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 TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some States and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2010 Census, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.

Disclaimer: These data are updated by the author and are not an official product of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.This project provides two sets of migration estimates for the major US metro areas. The first series measures net migration of people to and from the urban neighborhoods of the metro areas. The second series covers all neighborhoods but breaks down net migration to other regions by four region types: (1) high-cost metros, (2) affordable, large metros, (3) midsized metros, and (4) small metros and rural areas. These series were introduced in a Cleveland Fed District Data Brief entitled “Urban and Regional Migration Estimates: Will Your City Recover from the Pandemic?"The migration estimates in this project are created with data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York/Equifax Consumer Credit Panel (CCP). The CCP is a 5 percent random sample of the credit histories maintained by Equifax. The CCP reports the census block of residence for over 10 million individuals each quarter. Each month, Equifax receives individuals’ addresses, along with reports of debt balances and payments, from creditors (mortgage lenders, credit card issuers, student loan servicers, etc.). An algorithm maintained by Equifax considers all of the addresses reported for an individual and identifies the individual’s most likely current address. Equifax anonymizes the data before they are added to the CCP, removing names, addresses, and Social Security numbers (SSNs). In lieu of mailing addresses, the census block of the address is added to the CCP. Equifax creates a unique, anonymous identifier to enable researchers to build individuals’ panels. The panel nature of the data allows us to observe when someone has migrated and is living in a census block different from the one they lived in at the end of the preceding quarter. For more details about the CCP and its use in measuring migration, see Lee and Van der Klaauw (2010) and DeWaard, Johnson and Whitaker (2019). DefinitionsMetropolitan areaThe metropolitan areas in these data are combined statistical areas. This is the most aggregate definition of metro areas, and it combines Washington DC with Baltimore, San Jose with San Francisco, Akron with Cleveland, etc. Metro areas are combinations of counties that are tightly linked by worker commutes and other economic activity. All counties outside of metropolitan areas are tracked as parts of a rural commuting zone (CZ). CZs are also groups of counties linked by commuting, but CZ definitions cover all counties, both metropolitan and non-metropolitan. High-cost metropolitan areasHigh-cost metro areas are those where the median list price for a house was more than $200 per square foot on average between April 2017 and April 2022. These areas include San Francisco-San Jose, New York, San Diego, Los Angeles, Seattle, Boston, Miami, Sacramento, Denver, Salt Lake City, Portland, and Washington-Baltimore. Other Types of RegionsMetro areas with populations above 2 million and house price averages below $200 per square foot are categorized as affordable, large metros. Metro areas with populations between 500,000 and 2 million are categorized as mid-sized metros, regardless of house prices. All remaining counties are in the small metro and rural category.To obtain a metro area's total net migration, sum the four net migration values for the the four types of regions.Urban neighborhoodCensus tracts are designated as urban if they have a population density above 7,000 people per square mile. High density neighborhoods can support walkable retail districts and high-frequency public transportation. They are more likely to have the “street life” that people associate with living in an urban rather than a suburban area. The threshold of 7,000 people per square mile was selected because it was the average density in the largest US cities in the 1930 census. Before World War II, workplaces, shopping, schools and parks had to be accessible on foot. Tracts are also designated as urban if more than half of their housing units were built before WWII and they have a population density above 2,000 people per square mile. The lower population density threshold for the pre-war neighborhoods recognizes that many urban tracts have lost population since the 1960s. While the street grids usually remain, the area also needs su

This layer shows Population. This is shown by state and county boundaries. This service contains the 2018-2022 release of data from the American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year data, and contains estimates and margins of error. There are also additional calculated attributes related to this topic, which can be mapped or used within analysis. This layer is symbolized to show the point by Population Density and size of the point by Total Population. The size of the symbol represents the total count of housing units. Population Density was calculated based on the total population and area of land fields, which both came from the U.S. Census Bureau. Formula used for Calculating the Pop Density (B01001_001E/GEO_LAND_AREA_SQ_KM). To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right. Current Vintage: 2018-2022ACS Table(s): B01001, B09020Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Date of API call: January 18, 2024National Figures: data.census.govThe United States Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS):About the SurveyGeography & ACSTechnical DocumentationNews & UpdatesThis ready-to-use layer can be used within ArcGIS Pro, ArcGIS Online, its configurable apps, dashboards, Story Maps, custom apps, and mobile apps. Data can also be exported for offline workflows. Please cite the Census and ACS when using this data.Data Note from the Census:Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables.Data Processing Notes:Boundaries come from the Cartographic Boundaries via US Census TIGER geodatabases. Boundaries are updated at the same time as the data updates, and the boundary vintage appropriately matches the data vintage as specified by the Census. These are Census boundaries with water and/or coastlines clipped for cartographic purposes. For state and county boundaries, the water and coastlines are derived from the coastlines of the 500k TIGER Cartographic Boundary Shapefiles. The original AWATER and ALAND fields are still available as attributes within the data table (units are square meters). The States layer contains 52 records - all US states, Washington D.C., and Puerto Rico. The Counties (and equivalent) layer contains 3221 records - all counties and equivalent, Washington D.C., and Puerto Rico municipios. See Areas Published. Percentages and derived counts, and associated margins of error, are calculated values (that can be identified by the "_calc_" stub in the field name), and abide by the specifications defined by the American Community Survey.Field alias names were created based on the Table Shells.Margin of error (MOE) values of -555555555 in the API (or "*****" (five asterisks) on data.census.gov) are displayed as 0 in this dataset. The estimates associated with these MOEs have been controlled to independent counts in the ACS weighting and have zero sampling error. So, the MOEs are effectively zeroes, and are treated as zeroes in MOE calculations. Other negative values on the API, such as -222222222, -666666666, -888888888, and -999999999, all represent estimates or MOEs that can't be calculated or can't be published, usually due to small sample sizes. All of these are rendered in this dataset as null (blank) values.

Census Tracts from 2020. The TIGER/Line shapefiles are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some States and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2020 Census, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2010 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area.

The United States is a country located in North America. It is made up of 50 states and the capital district of Washington. The US federal republic has its capital in Washington D.C., which means this dataset can be used to study demographics, geography, and population density for different cities across the United States. This information can help researchers, policymakers and businesses understand how people live and work within different geographical areas in the USA

This dataset comes from simplemaps.com, check out the dataset at https://simplemaps.com/data/us-cities

Thumbnail from https://www.vecteezy.com/vector-art/3798082-red-square-map-of-united-states-of-america-with-long-shadow

The Africa Population Distribution Database provides decadal population density data for African administrative units for the period 1960-1990. The databsae was prepared for the United Nations Environment Programme / Global Resource Information Database (UNEP/GRID) project as part of an ongoing effort to improve global, spatially referenced demographic data holdings. The database is useful for a variety of applications including strategic-level agricultural research and applications in the analysis of the human dimensions of global change.

This documentation describes the third version of a database of administrative units and associated population density data for Africa. The first version was compiled for UNEP's Global Desertification Atlas (UNEP, 1997; Deichmann and Eklundh, 1991), while the second version represented an update and expansion of this first product (Deichmann, 1994; WRI, 1995). The current work is also related to National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA) activities to produce a global database of subnational population estimates (Tobler et al., 1995), and an improved database for the Asian continent (Deichmann, 1996). The new version for Africa provides considerably more detail: more than 4700 administrative units, compared to about 800 in the first and 2200 in the second version. In addition, for each of these units a population estimate was compiled for 1960, 70, 80 and 90 which provides an indication of past population dynamics in Africa. Forthcoming are population count data files as download options.

African population density data were compiled from a large number of heterogeneous sources, including official government censuses and estimates/projections derived from yearbooks, gazetteers, area handbooks, and other country studies. The political boundaries template (PONET) of the Digital Chart of the World (DCW) was used delineate national boundaries and coastlines for African countries.

For more information on African population density and administrative boundary data sets, see metadata files at [http://na.unep.net/datasets/datalist.php3] which provide information on file identification, format, spatial data organization, distribution, and metadata reference.

References:

Deichmann, U. 1994. A medium resolution population database for Africa, Database documentation and digital database, National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, University of California, Santa Barbara.

Deichmann, U. and L. Eklundh. 1991. Global digital datasets for land degradation studies: A GIS approach, GRID Case Study Series No. 4, Global Resource Information Database, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi.

UNEP. 1997. World Atlas of Desertification, 2nd Ed., United Nations Environment Programme, Edward Arnold Publishers, London.

WRI. 1995. Africa data sampler, Digital database and documentation, World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

This layer shows Population. This is shown by county boundaries. This service is updated annually to contain the most currently released American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year data, and contains estimates and margins of error. There are also additional calculated attributes related to this topic, which can be mapped or used within analysis.
This layer is symbolized to show the point by Population Density and size of the point by Total Population. The size of the symbol represents the total count of housing units. Population Density was calculated based on the total population and area of land fields, which both came from the U.S. Census Bureau. Formula used for Calculating the Pop Density (B01001_001E/GEO_LAND_AREA_SQ_KM). To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right. Current Vintage: 2015-2019ACS Table(s): B01001, B09020Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Date of API call: February 10, 2021National Figures: data.census.gov The United States Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS): About the SurveyGeography & ACSTechnical Documentation News & UpdatesThis ready-to-use layer can be used within ArcGIS Pro, ArcGIS Online, its configurable apps, dashboards, Story Maps, custom apps, and mobile apps. Data can also be exported for offline workflows. Please cite the Census and ACS when using this data.Data Note from the Census:Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables. Data Processing Notes: Boundaries come from the US Census TIGER geodatabases. Boundaries are updated at the same time as the data updates (annually), and the boundary vintage appropriately matches the data vintage as specified by the Census. These are Census boundaries with water and/or coastlines clipped for cartographic purposes. For census tracts, the water cutouts are derived from a subset of the 2010 AWATER (Area Water) boundaries offered by TIGER. For state and county boundaries, the water and coastlines are derived from the coastlines of the 500k TIGER Cartographic Boundary Shapefiles. The original AWATER and ALAND fields are still available as attributes within the data table (units are square meters). The States layer contains 52 records - all US states, Washington D.C., and Puerto RicoCensus tracts with no population that occur in areas of water, such as oceans, are removed from this data service (Census Tracts beginning with 99).Percentages and derived counts, and associated margins of error, are calculated values (that can be identified by the "_calc_" stub in the field name), and abide by the specifications defined by the American Community Survey.Field alias names were created based on the Table Shells file available from the American Community Survey Summary File Documentation page.Margin of error (MOE) values of -555555555 in the API (or "*****" (five asterisks) on data.census.gov) are displayed as 0 in this dataset. The estimates associated with these MOEs have been controlled to independent counts in the ACS weighting and have zero sampling error. So, the MOEs are effectively zeroes, and are treated as zeroes in MOE calculations. Other negative values on the API, such as -222222222, -666666666, -888888888, and -999999999, all represent estimates or MOEs that can't be calculated or can't be published, usually due to small sample sizes.
All of these are rendered in this dataset as null (blank) values.

This map uses dot density patterns to indicate which population is larger in each area: urban (green) or rural (blue). Data is from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2020 Census Demographic and Housing Characteristics. The map's layers contain total population counts by sex, age, and race groups for Nation, State, County, Census Tract, and Block Group in the United States and Puerto Rico.The U.S. Census designates each census block as part of an urban area or as rural. Larger geographies in this map such as block group, tract, county and state can therefore have a mix of urban and rural population. This map illustrates the 100% urban areas with all green dots, and 100% rural areas in dark blue dots. Areas with mixed urban/rural population have a proportional mix of green and blue dots to give a visual indication of where change may be happening. From the Census:"The Census Bureau’s urban-rural classification is a delineation of geographic areas, identifying both individual urban areas and the rural area of the nation. The Census Bureau’s urban areas represent densely developed territory, and encompass residential, commercial, and other non-residential urban land uses. The Census Bureau delineates urban areas after each decennial census by applying specified criteria to decennial census and other data. Rural encompasses all population, housing, and territory not included within an urban area.For the 2020 Census, an urban area will comprise a densely settled core of census blocks that meet minimum housing unit density and/or population density requirements. This includes adjacent territory containing non-residential urban land uses. To qualify as an urban area, the territory identified according to criteria must encompass at least 2,000 housing units or have a population of at least 5,000." SourceAbout the dataYou can use this map as is and you can also modify it to use other attributes included in its layers. This map's layers contain total population counts by sex, age, and race groups data from the 2020 Census Demographic and Housing Characteristics. This is shown by Nation, State, County, Census Tract, Block Group boundaries. Each geography layer contains a common set of Census counts based on available attributes from the U.S. Census Bureau. There are also additional calculated attributes related to this topic, which can be mapped or used within analysis.Vintage of boundaries and attributes: 2020 Demographic and Housing Characteristics Table(s): P1, H1, H3, P2, P3, P5, P12, P13, P17, PCT12 (Not all lines of these DHC tables are available in this feature layer.)Data downloaded from: U.S. Census Bureau’s data.census.gov siteDate the Data was Downloaded: May 25, 2023Geography Levels included: Nation, State, County, Census Tract, Block GroupNational Figures: included in Nation layer The United States Census Bureau Demographic and Housing Characteristics: 2020 Census Results 2020 Census Data Quality Geography & 2020 Census Technical Documentation Data Table Guide: includes the final list of tables, lowest level of geography by table and table shells for the Demographic Profile and Demographic and Housing Characteristics.News & Updates This map is ready to be used in ArcGIS Pro, ArcGIS Online and its configurable apps, Story Maps, dashboards, Notebooks, Python, custom apps, and mobile apps. Data can also be exported for offline workflows. Please cite the U.S. Census Bureau when using this data. Data Processing Notes: These 2020 Census boundaries come from the US Census TIGER geodatabases. These are Census boundaries with water and/or coastlines erased for cartographic and mapping purposes. For Census tracts and block groups, the water cutouts are derived from a subset of the 2020 Areal Hydrography boundaries offered by TIGER. Water bodies and rivers which are 50 million square meters or larger (mid to large sized water bodies) are erased from the tract and block group boundaries, as well as additional important features. For state and county boundaries, the water and coastlines are derived from the coastlines of the 2020 500k TIGER Cartographic Boundary Shapefiles. These are erased to more accurately portray the coastlines and Great Lakes. The original AWATER and ALAND fields are unchanged and available as attributes within the data table (units are square meters).  The layer contains all US states, Washington D.C., and Puerto Rico. Census tracts with no population that occur in areas of water, such as oceans, are removed from this data service (Census Tracts beginning with 99). Block groups that fall within the same criteria (Block Group denoted as 0 with no area land) have also been removed.Percentages and derived counts, are calculated values (that can be identified by the "_calc_" stub in the field name). Field alias names were created based on the Table Shells file available from the Data Table Guide for the Demographic Profile and Demographic and Housing Characteristics. Not all lines of all tables listed above are included in this layer. Duplicative counts were dropped. For example, P0030001 was dropped, as it is duplicative of P0010001.To protect the privacy and confidentiality of respondents, their data has been protected using differential privacy techniques by the U.S. Census Bureau.

This data represents all ShotSpotter incidents that were classified as “Probable Gunfire”, “Single_Gunshot”, or “Multiple_Gunshots” occurring within one of the six coverage areas defined below since January 1, 2014. The Department plans to continue to release this data with quarterly updates. Classifications are assigned by ShotSpotter and represent their assessment of what kind of impulse noise occurred. Some impulses initially dismissed as non-gunfire are manually audited and resubmitted to the dataset after ground truth analysis.MPD began implementing the ShotSpotter system in 2006 and has added sensors and upgraded components of the system at various times. ShotSpotter has also enhanced their ability to distinguish gunshots from other impulse noises. For example, the number of impulse noises coded as gunshots during Independence Day celebrations have significantly decreased over the past four years.ShotSpotter does not provide coverage for the entire District of Columbia. Official coverage areas are designed by ShotSpotter in conjunction with MPD, to target high population density areas with frequent sounds of gunshots incidents.A ShotSpotter incident may involve one gunshot or multiple gunshots depending on the time elapsed between each shot. Each incident is given a serial number ID when it occurs.The Latitude and Longitude of the incidents are rounded to three decimal places due to privacy concerns. This roughly corresponds to a 100 meter resolution.

To estimate county of residence of Filipinx healthcare workers who died of COVID-19, we retrieved data from the Kanlungan website during the month of December 2020.22 In deciding who to include on the website, the AF3IRM team that established the Kanlungan website set two standards in data collection. First, the team found at least one source explicitly stating that the fallen healthcare worker was of Philippine ancestry; this was mostly media articles or obituaries sharing the life stories of the deceased. In a few cases, the confirmation came directly from the deceased healthcare worker's family member who submitted a tribute. Second, the team required a minimum of two sources to identify and announce fallen healthcare workers. We retrieved 86 US tributes from Kanlungan, but only 81 of them had information on county of residence. In total, 45 US counties with at least one reported tribute to a Filipinx healthcare worker who died of COVID-19 were identified for analysis and will hereafter be referred to as “Kanlungan counties.” Mortality data by county, race, and ethnicity came from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS).24 Updated weekly, this dataset is based on vital statistics data for use in conducting public health surveillance in near real time to provide provisional mortality estimates based on data received and processed by a specified cutoff date, before data are finalized and publicly released.25 We used the data released on December 30, 2020, which included provisional COVID-19 death counts from February 1, 2020 to December 26, 2020—during the height of the pandemic and prior to COVID-19 vaccines being available—for counties with at least 100 total COVID-19 deaths. During this time period, 501 counties (15.9% of the total 3,142 counties in all 50 states and Washington DC)26 met this criterion. Data on COVID-19 deaths were available for six major racial/ethnic groups: Non-Hispanic White, Non-Hispanic Black, Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, Non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native, Non-Hispanic Asian (hereafter referred to as Asian American), and Hispanic. People with more than one race, and those with unknown race were included in the “Other” category. NCHS suppressed county-level data by race and ethnicity if death counts are less than 10. In total, 133 US counties reported COVID-19 mortality data for Asian Americans. These data were used to calculate the percentage of all COVID-19 decedents in the county who were Asian American. We used data from the 2018 American Community Survey (ACS) five-year estimates, downloaded from the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) to create county-level population demographic variables.27 IPUMS is publicly available, and the database integrates samples using ACS data from 2000 to the present using a high degree of precision.27 We applied survey weights to calculate the following variables at the county-level: median age among Asian Americans, average income to poverty ratio among Asian Americans, the percentage of the county population that is Filipinx, and the percentage of healthcare workers in the county who are Filipinx. Healthcare workers encompassed all healthcare practitioners, technical occupations, and healthcare service occupations, including nurse practitioners, physicians, surgeons, dentists, physical therapists, home health aides, personal care aides, and other medical technicians and healthcare support workers. County-level data were available for 107 out of the 133 counties (80.5%) that had NCHS data on the distribution of COVID-19 deaths among Asian Americans, and 96 counties (72.2%) with Asian American healthcare workforce data. The ACS 2018 five-year estimates were also the source of county-level percentage of the Asian American population (alone or in combination) who are Filipinx.8 In addition, the ACS provided county-level population counts26 to calculate population density (people per 1,000 people per square mile), estimated by dividing the total population by the county area, then dividing by 1,000 people. The county area was calculated in ArcGIS 10.7.1 using the county boundary shapefile and projected to Albers equal area conic (for counties in the US contiguous states), Hawai’i Albers Equal Area Conic (for Hawai’i counties), and Alaska Albers Equal Area Conic (for Alaska counties).20

Urban rats are notorious invasive pests that thrive in cities by exploiting the resources accompanying high human population density. Identifying long-term trends in rat numbers and how they are shaped by environmental changes is critical for understanding their ecology, and projecting future vulnerabilities and mitigation needs. Here, we use trend analyses of public complaint and inspection data in 16 cities around the world to estimate trends in commensal rat populations. Eleven of 16 cities (69%) had significant increasing trends in rat numbers, including Washington D.C., New York, and Amsterdam. Just three cities experienced declines. Cities experiencing greater temperature increases over time saw larger increases in rat numbers. Cities with more dense human populations and more urbanization also saw larger increases in rats. Warming temperatures and more people living in cities may be expanding the seasonal activity periods and food resource availability for urban rats. Cities will have to integrate the biological impacts of these variables into any future management strategies.

This dataset supports the manuscript Lawful Handgun Licensing, Population Density, Poverty, Police Staffing, and Violent Crime: A Two-Cohort Comparison of U.S. Jurisdictions (2023–2024). It contains processed violent crime counts, rates per 100,000, population denominators, poverty statistics, and police staffing levels for two cohorts of U.S. jurisdictions. Cohort A includes counties with high levels of licensed handgun ownership (Brevard FL, Macomb MI, Genesee MI, Sumner TN, Sullivan TN, Pierce WA). Cohort B includes restrictive licensing jurisdictions (New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Washington DC, Boston). The package includes: County/city-level violent crime counts for homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault (2023–2024). Population denominators (2024 Census estimates). Derived violent crime rates per 100,000. Poverty measures and law enforcement officer staffing rates. Python replication script to regenerate tables and figures used in the study. Accessed data sources: FBI Crime Data Explorer, Major Cities Chiefs Association, NYPD annual tables, FDLE FIBRS, Michigan MICR, Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, and U.S. Census QuickFacts. Data pulled on August 27, 28, and 30, 2025.

Free-roaming domestic cats (Felis catus) are known to pose threats to ecosystem health via transmission of zoonotic diseases and predation of native wildlife. Likewise, free-roaming cats are also susceptible to predation or disease transmission from native wildlife. Physical interactions are required for many of these risks to be manifested, necessitating spatial and temporal overlap between cats and wildlife species. Therefore, knowledge of the location and extent of shared habitat and activity periods would benefit management programs. We used data from a 3-year camera trap survey to model species-specific occupancy and identify landscape variables that contribute to the distribution of free-roaming domestic cats and eight native mammal species in Washington, DC. (USA). Our analysis includes five species that are common prey items of domestic cats, and three species that are potential disease vectors or are otherwise known to be a risk to cats. We then predicted the probability of occupancy and estimated the probability of spatial overlap between cats and each native wildlife species at multiple scales. We also used kernel density estimations to calculate temporal overlap between cats and each native wildlife species. Across spatial scales, occupancy for potential disease vector species was generally positively correlated with canopy cover and open water. Prey species were also generally positively correlated with canopy cover, but displayed negative associations with human population density and inconsistent associations with average per capita income. Domestic cat occupancy was negatively correlated with natural habitat characteristics and positively correlated with human population density. Predicted spatial overlap between domestic cats and native wildlife was greatest for potential disease vector species. Temporal overlap was high (>0.50) between cats and all but two native wildlife species, indicating that temporal overlap is probable wherever species overlap spatially. Our findings indicate that the risk to and from domestic cats varies across urban landscapes, but primarily arises from human activities. As such, humans are implicated in the negative outcomes that result from cats interacting with wildlife. Data-driven management to reduce such interactions can aid in cat population management, biodiversity conservation, and public health campaigns.

Maps depicting the intensity of human pressure on the environment have become a critical tool for spatial planning and management, monitoring the extent of human influence across Earth, and identifying critical remaining intact habitat. Yet, these maps are often years out of date by the time they are available to scientists and policy-makers. Here we provide an updated Human Footprint methodology to run on an annual basis to monitor changing anthropogenic pressures. Software and methods are parameterized to enable regular updates in the future. In addition, we release a 100-meter global dataset for the years 2015–2019 and 2020 based on land use, population, infrastructure, and accessibility data. Results show high levels of agreement in validation against expert-interpreted satellite imagery and improved performance compared to previous iterations of similar datasets. These maps are directly relevant to measuring progress towards national and international targets related to biodiversit..., This dataset was created by combining data on human pressures across the period 2015 to 2019 and for 2020 to map: 1) Land cover change (built environments, crop lands, and pasture lands), 2) population density, 3) electric infrastructure, 4) roadways, 5) railways, and 6) navigable waterways. Each pressure layer is assigned a score relative to its level of human pressure, then computed into a standardized scale of 0–50 as the sum of all pressure layers. Pressures are not mutually exclusive, rather the co-occurrence of pressures is intended to identify the greatest levels of human impact. The majority of layers cover the complete time period of 2015–2020, however, pressures from pasture, roads, and railways are treated as static in the Human Footprint maps due to limitations in the input datasets. Scripts used to produce this data are available at: https://gitlab.com/impactobservatory/dwi-humanfootprint Overall methodology is based on the following: --B. A. Williams, O. Venter, J. R. All..., HFP scores range from 0 to 50, with 0 representing virtually no human pressure and 50 representing severe human pressure on the environment. Data files are divided into tiles of 8192x8192 pixels. The data available here is multiplied by 1000 and converted to uint16 data type to reduce file sizes such that a value of 50000 corresponds to a score of 50. No data regions are coded as 65535., # Global 100m Terrestrial Human Footprint (HFP-100)

https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.ttdz08m1f

This readme.txt file was generated on 2023-10-25 by corresponding author Joe Mazzariello, Impact Observatory Inc. Corresponding Author Information Name: Joe Mazzariello Institution: Impact Observatory, Inc Address: 900 19th St NW, Squad 18, Washington, DC 20006, USA Email: joe@impactobservatory.com

General Information

Date of data collection: 2015-01-01 through 2020-12-31

Geographic location of data collection: Global

Data Description: This file contains the global results for the Human Footprint 100m product for 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. The Human Footprint (HFP) is used to monitor changing anthropogenic pressures on a yearly cadence based on land cover change, population density, nighttime lights, roads, railways, and navigable rivers. Land cover for this set of data is based on the Copernicus Global Land Service Dyn...

Many large carnivores occupy a wide geographic distribution, and face threats from habitat loss and fragmentation, poaching, prey depletion, and human wildlife-conflicts. Conservation requires robust techniques for estimating population densities and trends, but the elusive nature and low densities of many large carnivores make them difficult to detect. Spatial capture-recapture (SCR) models provide a means for handling imperfect detectability, while linking population estimates to individual movement patterns to provide more accurate estimates than standard approaches. Within this framework, we investigate the effect of different sample interval lengths on density estimates, using simulations and a common leopard (Panthera pardus) model system. We apply Bayesian SCR methods to 89 simulated datasets and camera-trapping data from 22 leopards captured 82 times during winter 2010–2011 in Royal Manas National Park, Bhutan. We show that sample interval length from daily, weekly, monthly or quarterly periods did not appreciably affect median abundance or density, but did influence precision. We observed the largest gains in precision when moving from quarterly to shorter intervals. We therefore recommend daily sampling intervals for monitoring rare or elusive species where practicable, but note that monthly or quarterly sample periods can have similar informative value. We further develop a novel application of Bayes factors to select models where multiple ecological factors are integrated into density estimation. Our simulations demonstrate that these methods can help identify the “true” explanatory mechanisms underlying the data. Using this method, we found strong evidence for sex-specific movement distributions in leopards, suggesting that sexual patterns of space-use influence density. This model estimated a density of 10.0 leopards/100 km2 (95% credibility interval: 6.25–15.93), comparable to contemporary estimates in Asia. These SCR methods provide a guide to monitor and observe the effect of management interventions on leopards and other species of conservation interest.

This map's colors indicate which population is larger in each area: urban (green) or rural (yellow). The map's layers contain total population counts by sex, age, and race groups for Nation, State, County, Census Tract, and Block Group in the United States and Puerto Rico.The U.S. Census designates each census block as part of an urban area or as rural. Larger geographies in this map such as block group, tract, county and state can therefore have a mix of urban and rural population. This map illustrates the 100% urban areas in dark green, and 100% rural areas in dark yellow. Areas with mixed urban/rural population have softer shades of green or yellow, to give a visual indication of where change may be happening. From the Census:"The Census Bureau’s urban-rural classification is a delineation of geographic areas, identifying both individual urban areas and the rural area of the nation. The Census Bureau’s urban areas represent densely developed territory, and encompass residential, commercial, and other non-residential urban land uses. The Census Bureau delineates urban areas after each decennial census by applying specified criteria to decennial census and other data. Rural encompasses all population, housing, and territory not included within an urban area.For the 2020 Census, an urban area will comprise a densely settled core of census blocks that meet minimum housing unit density and/or population density requirements. This includes adjacent territory containing non-residential urban land uses. To qualify as an urban area, the territory identified according to criteria must encompass at least 2,000 housing units or have a population of at least 5,000." SourceAbout the dataYou can use this map as is and you can also modify it to use other attributes included in its layers. This map's layers contain total population counts by sex, age, and race groups data from the 2020 Census Demographic and Housing Characteristics. This is shown by Nation, State, County, Census Tract, Block Group boundaries. Each geography layer contains a common set of Census counts based on available attributes from the U.S. Census Bureau. There are also additional calculated attributes related to this topic, which can be mapped or used within analysis.Vintage of boundaries and attributes: 2020 Demographic and Housing Characteristics Table(s): P1, H1, H3, P2, P3, P5, P12, P13, P17, PCT12 (Not all lines of these DHC tables are available in this feature layer.)Data downloaded from: U.S. Census Bureau’s data.census.gov siteDate the Data was Downloaded: May 25, 2023Geography Levels included: Nation, State, County, Census Tract, Block GroupNational Figures: included in Nation layer The United States Census Bureau Demographic and Housing Characteristics: 2020 Census Results 2020 Census Data Quality Geography & 2020 Census Technical Documentation Data Table Guide: includes the final list of tables, lowest level of geography by table and table shells for the Demographic Profile and Demographic and Housing Characteristics.News & Updates This map is ready to be used in ArcGIS Pro, ArcGIS Online and its configurable apps, Story Maps, dashboards, Notebooks, Python, custom apps, and mobile apps. Data can also be exported for offline workflows. Please cite the U.S. Census Bureau when using this data. Data Processing Notes: These 2020 Census boundaries come from the US Census TIGER geodatabases. These are Census boundaries with water and/or coastlines erased for cartographic and mapping purposes. For Census tracts and block groups, the water cutouts are derived from a subset of the 2020 Areal Hydrography boundaries offered by TIGER. Water bodies and rivers which are 50 million square meters or larger (mid to large sized water bodies) are erased from the tract and block group boundaries, as well as additional important features. For state and county boundaries, the water and coastlines are derived from the coastlines of the 2020 500k TIGER Cartographic Boundary Shapefiles. These are erased to more accurately portray the coastlines and Great Lakes. The original AWATER and ALAND fields are unchanged and available as attributes within the data table (units are square meters).  The layer contains all US states, Washington D.C., and Puerto Rico. Census tracts with no population that occur in areas of water, such as oceans, are removed from this data service (Census Tracts beginning with 99). Block groups that fall within the same criteria (Block Group denoted as 0 with no area land) have also been removed.Percentages and derived counts, are calculated values (that can be identified by the "_calc_" stub in the field name). Field alias names were created based on the Table Shells file available from the Data Table Guide for the Demographic Profile and Demographic and Housing Characteristics. Not all lines of all tables listed above are included in this layer. Duplicative counts were dropped. For example, P0030001 was dropped, as it is duplicative of P0010001.To protect the privacy and confidentiality of respondents, their data has been protected using differential privacy techniques by the U.S. Census Bureau.

The EnviroAtlas Intelligent Dasymetric Mapping (IDM) Toolbox1 was used to generate these data. Dasymetric mapping is a geospatial technique that uses information such as land use and land cover to distribute population counts from irregularly shaped and sized source units (e.g., census blocks) to a standard grid while maintaining the population totals within each of the original source units. For this effort, open water, ice/snow, and emergent wetlands were considered uninhabitable. Furthermore, available ancillary datasets relevant to human land use were used to identify additional areas as uninhabited (e.g., cemeteries, commercial property, transportation corridors). This map is available for the conterminous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Various land cover datasets were used for different states and territories. Conterminous United States - 2019 National Land Cover Dataset Alaska – 2016 National Land Cover Dataset Hawaii – 2011 NOAA High Resolution Land Cover were reclassified and resampled to match National Land Cover Dataset Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands - U.S. Forest Service Landscape Monitoring System 2020 Land Use data

Using the IDM Toolbox, along with land cover, land use, and 2020 U.S. Census block counts, population densities were determined for each 30 m pixel by U.S. State and Territory. Because Rhode Island and Washington, D.C were not large enough to accurately calculate separately, they were combined with Massachusetts and Maryland, respectively. A complete description of the methods and ancillary datasets used to develop this work is described in the full metadata and the journal article:Baynes, J., A. Neale, and T. Hultgren. 2022. Improving intelligent dasymetric mapping population density estimates at 30 m resolution for the conterminous United States by excluding uninhabited areas. Earth System Science Data 14(6): 2833–2849. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-2833-2022.

This is an EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) web service supporting research, education, and decision-making. EnviroAtlas includes a user-friendly interactive map for data discovery, https://enviroatlas.epa.gov/enviroatlas/interactivemap. Access Data Fact Sheet: Fact Sheet Access Full Metadata: Conterminous US | Alaska | Hawaii | Puerto Rico | US Virgin Islands Access Web ServiceDownload GeoTIFF: Conterminous US | Alaska | Hawaii | Puerto Rico | US Virgin Islands To cite these data, please use this format: United States Environmental Protection Agency. EnviroAtlas. 2020 Dasymetric Population for the Conterminous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands. Accessed: [Month, Day, Year] from https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas or cite Baynes et. al. Please contact us with any questions! 1 Information about the IDM toolbox is available at https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/dasymetric-toolbox. Code for the IDM toolbox is maintained in two GitHub repositories [IDM Toolbox for ArcGIS Pro] [IDM Toolbox for Open-Source GIS].

Race is a social and historical construct, and the racial categories counted by the census change over time so the process of constructing stable racial categories for these 50 years out of census data required complex and imperfect decisions. Here we have used historical research on early 20th century southern California to construct historic racial categories from the IPUMS full count data, which allows us to track groups that were not formally classified as racial groups in some census decades like Mexican, but which were important racial categories in southern California. Detailed explanation of how we constructed these categories and the rationale we used for the decisions we made can be found here. Layers are symbolized to show the percentage of each of the following groups from 1900-1940:AmericanIndian Not-Hispanic, AmericanIndian Hispanic, Black non-Hispanic, Black-Hispanic, Chinese, Korean, Filipino and Japanese, Mexican, Hispanic Not-Mexican, white non-Hispanic. The IPUMS Census data is messy and includes some errors and undercounts, making it hard to map some smaller populations, like Asian Indians (in census called Hindu in 1920) and creating a possible undercount of Native American populations. The race data mapped here also includes categories that may not have been socially meaningful at the time like Black-Hispanic, which generally would represent people from Mexico who the census enumerator classified as Black because of their dark skin, but who were likely simply part of Mexican communities at the time. We have included maps of the Hispanic not-Mexican category which shows very small numbers of non-Mexican Hispanic population, and American Indian Hispanic, which often captures people who would have been listed as Indian in the census, probably because of skin color, but had ancestry from Mexico (or another Hispanic country). This category may include some indigenous Californians who married into or assimilated into Mexican American communities in the early 20th century. If you are interested in mapping some of the other racial or ethnic groups in the early 20th century, you can explore and map the full range of variables we have created in the People's History of the IE IE_ED1900-1940 Race Hispanic Marriage and Age Feature layer.Suggested Citation: Tilton, Jennifer. People's History Race Ethnicity Dot Density Map 1900-1940. A People's History of the Inland Empire Census Project 1900-1940 using IPUMS Ancestry Full Count Data. Program in Race and Ethnic Studies University of Redlands, Center for Spatial Studies University of Redlands, UCR Public History. 2023. 2025Feature Layer CitationTilton, Jennifer, Tessa VanRy & Lisa Benvenuti. Race and Demographic Data 1900-1940. A People's History of the Inland Empire Census Project 1900-1940 using IPUMS Ancestry Full Count Data. Program in Race and Ethnic Studies University of Redlands, Center for Spatial Studies University of Redlands, UCR Public History. 2023. Additional contributing authors: Mackenzie Nelson, Will Blach & Andy Garcia Funding provided by: People’s History of the IE: Storyscapes of Race, Place, and Queer Space in Southern California with funding from NEH-SSRC Grant 2022-2023 & California State Parks grant to Relevancy & History. Source for Census Data 1900- 1940 Ruggles, Steven, Catherine A. Fitch, Ronald Goeken, J. David Hacker, Matt A. Nelson, Evan Roberts, Megan Schouweiler, and Matthew Sobek. IPUMS Ancestry Full Count Data: Version 3.0 [dataset]. Minneapolis, MN: IPUMS, 2021. Primary Sources for Enumeration District Linework 1900-1940 Steve Morse provided the full list of transcribed EDs for all 5 decades "United States Enumeration District Maps for the Twelfth through the Sixteenth US Censuses, 1900-1940." Images. FamilySearch. https://FamilySearch.org: 9 February 2023. Citing NARA microfilm publication A3378. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, 2003. BLM PLSS Map Additional Historical Sources consulted include: San Bernardino City Annexation GIS Map Redlands City Charter Proposed with Ward boundaries (Not passed) 1902. Courtesy of Redlands City Clerk. Redlands Election Code Precincts 1908, City Ordinances of the City of Redlands, p. 19-22. Courtesy of Redlands City Clerk Riverside City Charter 1907 (for 1910 linework) courtesy of Riverside City Clerk. 1900-1940 Raw Census files for specific EDs, to confirm boundaries when needed, accessed through Family Search. If you have additional questions or comments, please contact jennifer_tilton@redlands.edu.