Population density (people per sq. km of land area) in United States was reported at 36.51 sq. Km in 2022, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. United States - Population density (people per sq. km) - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on September of 2025.

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;

Population density (people per sq. km of land area) in American Samoa was reported at 242 sq. Km in 2022, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. American Samoa - Population density (people per sq. km) - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on September of 2025.

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.

The average for 2021 based on 12 countries was 25 people per square km. The highest value was in Ecuador: 72 people per square km and the lowest value was in Guyana: 4 people per square km. The indicator is available from 1961 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

36.5 (people per sq. km) in 2022. Population density is midyear population divided by land area in square kilometers.

This data set represents 1990 block group population density, in people per square kilometer, in the conterminous United States. This data set represents The data set was used as an input data layer for a national model to predict nitrate concentration in ground water used for drinking. Nolan and Hitt (2006) developed two national models to predict contamination of ground water by nonpoint sources of nitrate. The nonlinear approach to national-scale Ground-WAter Vulnerability Assessment (GWAVA) uses components representing nitrogen (N) sources, transport, and attenuation. One model (GWAVA-S) predicts nitrate contamination of shallow (typically less than 5 meters deep), recently recharged ground water, which may or may not be used for drinking. The other (GWAVA-DW) predicts ambient nitrate concentration in deeper supplies used for drinking. This data set is one of 14 data sets (1 output data set and 13 input data sets) associated with the GWAVA-DW model. Full details of the model development are in Nolan and Hitt (2006). For inputs to the model, spatial attributes representing 13 nitrogen loading and transport and attenuation factors were compiled as raster data sets (1-km by 1-km grid cell size) for the conterminous United States (see table 1). >Table 1.-- Parameters of nonlinear regression model for > nitrate in ground water used for drinking (GWAVA-DW) > and corresponding input spatial data sets. > [kg, kilograms; km2, square kilometers.] > >Nitrogen Source Factors Data Set Name > 1 farm fertilizer (kg/hectare) gwava-dw_ffer > 2 confined manure (kg/hectare) gwava-dw_conf > 3 orchards/vineyards (percent) gwava-dw_orvi > 4 population density (people/km2) gwava-dw_popd > >Transport to Aquifer Factors > 5 water input (km2/cm) gwava-dw_wtin > 6 glacial till (yes/no) gwava-dw_gtil > 7 semiconsolidated sand aquifers gwava-dw_semc > (yes/no) > 8 sandstone and carbonate rocks gwava-dw_sscb > (yes/no) > 9 drainage ditch (km2) gwava-dw_ddit > 10 Hortonian overland flow gwava-dw_hor > (percent of streamflow) > >Attenuation Factors > 11 fresh surface water withdrawal gwava-dw_swus > for irrigation (megaliters/day) > 12 irrigation tailwater recovery (km2) gwava-dw_twre > 13 Dunne overland flow gwava-dw_dun > (percent of streamflow) > 14 well depth (meters) - "Farm fertilizer" is the average annual nitrogen input from commercial fertilizer applied to agricultural lands, 1992-2001, in kilograms per hectare. "Confined manure" is the average annual nitrogen input from confined animal manure, 1992 and 1997, in kilograms per hectare. "Orchards/vineyards" is the percent of orchards/vineyards land cover classification. "Population density" is 1990 block group population density, in people per square kilometer. "Water input" is the ratio of the total area of irrigated land to precipitation, in square kilometers per centimeter. "Glacial till" is the presence or absence of poorly sorted glacial till east of the Rocky Mountains. "Semiconsolidated sand aquifers" is the presence or absence of semiconsolidated sand aquifers. "Sandstone and carbonate rocks" is the presence or absence of sandstone and carbonate rock aquifers. "Drainage ditch" is the area of National Resources Inventory surface drainage, field ditch conservation practice, in square kilometers. "Hortonian overland flow" is infiltration excess overland flow estimated by TOPMODEL, in percent of streamflow. "Fresh surface water withdrawal for irrigation" is the amount of fresh surface water withdrawal for irrigation, in megaliters per day. "Irrigation tailwater recovery" is the area of National Resources Inventory irrigation system, tailwater recovery conservation practice, in square kilometers. "Dunne overland flow" is saturation overland flow estimated by TOPMODEL, in percent of streamflow. "Well depth" is the depth of the well, in meters. Well depth was not compiled as a spatial data set. Well depth equals 50 meters for the model simulation being presented. Reference cited: Nolan, B.T. and Hitt, K.J., 2006, Vulnerability of shallow ground water and drinking-water wells to nitrate in the United States: Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 40, no. 24, pages 7834-7840.

Africa: Population density (people per sq. km of land area)

  Dataset summary

This dataset provides values for "Population density (people per sq. km of land area)" across African countries, standardized and made ML-ready. Geographic scope: 54 African countries. Temporal coverage: 1960–2024 (annual). Units: As defined by the World Bank indicator.

  Source & licensing

Source: World Bank – World Development Indicators (WDI), Indicator code: EN.POP.DNST. License:… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/electricsheepafrica/Population-density-people-per-sq-km-of-land-area-africa.

description: In this dataset we present two maps that estimate the location and population served by domestic wells in the contiguous United States. The first methodology, called the Block Group Method or BGM, builds upon the original block-group data from the 1990 census (the last time the U.S. Census queried the population regarding their source of water) by incorporating higher resolution census block data. The second methodology, called the Road-Enhanced Method or REM, refines the locations by using a buffer expansion and shrinkage technique along roadways to define areas where domestic wells exist. The fundamental assumption with this method is that houses (and therefore domestic wells) are located near a named road. The results are presented as two nationally consistent domestic-well population datasets. While both methods can be considered valid, the REM map is more precise in locating domestic wells; the REM map had a smaller amount of spatial bias (nearly equal vs biased in type 1 error), total error (10.9% vs 23.7%,), and distance error (2.0 km vs 2.7 km), when comparing the REM and BGM maps to a California calibration map. However, the BGM map is more inclusive of all potential locations for domestic wells. The primary difference in the BGM and the REM is the mapping of low density areas. The REM has a 57% reduction in areas mapped as low density (populations greater than 0 but less than 1 person per km), concentrating populations into denser regions. Therefore, if one is trying to capture all of the potential areas of domestic-well usage, then the BGM map may be more applicable. If location is more imperative, then the REM map is better at identifying areas of the landscape with the highest probability of finding a domestic well. Depending on the purpose of a study, a combination of both maps can be used. For space concerns, the datasets have been divided into two separate geodatabases. The BGM map geodatabase and the REM map database.; abstract: In this dataset we present two maps that estimate the location and population served by domestic wells in the contiguous United States. The first methodology, called the Block Group Method or BGM, builds upon the original block-group data from the 1990 census (the last time the U.S. Census queried the population regarding their source of water) by incorporating higher resolution census block data. The second methodology, called the Road-Enhanced Method or REM, refines the locations by using a buffer expansion and shrinkage technique along roadways to define areas where domestic wells exist. The fundamental assumption with this method is that houses (and therefore domestic wells) are located near a named road. The results are presented as two nationally consistent domestic-well population datasets. While both methods can be considered valid, the REM map is more precise in locating domestic wells; the REM map had a smaller amount of spatial bias (nearly equal vs biased in type 1 error), total error (10.9% vs 23.7%,), and distance error (2.0 km vs 2.7 km), when comparing the REM and BGM maps to a California calibration map. However, the BGM map is more inclusive of all potential locations for domestic wells. The primary difference in the BGM and the REM is the mapping of low density areas. The REM has a 57% reduction in areas mapped as low density (populations greater than 0 but less than 1 person per km), concentrating populations into denser regions. Therefore, if one is trying to capture all of the potential areas of domestic-well usage, then the BGM map may be more applicable. If location is more imperative, then the REM map is better at identifying areas of the landscape with the highest probability of finding a domestic well. Depending on the purpose of a study, a combination of both maps can be used. For space concerns, the datasets have been divided into two separate geodatabases. The BGM map geodatabase and the REM map database.

Spatial capture-recapture (SCR) models have advanced our ability to estimate population density for wide ranging animals by explicitly incorporating individual movement. Though these models are more robust to various spatial sampling designs, few studies have empirically tested different large-scale trap configurations using SCR models. We investigated how extent of trap coverage and trap spacing affects precision and accuracy of SCR parameters, implementing models using the R package secr. We tested two trapping scenarios, one spatially extensive and one intensive, using black bear (Ursus americanus) DNA data from hair snare arrays in south-central Missouri, USA. We also examined the influence that adding a second, lower barbed-wire strand to snares had on quantity and spatial distribution of detections. We simulated trapping data to test bias in density estimates of each configuration under a range of density and detection parameter values. Field data showed that using multiple arrays with intensive snare coverage produced more detections of more individuals than extensive coverage. Consequently, density and detection parameters were more precise for the intensive design. Density was estimated as 1.7 bears per 100 km2 and was 5.5 times greater than that under extensive sampling. Abundance was 279 (95% CI = 193–406) bears in the 16,812 km2 study area. Excluding detections from the lower strand resulted in the loss of 35 detections, 14 unique bears, and the largest recorded movement between snares. All simulations showed low bias for density under both configurations. Results demonstrated that in low density populations with non-uniform distribution of population density, optimizing the tradeoff among snare spacing, coverage, and sample size is of critical importance to estimating parameters with high precision and accuracy. With limited resources, allocating available traps to multiple arrays with intensive trap spacing increased the amount of information needed to inform parameters with high precision.

Russia is the largest country in the world by far, with a total area of just over 17 million square kilometers. After Antarctica, the next three countries are Canada, the U.S., and China; all between 9.5 and 10 million square kilometers. The figures given include internal water surface area (such as lakes or rivers) - if the figures were for land surface only then China would be the second largest country in the world, the U.S. third, and Canada (the country with more lakes than the rest of the world combined) fourth. Russia Russia has a population of around 145 million people, putting it in the top ten most populous countries in the world, and making it the most populous in Europe. However, it's vast size gives it a very low population density, ranked among the bottom 20 countries. Most of Russia's population is concentrated in the west, with around 75 percent of the population living in the European part, while around 75 percent of Russia's territory is in Asia; the Ural Mountains are considered the continental border. Elsewhere in the world Beyond Russia, the world's largest countries all have distinctive topographies and climates setting them apart. The United States, for example, has climates ranging from tundra in Alaska to tropical forests in Florida, with various mountain ranges, deserts, plains, and forests in between. Populations in these countries are often concentrated in urban areas, and are not evenly distributed across the country. For example, around 85 percent of Canada's population lives within 100 miles of the U.S. border; around 95 percent of China lives east of the Heihe–Tengchong Line that splits the country; and the majority of populations in large countries such as Australia or Brazil live near the coast.

In this dataset we present two maps that estimate the location and population served by domestic wells in the contiguous United States. The first methodology, called the “Block Group Method” or BGM, builds upon the original block-group data from the 1990 census (the last time the U.S. Census queried the population regarding their source of water) by incorporating higher resolution census block data. The second methodology, called the “Road-Enhanced Method” or REM, refines the locations by using a buffer expansion and shrinkage technique along roadways to define areas where domestic wells exist. The fundamental assumption with this method is that houses (and therefore domestic wells) are located near a named road. The results are presented as two nationally consistent domestic-well population datasets. While both methods can be considered valid, the REM map is more precise in locating domestic wells; the REM map had a smaller amount of spatial bias (nearly equal vs biased in type 1 error), total error (10.9% vs 23.7%,), and distance error (2.0 km vs 2.7 km), when comparing the REM and BGM maps to a California calibration map. However, the BGM map is more inclusive of all potential locations for domestic wells. The primary difference in the BGM and the REM is the mapping of low density areas. The REM has a 57% reduction in areas mapped as low density (populations greater than 0 but less than 1 person per km), concentrating populations into denser regions. Therefore, if one is trying to capture all of the potential areas of domestic-well usage, then the BGM map may be more applicable. If location is more imperative, then the REM map is better at identifying areas of the landscape with the highest probability of finding a domestic well. Depending on the purpose of a study, a combination of both maps can be used. For space concerns, the datasets have been divided into two separate geodatabases. The BGM map geodatabase and the REM map database.

美国：人口密度：每平方公里人口在12-01-2017达35.608Person/sq km，相较于12-01-2016的35.355Person/sq km有所增长。美国：人口密度：每平方公里人口数据按年更新，12-01-1961至12-01-2017期间平均值为26.948Person/sq km，共57份观测结果。该数据的历史最高值出现于12-01-2017，达35.608Person/sq km，而历史最低值则出现于12-01-1961，为20.056Person/sq km。CEIC提供的美国：人口密度：每平方公里人口数据处于定期更新的状态，数据来源于World Bank，数据归类于全球数据库的美国 – 表 US.世行.WDI：人口和城市化进程统计。

Estimates are based on averages over 100 replicates for each scenario of density (1.0, 2.5 bears per100 km2), g0 (0.1, 0.2), and σ (5, 10, 15 km).Percent relative bias (%RB) and percent coverage of 95% confidence intervals (%COV) of mean density estimates for simulations of spatial capture recapture models under extensive and intensive trap configurations.

Order of values are mean (standard deviation, total) over six sessions. Note the sum of new detections (u) was 92 total individuals for the intensive design due to two individuals being detected in two arrays (i.e., total individuals was actually 90).aNumber of lured snares in each session.bNumber of individuals detected for the first time on each session.cNumber of individuals detected on each session.dNumber of detections, including within-session recaptures.eNumber of snares having at least one detection per session.Summary of sampling statistics for extensive and intensive (arrays A–E) black bear survey configurations in south-central Missouri, USA.

This data package was produced by researchers working on the Shortgrass Steppe Long Term Ecological Research (SGS-LTER) Project, administered at Colorado State University. Long-term datasets and background information (proposals, reports, photographs, etc.) on the SGS-LTER project are contained in a comprehensive project collection within the Digital Collections of Colorado (http://digitool.library.colostate.edu/R/?func=collections&collection_id=3429). The data table and associated metadata document, which is generated in Ecological Metadata Language, may be available through other repositories serving the ecological research community and represent components of the larger SGS-LTER project collection. Additional information and referenced materials can be found: http://hdl.handle.net/10217/83392 Carnivores are among the most conspicuous, charismatic and economically important mammals in shortgrass steppe, yet relatively is little is known about their populations or of the ecological factors that determine their distribution and abundance, in part because densities tend to be low. Mammalian carnivores represent the top predators in grassland food webs, consuming rodents, rabbits, young ungulates and other small vertebrates. In addition, shortgrass steppe is the primary habitat of the swift fox (Vulpes velox), a species of special conservation concern throughout most of its range. Fox populations are thought to be limited by predation from coyotes (Canis latrans), the most common carnivore in these grasslands and a species of interest, both for its ecological roles and well as a target species for human exploitation, ie hunting and predator control. In 1994, we implemented a low-intensity sampling scheme to monitor long-term changes in relative abundance of mammalian carnivores and help us examine interactions between these predators and their small mammal prey, including rodents and rabbits. We estimated relative abundance of carnivores using scat surveys along a fixed route. Four times each year (January, April, July, October), we drove a 32-km route consisting of pasture two-track and gravel roads on the CPER. We first drove the route to remove all scats (‘PRE-census’); we then returned ~14 d later and counted the number of scats deposited on the route (‘CENSUS’). We recorded the species that deposited the scat and estimated the scat age based on external appearance (4 categories). Beginning in 1997, we recorded the vegetation (habitat) type and topographic position of all scat locations to describe habitat use. Latrines are indicated by locations containing multiple scats. We used the ‘CENSUS’ data to calculate a scat index, defined as the number of scats deposited per km of road per night. The scat index can be used to estimate population density using equations for coyotes (Knowlton 1982) and swift foxes (Schauster et al. 2002) that described the rate of scat deposition from surveys where density was known. To estimate density and compare trends among seasons and years, we omitted scats collected along the 8.3 km of the route that occurred on gravel county roads. These roads are graded sporadically, sometimes between pre-census and census surveys, which tended to remove scats. (NOTE: these observations are NOT omitted in the dataset). Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Website Pointer to html file. File Name: Web Page, url: https://portal.edirepository.org/nis/mapbrowse?scope=knb-lter-sgs&identifier=135 Webpage with information and links to data files for download