated into a relational Microsoft Access database. To ensure that our dataset is more accessible, we are also releasing the dataset in Microsoft Excel format.

The city of Bursa, a major cosmopolitan commercial hub in modern northwestern Turkey, is selected from the larger UrbanOccupationsOETR project database as an exemplary case to represent the volume, value, variety, and veracity of the population data. Furthermore, since urban areas are usually the most densely populated locations that attract the most migration in any country, they are attractive locations for multifold reasons in historical demography. Bursa is not the only urban location in the UrbanOccupationsOETR database. As it focused on urbanization and occupational structural change, it collected the population microdata on major urban centers (chosen as primary locations) and towns (denoted as secondary locations), which pioneered the economic development of post-Ottoman nation-states. What makes the city of Bursa’s data more advantageous than other cities is that it has been cleaned and validated multiple times and used elsewhere for demographic and economic analyses.

The Ottoman population registers of 1830 and 1839 classified the population under the commonly and officially recognized ethnoreligious identities- Muslim, Orthodox Christian, Armenian, Catholic, Jewish, and (Muslim and non-Muslim) Roma. Muslim and non-Muslim populations were counted in separate registers. The registers were organized along spatial and temporal lines. The standard unit of the register was the quarter (mahalle) in urban and village (karye) in rural settings. Within these register units, populated public and non-household spaces such as inns, dervish lodges, monasteries, madrasas, coffeehouses, bakeries, mills, pastures (of nomads), and large private farms (çiftlik) were recorded separately.

The household (menzil/hane) was the unit of entry, which sometimes took different forms depending on the context, such as the room for inns and the tent for nomads. Each household recorded its members on a horizontal line. The variables of male individuals inhabiting them were self-reported biographical information (names, titles/family names, ages, and occupations), physical description (height and facial hair), relationships with other household members (kinship, tenancy, and employment ties), infirmities, and military and poll tax status, including the reasons for exemption, military post, and poll tax category (high-ala, medium-evsat, and small-edna). Households with no inhabitants were differentiated. At the same time, if a resident was known to be absent during registration due to reasons such as military service or migration, he was recorded in his household with a note stating that reason. If he was missing and appeared later, he was added to the household during updates with a note like “not recorded previously” (e.g., hin-i tahrirde taşrada olub) or “newly recorded” (tahrir-mande).

In addition to the permanent residents of a given location, migrant/temporary non-local (yabancı) residents such as laborers, inn-stayers, and unskilled bachelors (bî-kâr) were recorded along with their place of origin and for how long they had been in the migrated place. Non-Muslim migrants were registered with information regarding the last location where they got their poll tax certificate and if they would make their next poll tax payment in the migrated location.

Updates were made mainly to births, deaths, migrations, and military and poll tax status. No other variables, such as age, were renewed except for occupations in a limited number of cases. Updates are easily identifiable since they were written in siyakat, a special Ottoman chancery shorthand script, and occasionally in red ink. Births were specified with newborns’ names added next to the father’s entry. Deaths were updated by crossing out the deceased person’s record. Migrations were added with a description of the migrated place (including the military branch if the person was conscripted). Military and poll tax status was updated by crossing out the old category and adding the new one next to it. Updates were usually expressed in hijri years, sometimes in month-year, and rarely in day-month-year fashion. It is important to note that since updates were made once every few months, these dates may reflect their registration date rather than giving the exact time of the events. Equally crucial is that many events, especially births, were not reported, so their quality is limited.

Modeled after the way information was contained in the population registers, this relational database has two tables, “tblHouse” and “tblIndividual.” Each table categorizes and standardizes the register variables. To make the data easier to use, the dataset also includes a query “Query_InnerJoin” that combines all the variables from each table in a separate sheet.

Given Bursa’s important place in Ottoman history, our dataset serves as a large and crucial resource for comprehending historical societal, economic, and demographic trends within the Empire in the early stages of globalization. The dataset has 8391 household entries (HouseID) and 19,186 individual (IndivID) entries. This data includes the population registered in all of Bursa’s quarters and other location categories in 1839 and the updates until and including 1843 (Figure 2). The ethno-religious breakdown of the total population is 12462 Muslims (65%), 3315 Armenians (17%), 2466 Orthodox Christians (13%), 749 Jews (4%), and 194 Catholics (1%).

To broaden access and use of our data and bring it more in line with findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (FAIR) data guidelines, the variables of “tblHouse” and “tblIndividual” are sorted into general categories and described in detail in the following tables. As the variables indicate, the dataset and population registers, in general, could serve to formulate unprecedented, hitherto impossible research questions related to major demographic dynamics, i.e., household size and composition, ethnoreligious differences, population density, occupational structure, intergenerational mobility and status transfer, mortality, fertility, migration, age-heaping/human capital, conscription, settlement patterns within and across urban locations, onomastics, toponymy, etc.

Table 1: Categories and descriptions of the variables of tblHouse