analyze the current population survey (cps) annual social and economic supplement (asec) with r the annual march cps-asec has been supplying the statistics for the census bureau's report on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage since 1948. wow. the us census bureau and the bureau of labor statistics ( bls) tag-team on this one. until the american community survey (acs) hit the scene in the early aughts (2000s), the current population survey had the largest sample size of all the annual general demographic data sets outside of the decennial census - about two hundred thousand respondents. this provides enough sample to conduct state- and a few large metro area-level analyses. your sample size will vanish if you start investigating subgroups b y state - consider pooling multiple years. county-level is a no-no. despite the american community survey's larger size, the cps-asec contains many more variables related to employment, sources of income, and insurance - and can be trended back to harry truman's presidency. aside from questions specifically asked about an annual experience (like income), many of the questions in this march data set should be t reated as point-in-time statistics. cps-asec generalizes to the united states non-institutional, non-active duty military population. the national bureau of economic research (nber) provides sas, spss, and stata importation scripts to create a rectangular file (rectangular data means only person-level records; household- and family-level information gets attached to each person). to import these files into r, the parse.SAScii function uses nber's sas code to determine how to import the fixed-width file, then RSQLite to put everything into a schnazzy database. you can try reading through the nber march 2012 sas importation code yourself, but it's a bit of a proc freak show. this new github repository contains three scripts: 2005-2012 asec - download all microdata.R down load the fixed-width file containing household, family, and person records import by separating this file into three tables, then merge 'em together at the person-level download the fixed-width file containing the person-level replicate weights merge the rectangular person-level file with the replicate weights, then store it in a sql database create a new variable - one - in the data table 2012 asec - analysis examples.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' progr am create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights perform a boatload of analysis examples replicate census estimates - 2011.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' program create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights match the sas output shown in the png file below 2011 asec replicate weight sas output.png statistic and standard error generated from the replicate-weighted example sas script contained in this census-provided person replicate weights usage instructions document. click here to view these three scripts for more detail about the current population survey - annual social and economic supplement (cps-asec), visit: the census bureau's current population survey page the bureau of labor statistics' current population survey page the current population survey's wikipedia article notes: interviews are conducted in march about experiences during the previous year. the file labeled 2012 includes information (income, work experience, health insurance) pertaining to 2011. when you use the current populat ion survey to talk about america, subract a year from the data file name. as of the 2010 file (the interview focusing on america during 2009), the cps-asec contains exciting new medical out-of-pocket spending variables most useful for supplemental (medical spending-adjusted) poverty research. confidential to sas, spss, stata, sudaan users: why are you still rubbing two sticks together after we've invented the butane lighter? time to transition to r. :D

Abstract

In 2009, the EU-SILC instrument covered all EU Member States plus Iceland, Turkey, Norway and Switzerland. EU-SILC has become the EU reference source for comparative statistics on income distribution and social exclusion at European level, particularly in the context of the "Program of Community action to encourage cooperation between Member States to combat social exclusion" and for producing structural indicators on social cohesion for the annual spring report to the European Council. The first priority is to be given to the delivery of comparable, timely and high quality cross-sectional data.

There are two types of datasets: 1) Cross-sectional data pertaining to fixed time periods, with variables on income, poverty, social exclusion and living conditions. 2) Longitudinal data pertaining to individual-level changes over time, observed periodically - usually over four years.

Social exclusion and housing-condition information is collected at household level. Income at a detailed component level is collected at personal level, with some components included in the "Household" section. Labour, education and health observations only apply to persons 16 and older. EU-SILC was established to provide data on structural indicators of social cohesion (at-risk-of-poverty rate, S80/S20 and gender pay gap) and to provide relevant data for the two 'open methods of coordination' in the field of social inclusion and pensions in Europe.

The 7th version of the 2009 Cross-Sectional User Database (UDB) as released in July 2015 is documented here.

Geographic coverage

The survey covers following countries: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Greece, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden, United Kingdom, Iceland, Norway.

Small parts of the national territory amounting to no more than 2% of the national population and the national territories listed below may be excluded from EU-SILC: France - French Overseas Departments and territories; Netherlands - The West Frisian Islands with the exception of Texel; Ireland - All offshore islands with the exception of Achill, Bull, Cruit, Gorumna, Inishnee, Lettermore, Lettermullan and Valentia; United kingdom - Scotland north of the Caledonian Canal, the Scilly Islands.

Analysis unit

• Households;
• Individuals 16 years and older.

Universe

The survey covered all household members over 16 years old. Persons living in collective households and in institutions are generally excluded from the target population.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

On the basis of various statistical and practical considerations and the precision requirements for the most critical variables, the minimum effective sample sizes to be achieved were defined. Sample size for the longitudinal component refers, for any pair of consecutive years, to the number of households successfully interviewed in the first year in which all or at least a majority of the household members aged 16 or over are successfully interviewed in both the years.

For the cross-sectional component, the plans are to achieve the minimum effective sample size of around 131.000 households in the EU as a whole (137.000 including Iceland and Norway). The allocation of the EU sample among countries represents a compromise between two objectives: the production of results at the level of individual countries, and production for the EU as a whole. Requirements for the longitudinal data will be less important. For this component, an effective sample size of around 98.000 households (103.000 including Iceland and Norway) is planned.

Member States using registers for income and other data may use a sample of persons (selected respondents) rather than a sample of complete households in the interview survey. The minimum effective sample size in terms of the number of persons aged 16 or over to be interviewed in detail is in this case taken as 75 % of the figures shown in columns 3 and 4 of the table I, for the cross-sectional and longitudinal components respectively.

The reference is to the effective sample size, which is the size required if the survey were based on simple random sampling (design effect in relation to the 'risk of poverty rate' variable = 1.0). The actual sample sizes will have to be larger to the extent that the design effects exceed 1.0 and to compensate for all kinds of non-response. Furthermore, the sample size refers to the number of valid households which are households for which, and for all members of which, all or nearly all the required information has been obtained. For countries with a sample of persons design, information on income and other data shall be collected for the household of each selected respondent and for all its members.

At the beginning, a cross-sectional representative sample of households is selected. It is divided into say 4 sub-samples, each by itself representative of the whole population and similar in structure to the whole sample. One sub-sample is purely cross-sectional and is not followed up after the first round. Respondents in the second sub-sample are requested to participate in the panel for 2 years, in the third sub-sample for 3 years, and in the fourth for 4 years. From year 2 onwards, one new panel is introduced each year, with request for participation for 4 years. In any one year, the sample consists of 4 sub-samples, which together constitute the cross-sectional sample. In year 1 they are all new samples; in all subsequent years, only one is new sample. In year 2, three are panels in the second year; in year 3, one is a panel in the second year and two in the third year; in subsequent years, one is a panel for the second year, one for the third year, and one for the fourth (final) year.

According to the Commission Regulation on sampling and tracing rules, the selection of the sample will be drawn according to the following requirements:

1. For all components of EU-SILC (whether survey or register based), the crosssectional and longitudinal (initial sample) data shall be based on a nationally representative probability sample of the population residing in private households within the country, irrespective of language, nationality or legal residence status. All private households and all persons aged 16 and over within the household are eligible for the operation.
2. Representative probability samples shall be achieved both for households, which form the basic units of sampling, data collection and data analysis, and for individual persons in the target population.
3. The sampling frame and methods of sample selection shall ensure that every individual and household in the target population is assigned a known and non-zero probability of selection.
4. By way of exception, paragraphs 1 to 3 shall apply in Germany exclusively to the part of the sample based on probability sampling according to Article 8 of the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council (EC) No 1177/2003 concerning

Community Statistics on Income and Living Conditions. Article 8 of the EU-SILC Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council mentions: 1. The cross-sectional and longitudinal data shall be based on nationally representative probability samples. 2. By way of exception to paragraph 1, Germany shall supply cross-sectional data based on a nationally representative probability sample for the first time for the year 2008. For the year 2005, Germany shall supply data for one fourth based on probability sampling and for three fourths based on quota samples, the latter to be progressively replaced by random selection so as to achieve fully representative probability sampling by 2008. For the longitudinal component, Germany shall supply for the year 2006 one third of longitudinal data (data for year 2005 and 2006) based on probability sampling and two thirds based on quota samples. For the year 2007, half of the longitudinal data relating to years 2005, 2006 and 2007 shall be based on probability sampling and half on quota sample. After 2007 all of the longitudinal data shall be based on probability sampling.

Detailed information about sampling is available in Quality Reports in Related Materials.

Mode of data collection

Mixed

Abstract

Round 1 of the Afrobarometer survey was conducted from July 1999 through June 2001 in 12 African countries, to solicit public opinion on democracy, governance, markets, and national identity. The full 12 country dataset released was pieced together out of different projects, Round 1 of the Afrobarometer survey,the old Southern African Democracy Barometer, and similar surveys done in West and East Africa.

The 7 country dataset is a subset of the Round 1 survey dataset, and consists of a combined dataset for the 7 Southern African countries surveyed with other African countries in Round 1, 1999-2000 (Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe). It is a useful dataset because, in contrast to the full 12 country Round 1 dataset, all countries in this dataset were surveyed with the identical questionnaire

Geographic coverage

Botswana Lesotho Malawi Namibia South Africa Zambia Zimbabwe

Analysis unit

Basic units of analysis that the study investigates include: individuals and groups

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A new sample has to be drawn for each round of Afrobarometer surveys. Whereas the standard sample size for Round 3 surveys will be 1200 cases, a larger sample size will be required in societies that are extremely heterogeneous (such as South Africa and Nigeria), where the sample size will be increased to 2400. Other adaptations may be necessary within some countries to account for the varying quality of the census data or the availability of census maps.

The sample is designed as a representative cross-section of all citizens of voting age in a given country. The goal is to give every adult citizen an equal and known chance of selection for interview. We strive to reach this objective by (a) strictly applying random selection methods at every stage of sampling and by (b) applying sampling with probability proportionate to population size wherever possible. A randomly selected sample of 1200 cases allows inferences to national adult populations with a margin of sampling error of no more than plus or minus 2.5 percent with a confidence level of 95 percent. If the sample size is increased to 2400, the confidence interval shrinks to plus or minus 2 percent.

Sample Universe

The sample universe for Afrobarometer surveys includes all citizens of voting age within the country. In other words, we exclude anyone who is not a citizen and anyone who has not attained this age (usually 18 years) on the day of the survey. Also excluded are areas determined to be either inaccessible or not relevant to the study, such as those experiencing armed conflict or natural disasters, as well as national parks and game reserves. As a matter of practice, we have also excluded people living in institutionalized settings, such as students in dormitories and persons in prisons or nursing homes.

What to do about areas experiencing political unrest? On the one hand we want to include them because they are politically important. On the other hand, we want to avoid stretching out the fieldwork over many months while we wait for the situation to settle down. It was agreed at the 2002 Cape Town Planning Workshop that it is difficult to come up with a general rule that will fit all imaginable circumstances. We will therefore make judgments on a case-by-case basis on whether or not to proceed with fieldwork or to exclude or substitute areas of conflict. National Partners are requested to consult Core Partners on any major delays, exclusions or substitutions of this sort.

Sample Design

The sample design is a clustered, stratified, multi-stage, area probability sample.

To repeat the main sampling principle, the objective of the design is to give every sample element (i.e. adult citizen) an equal and known chance of being chosen for inclusion in the sample. We strive to reach this objective by (a) strictly applying random selection methods at every stage of sampling and by (b) applying sampling with probability proportionate to population size wherever possible.

In a series of stages, geographically defined sampling units of decreasing size are selected. To ensure that the sample is representative, the probability of selection at various stages is adjusted as follows:

The sample is stratified by key social characteristics in the population such as sub-national area (e.g. region/province) and residential locality (urban or rural). The area stratification reduces the likelihood that distinctive ethnic or language groups are left out of the sample. And the urban/rural stratification is a means to make sure that these localities are represented in their correct proportions. Wherever possible, and always in the first stage of sampling, random sampling is conducted with probability proportionate to population size (PPPS). The purpose is to guarantee that larger (i.e., more populated) geographical units have a proportionally greater probability of being chosen into the sample. The sampling design has four stages

A first-stage to stratify and randomly select primary sampling units;

A second-stage to randomly select sampling start-points;

A third stage to randomly choose households;

A final-stage involving the random selection of individual respondents

We shall deal with each of these stages in turn.

STAGE ONE: Selection of Primary Sampling Units (PSUs)

The primary sampling units (PSU's) are the smallest, well-defined geographic units for which reliable population data are available. In most countries, these will be Census Enumeration Areas (or EAs). Most national census data and maps are broken down to the EA level. In the text that follows we will use the acronyms PSU and EA interchangeably because, when census data are employed, they refer to the same unit.

We strongly recommend that NIs use official national census data as the sampling frame for Afrobarometer surveys. Where recent or reliable census data are not available, NIs are asked to inform the relevant Core Partner before they substitute any other demographic data. Where the census is out of date, NIs should consult a demographer to obtain the best possible estimates of population growth rates. These should be applied to the outdated census data in order to make projections of population figures for the year of the survey. It is important to bear in mind that population growth rates vary by area (region) and (especially) between rural and urban localities. Therefore, any projected census data should include adjustments to take such variations into account.

Indeed, we urge NIs to establish collegial working relationships within professionals in the national census bureau, not only to obtain the most recent census data, projections, and maps, but to gain access to sampling expertise. NIs may even commission a census statistician to draw the sample to Afrobarometer specifications, provided that provision for this service has been made in the survey budget.

Regardless of who draws the sample, the NIs should thoroughly acquaint themselves with the strengths and weaknesses of the available census data and the availability and quality of EA maps. The country and methodology reports should cite the exact census data used, its known shortcomings, if any, and any projections made from the data. At minimum, the NI must know the size of the population and the urban/rural population divide in each region in order to specify how to distribute population and PSU's in the first stage of sampling. National investigators should obtain this written data before they attempt to stratify the sample.

Once this data is obtained, the sample population (either 1200 or 2400) should be stratified, first by area (region/province) and then by residential locality (urban or rural). In each case, the proportion of the sample in each locality in each region should be the same as its proportion in the national population as indicated by the updated census figures.

Having stratified the sample, it is then possible to determine how many PSU's should be selected for the country as a whole, for each region, and for each urban or rural locality.

The total number of PSU's to be selected for the whole country is determined by calculating the maximum degree of clustering of interviews one can accept in any PSU. Because PSUs (which are usually geographically small EAs) tend to be socially homogenous we do not want to select too many people in any one place. Thus, the Afrobarometer has established a standard of no more than 8 interviews per PSU. For a sample size of 1200, the sample must therefore contain 150 PSUs/EAs (1200 divided by 8). For a sample size of 2400, there must be 300 PSUs/EAs.

These PSUs should then be allocated proportionally to the urban and rural localities within each regional stratum of the sample. Let's take a couple of examples from a country with a sample size of 1200. If the urban locality of Region X in this country constitutes 10 percent of the current national population, then the sample for this stratum should be 15 PSUs (calculated as 10 percent of 150 PSUs). If the rural population of Region Y constitutes 4 percent of the current national population, then the sample for this stratum should be 6 PSU's.

The next step is to select particular PSUs/EAs using random methods. Using the above example of the rural localities in Region Y, let us say that you need to pick 6 sample EAs out of a census list that contains a total of 240 rural EAs in Region Y. But which 6? If the EAs created by the national census bureau are of equal or roughly equal population size, then selection is relatively straightforward. Just number all EAs consecutively, then make six selections using a table of random numbers. This procedure, known as simple random sampling (SRS), will

Abstract

The dataset is a relational dataset of 8,000 households households, representing a sample of the population of an imaginary middle-income country. The dataset contains two data files: one with variables at the household level, the other one with variables at the individual level. It includes variables that are typically collected in population censuses (demography, education, occupation, dwelling characteristics, fertility, mortality, and migration) and in household surveys (household expenditure, anthropometric data for children, assets ownership). The data only includes ordinary households (no community households). The dataset was created using REaLTabFormer, a model that leverages deep learning methods. The dataset was created for the purpose of training and simulation and is not intended to be representative of any specific country.

The full-population dataset (with about 10 million individuals) is also distributed as open data.

Geographic coverage

The dataset is a synthetic dataset for an imaginary country. It was created to represent the population of this country by province (equivalent to admin1) and by urban/rural areas of residence.

Analysis unit

Household, Individual

Universe

The dataset is a fully-synthetic dataset representative of the resident population of ordinary households for an imaginary middle-income country.

Kind of data

ssd

Sampling procedure

The sample size was set to 8,000 households. The fixed number of households to be selected from each enumeration area was set to 25. In a first stage, the number of enumeration areas to be selected in each stratum was calculated, proportional to the size of each stratum (stratification by geo_1 and urban/rural). Then 25 households were randomly selected within each enumeration area. The R script used to draw the sample is provided as an external resource.

Mode of data collection

other

Research instrument

The dataset is a synthetic dataset. Although the variables it contains are variables typically collected from sample surveys or population censuses, no questionnaire is available for this dataset. A "fake" questionnaire was however created for the sample dataset extracted from this dataset, to be used as training material.

Cleaning operations

The synthetic data generation process included a set of "validators" (consistency checks, based on which synthetic observation were assessed and rejected/replaced when needed). Also, some post-processing was applied to the data to result in the distributed data files.

Response rate

This is a synthetic dataset; the "response rate" is 100%.

I explore the sample size in qualitative research that is required to reach theoretical saturation. I conceptualize a population as consisting of sub-populations that contain different types of information sources that hold a number of codes. Theoretical saturation is reached after all the codes in the population have been observed once in the sample. I delineate three different scenarios to sample information sources: “random chance,” which is based on probability sampling, “minimal information,” which yields at least one new code per sampling step, and “maximum information,” which yields the largest number of new codes per sampling step. Next, I use simulations to assess the minimum sample size for each scenario for systematically varying hypothetical populations. I show that theoretical saturation is more dependent on the mean probability of observing codes than on the number of codes in a population. Moreover, the minimal and maximal information scenarios are significantly more efficient than random chance, but yield fewer repetitions per code to validate the findings. I formulate guidelines for purposive sampling and recommend that researchers follow a minimum information scenario.

Wildlife populations often exhibit unequal catchability between subgroups such as males and females. This heterogeneity of capture probabilities can bias both population size and sex ratio estimates. Several authors have suggested that this problem can be overcome by treating males and females as separate populations and calculating a population estimate for each of them. However, this suggestion has received little testing, and many researchers do not implement it. Therefore, we used two simulations to test the utility of this method. One simulated a closed population, while the other simulated an open population and used the robust design to calculate population sizes. We tested both simulations with multiple levels of heterogeneity, and we used a third simulation to test several methods for detecting heterogeneity of capture probabilities. We found that treating males and females as separate populations produced more accurate population and sex ratio estimates. The benefits of this method were particularly pronounced for sex ratio estimates. When males and females were included as a single population, the sex ratio estimates became inaccurate when even slight heterogeneity was present, but when males and females were treated separately, the estimates were accurate even when large biases were present. Nevertheless, treating males and females separately reduced precision, and this method may not be appropriate when capture and recapture rates are low. None of the methods for detecting heterogeneity were robust, and we do not recommend that researchers rely on them. Rather, we suggest separating populations by sex, age, or other subgroups whenever sample sizes permit.

Effective population size (Ne) is a particularly useful metric for conservation as it affects genetic drift, inbreeding and adaptive potential within populations. Current guidelines recommend a minimum Ne of 50 and 500 to avoid short-term inbreeding and to preserve long-term adaptive potential, respectively. However, the extent to which wild populations reach these thresholds globally has not been investigated, nor has the relationship between Ne and human activities. Through a quantitative review, we generated a dataset with 4610 georeferenced Ne estimates from 3829 unique populations, extracted from 723 articles. These data show that certain taxonomic groups are less likely to meet 50/500 thresholds and are disproportionately impacted by human activities; plant, mammal, and amphibian populations had a <54% probability of reaching = 50 and a <9% probability of reaching = 500. Populations listed as being of conservation concern according to the IUCN Red List had a smaller median than unlisted populations, and this was consistent across all taxonomic groups. was reduced in areas with a greater Global Human Footprint, especially for amphibians, birds, and mammals, however relationships varied between taxa. We also highlight several considerations for future works, including the role that gene flow and subpopulation structure plays in the estimation of in wild populations, and the need for finer-scale taxonomic analyses. Our findings provide guidance for more specific thresholds based on Ne and help prioritize assessment of populations from taxa most at risk of failing to meet conservation thresholds. Methods Literature search, screening, and data extraction A primary literature search was conducted using ISI Web of Science Core Collection and any articles that referenced two popular single-sample Ne estimation software packages: LDNe (Waples & Do, 2008), and NeEstimator v2 (Do et al., 2014). The initial search included 4513 articles published up to the search date of May 26, 2020. Articles were screened for relevance in two steps, first based on title and abstract, and then based on the full text. For each step, a consistency check was performed using 100 articles to ensure they were screened consistently between reviewers (n = 6). We required a kappa score (Collaboration for Environmental Evidence, 2020) of ³ 0.6 in order to proceed with screening of the remaining articles. Articles were screened based on three criteria: (1) Is an estimate of Ne or Nb reported; (2) for a wild animal or plant population; (3) using a single-sample genetic estimation method. Further details on the literature search and article screening are found in the Supplementary Material (Fig. S1). We extracted data from all studies retained after both screening steps (title and abstract; full text). Each line of data entered in the database represents a single estimate from a population. Some populations had multiple estimates over several years, or from different estimation methods (see Table S1), and each of these was entered on a unique row in the database. Data on N̂e, N̂b, or N̂c were extracted from tables and figures using WebPlotDigitizer software version 4.3 (Rohatgi, 2020). A full list of data extracted is found in Table S2. Data Filtering After the initial data collation, correction, and organization, there was a total of 8971 Ne estimates (Fig. S1). We used regression analyses to compare Ne estimates on the same populations, using different estimation methods (LD, Sibship, and Bayesian), and found that the R2 values were very low (R2 values of <0.1; Fig. S2 and Fig. S3). Given this inconsistency, and the fact that LD is the most frequently used method in the literature (74% of our database), we proceeded with only using the LD estimates for our analyses. We further filtered the data to remove estimates where no sample size was reported or no bias correction (Waples, 2006) was applied (see Fig. S6 for more details). Ne is sometimes estimated to be infinity or negative within a population, which may reflect that a population is very large (i.e., where the drift signal-to-noise ratio is very low), and/or that there is low precision with the data due to small sample size or limited genetic marker resolution (Gilbert & Whitlock, 2015; Waples & Do, 2008; Waples & Do, 2010) We retained infinite and negative estimates only if they reported a positive lower confidence interval (LCI), and we used the LCI in place of a point estimate of Ne or Nb. We chose to use the LCI as a conservative proxy for in cases where a point estimate could not be generated, given its relevance for conservation (Fraser et al., 2007; Hare et al., 2011; Waples & Do 2008; Waples 2023). We also compared results using the LCI to a dataset where infinite or negative values were all assumed to reflect very large populations and replaced the estimate with an arbitrary large value of 9,999 (for reference in the LCI dataset only 51 estimates, or 0.9%, had an or > 9999). Using this 9999 dataset, we found that the main conclusions from the analyses remained the same as when using the LCI dataset, with the exception of the HFI analysis (see discussion in supplementary material; Table S3, Table S4 Fig. S4, S5). We also note that point estimates with an upper confidence interval of infinity (n = 1358) were larger on average (mean = 1380.82, compared to 689.44 and 571.64, for estimates with no CIs or with an upper boundary, respectively). Nevertheless, we chose to retain point estimates with an upper confidence interval of infinity because accounting for them in the analyses did not alter the main conclusions of our study and would have significantly decreased our sample size (Fig. S7, Table S5). We also retained estimates from populations that were reintroduced or translocated from a wild source (n = 309), whereas those from captive sources were excluded during article screening (see above). In exploratory analyses, the removal of these data did not influence our results, and many of these populations are relevant to real-world conservation efforts, as reintroductions and translocations are used to re-establish or support small, at-risk populations. We removed estimates based on duplication of markers (keeping estimates generated from SNPs when studies used both SNPs and microsatellites), and duplication of software (keeping estimates from NeEstimator v2 when studies used it alongside LDNe). Spatial and temporal replication were addressed with two separate datasets (see Table S6 for more information): the full dataset included spatially and temporally replicated samples, while these two types of replication were removed from the non-replicated dataset. Finally, for all populations included in our final datasets, we manually extracted their protection status according to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Taxa were categorized as “Threatened” (Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically Endangered), “Nonthreatened” (Least Concern, Near Threatened), or “N/A” (Data Deficient, Not Evaluated). Mapping and Human Footprint Index (HFI) All populations were mapped in QGIS using the coordinates extracted from articles. The maps were created using a World Behrmann equal area projection. For the summary maps, estimates were grouped into grid cells with an area of 250,000 km2 (roughly 500 km x 500 km, but the dimensions of each cell vary due to distortions from the projection). Within each cell, we generated the count and median of Ne. We used the Global Human Footprint dataset (WCS & CIESIN, 2005) to generate a value of human influence (HFI) for each population at its geographic coordinates. The footprint ranges from zero (no human influence) to 100 (maximum human influence). Values were available in 1 km x 1 km grid cell size and were projected over the point estimates to assign a value of human footprint to each population. The human footprint values were extracted from the map into a spreadsheet to be used for statistical analyses. Not all geographic coordinates had a human footprint value associated with them (i.e., in the oceans and other large bodies of water), therefore marine fishes were not included in our HFI analysis. Overall, 3610 Ne estimates in our final dataset had an associated footprint value.

The Annual Population Survey (APS) is a major survey series, which aims to provide data that can produce reliable estimates at local authority level. Key topics covered in the survey include education, employment, health and ethnicity. The APS comprises key variables from the Labour Force Survey (LFS), all its associated LFS boosts and the APS boost.

The APS allows for analysis to be carried out on detailed subgroups and below regional level. In recent years (particularly with the sample size of the LFS 5 quarter dataset reducing) there has been some interest in producing a two year APS longitudinal dataset to look at any trends that may occur over a year. The APS Two-Year Longitudinal Datasets, covering 2012/13 onwards, have been deposited as a result of this work. Person- and Household-level APS datasets are also available.

For further detailed information about methodology, users should consult the Labour Force Survey User Guide, included with the APS documentation.

Occupation data for 2021 and 2022
The ONS has identified an issue with the collection of some occupational data in 2021 and 2022 data files in a number of their surveys. While they estimate any impacts will be small overall, this will affect the accuracy of the breakdowns of some detailed (four-digit Standard Occupational Classification (SOC)) occupations, and data derived from them. None of ONS' headline statistics, other than those directly sourced from occupational data, are affected and you can continue to rely on their accuracy. Further information can be found in the ONS article published on 11 July 2023: Revision of miscoded occupational data in the ONS Labour Force Survey, UK: January 2021 to September 2022

Abstract

Well-functioning financial systems serve a vital purpose, offering savings, credit, payment, and risk management products to people with a wide range of needs. Yet until now little had been known about the global reach of the financial sector - the extent of financial inclusion and the degree to which such groups as the poor, women, and youth are excluded from formal financial systems. Systematic indicators of the use of different financial services had been lacking for most economies.

The Global Financial Inclusion (Global Findex) database provides such indicators. This database contains the first round of Global Findex indicators, measuring how adults in more than 140 economies save, borrow, make payments, and manage risk. The data set can be used to track the effects of financial inclusion policies globally and develop a deeper and more nuanced understanding of how people around the world manage their day-to-day finances. By making it possible to identify segments of the population excluded from the formal financial sector, the data can help policy makers prioritize reforms and design new policies.

Geographic coverage

National Coverage.

Analysis unit

Individual

Universe

The target population is the civilian, non-institutionalized population 15 years and above. The sample is nationally representative.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Global Findex indicators are drawn from survey data collected by Gallup, Inc. over the 2011 calendar year, covering more than 150,000 adults in 148 economies and representing about 97 percent of the world's population. Since 2005, Gallup has surveyed adults annually around the world, using a uniform methodology and randomly selected, nationally representative samples. The second round of Global Findex indicators was collected in 2014 and is forthcoming in 2015. The set of indicators will be collected again in 2017.

Surveys were conducted face-to-face in economies where landline telephone penetration is less than 80 percent, or where face-to-face interviewing is customary. The first stage of sampling is the identification of primary sampling units, consisting of clusters of households. The primary sampling units are stratified by population size, geography, or both, and clustering is achieved through one or more stages of sampling. Where population information is available, sample selection is based on probabilities proportional to population size; otherwise, simple random sampling is used. Random route procedures are used to select sampled households. Unless an outright refusal occurs, interviewers make up to three attempts to survey the sampled household. If an interview cannot be obtained at the initial sampled household, a simple substitution method is used. Respondents are randomly selected within the selected households by means of the Kish grid.

Surveys were conducted by telephone in economies where landline telephone penetration is over 80 percent. The telephone surveys were conducted using random digit dialing or a nationally representative list of phone numbers. In selected countries where cell phone penetration is high, a dual sampling frame is used. Random respondent selection is achieved by using either the latest birthday or Kish grid method. At least three attempts are made to teach a person in each household, spread over different days and times of year.

The sample size in the majority of economies was 1,000 individuals.

Mode of data collection

Landline and cellular telephone

Research instrument

The questionnaire was designed by the World Bank, in conjunction with a Technical Advisory Board composed of leading academics, practitioners, and policy makers in the field of financial inclusion. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Gallup, Inc. also provided valuable input. The questionnaire was piloted in over 20 countries using focus groups, cognitive interviews, and field testing. The questionnaire is available in 142 languages upon request.

Questions on insurance, mobile payments, and loan purposes were asked only in developing economies. The indicators on awareness and use of microfinance insitutions (MFIs) are not included in the public dataset. However, adults who report saving at an MFI are considered to have an account; this is reflected in the composite account indicator.

Sampling error estimates

Estimates of standard errors (which account for sampling error) vary by country and indicator. For country- and indicator-specific standard errors, refer to the Annex and Country Table in Demirguc-Kunt, Asli and L. Klapper. 2012. "Measuring Financial Inclusion: The Global Findex." Policy Research Working Paper 6025, World Bank, Washington, D.C.

The dataset has all files to replicate all analyses in the manuscript "The influence of sample size and sampling design on estimating population-level intraspecific trait variation (ITV) along environmental gradients" (Journal: Ecology and Evolution).

A database based on a random sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the United States, developed for the purpose of studying the effects of demographic and socio-economic characteristics on differentials in mortality rates. It consists of data from 26 U.S. Current Population Surveys (CPS) cohorts, annual Social and Economic Supplements, and the 1980 Census cohort, combined with death certificate information to identify mortality status and cause of death covering the time interval, 1979 to 1998. The Current Population Surveys are March Supplements selected from the time period from March 1973 to March 1998. The NLMS routinely links geographical and demographic information from Census Bureau surveys and censuses to the NLMS database, and other available sources upon request. The Census Bureau and CMS have approved the linkage protocol and data acquisition is currently underway. The plan for the NLMS is to link information on mortality to the NLMS every two years from 1998 through 2006 with research on the resulting database to continue, at least, through 2009. The NLMS will continue to incorporate data from the yearly Annual Social and Economic Supplement into the study as the data become available. Based on the expected size of the Annual Social and Economic Supplements to be conducted, the expected number of deaths to be added to the NLMS through the updating process will increase the mortality content of the study to nearly 500,000 cases out of a total number of approximately 3.3 million records. This effort would also include expanding the NLMS population base by incorporating new March Supplement Current Population Survey data into the study as they become available. Linkages to the SEER and CMS datasets are also available. Data Availability: Due to the confidential nature of the data used in the NLMS, the public use dataset consists of a reduced number of CPS cohorts with a fixed follow-up period of five years. NIA does not make the data available directly. Research access to the entire NLMS database can be obtained through the NIA program contact listed. Interested investigators should email the NIA contact and send in a one page prospectus of the proposed project. NIA will approve projects based on their relevance to NIA/BSR''s areas of emphasis. Approved projects are then assigned to NLMS statisticians at the Census Bureau who work directly with the researcher to interface with the database. A modified version of the public use data files is available also through the Census restricted Data Centers. However, since the database is quite complex, many investigators have found that the most efficient way to access it is through the Census programmers. * Dates of Study: 1973-2009 * Study Features: Longitudinal * Sample Size: ~3.3 Million Link: *ICPSR: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/00134

Inferences of population structure and more precisely the identification of genetically homogeneous groups of individuals are essential to the fields of ecology, evolutionary biology, and conservation biology. Such population structure inferences are routinely investigated via the program STRUCTURE implementing a Bayesian algorithm to identify groups of individuals at Hardy-Weinberg and linkage equilibrium. While the method is performing relatively well under various population models with even sampling between subpopulations, the robustness of the method to uneven sample size between subpopulations and/or hierarchical levels of population structure has not yet been tested despite being commonly encountered in empirical datasets. In this study, I used simulated and empirical microsatellite datasets to investigate the impact of uneven sample size between subpopulations and/or hierarchical levels of population structure on the detected population structure. The results demonstrated that uneven sampling often leads to wrong inferences on hierarchical structure and downward biased estimates of the true number of subpopulations. Distinct subpopulations with reduced sampling tended to be merged together, whilst at the same time, individuals from extensively sampled subpopulations were generally split, despite belonging to the same panmictic population. Four new supervised methods to detect the number of clusters were developed and tested as part of this study and were found to outperform the existing methods using both evenly and unevenly sampled datasets. Additionally, a sub-sampling strategy aiming to reduce sampling unevenness between subpopulations is presented and tested. These results altogether demonstrate that when sampling evenness is accounted for, the detection of the correct population structure is greatly improved.

Abstract

The fourth edition of the Global Findex offers a lens into how people accessed and used financial services during the COVID-19 pandemic, when mobility restrictions and health policies drove increased demand for digital services of all kinds.

The Global Findex is the world's most comprehensive database on financial inclusion. It is also the only global demand-side data source allowing for global and regional cross-country analysis to provide a rigorous and multidimensional picture of how adults save, borrow, make payments, and manage financial risks. Global Findex 2021 data were collected from national representative surveys of about 128,000 adults in more than 120 economies. The latest edition follows the 2011, 2014, and 2017 editions, and it includes a number of new series measuring financial health and resilience and contains more granular data on digital payment adoption, including merchant and government payments.

The Global Findex is an indispensable resource for financial service practitioners, policy makers, researchers, and development professionals.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Individual

Kind of data

Observation data/ratings [obs]

Sampling procedure

In most developing economies, Global Findex data have traditionally been collected through face-to-face interviews. Surveys are conducted face-to-face in economies where telephone coverage represents less than 80 percent of the population or where in-person surveying is the customary methodology. However, because of ongoing COVID-19 related mobility restrictions, face-to-face interviewing was not possible in some of these economies in 2021. Phone-based surveys were therefore conducted in 67 economies that had been surveyed face-to-face in 2017. These 67 economies were selected for inclusion based on population size, phone penetration rate, COVID-19 infection rates, and the feasibility of executing phone-based methods where Gallup would otherwise conduct face-to-face data collection, while complying with all government-issued guidance throughout the interviewing process. Gallup takes both mobile phone and landline ownership into consideration. According to Gallup World Poll 2019 data, when face-to-face surveys were last carried out in these economies, at least 80 percent of adults in almost all of them reported mobile phone ownership. All samples are probability-based and nationally representative of the resident adult population. Phone surveys were not a viable option in 17 economies that had been part of previous Global Findex surveys, however, because of low mobile phone ownership and surveying restrictions. Data for these economies will be collected in 2022 and released in 2023.

In economies where face-to-face surveys are conducted, the first stage of sampling is the identification of primary sampling units. These units are stratified by population size, geography, or both, and clustering is achieved through one or more stages of sampling. Where population information is available, sample selection is based on probabilities proportional to population size; otherwise, simple random sampling is used. Random route procedures are used to select sampled households. Unless an outright refusal occurs, interviewers make up to three attempts to survey the sampled household. To increase the probability of contact and completion, attempts are made at different times of the day and, where possible, on different days. If an interview cannot be obtained at the initial sampled household, a simple substitution method is used. Respondents are randomly selected within the selected households. Each eligible household member is listed, and the hand-held survey device randomly selects the household member to be interviewed. For paper surveys, the Kish grid method is used to select the respondent. In economies where cultural restrictions dictate gender matching, respondents are randomly selected from among all eligible adults of the interviewer's gender.

In traditionally phone-based economies, respondent selection follows the same procedure as in previous years, using random digit dialing or a nationally representative list of phone numbers. In most economies where mobile phone and landline penetration is high, a dual sampling frame is used.

The same respondent selection procedure is applied to the new phone-based economies. Dual frame (landline and mobile phone) random digital dialing is used where landline presence and use are 20 percent or higher based on historical Gallup estimates. Mobile phone random digital dialing is used in economies with limited to no landline presence (less than 20 percent).

For landline respondents in economies where mobile phone or landline penetration is 80 percent or higher, random selection of respondents is achieved by using either the latest birthday or household enumeration method. For mobile phone respondents in these economies or in economies where mobile phone or landline penetration is less than 80 percent, no further selection is performed. At least three attempts are made to reach a person in each household, spread over different days and times of day.

Sample size for Jordan is 1009.

Mode of data collection

Mobile telephone

Research instrument

Questionnaires are available on the website.

Sampling error estimates

Estimates of standard errors (which account for sampling error) vary by country and indicator. For country-specific margins of error, please refer to the Methodology section and corresponding table in Demirgüç-Kunt, Asli, Leora Klapper, Dorothe Singer, Saniya Ansar. 2022. The Global Findex Database 2021: Financial Inclusion, Digital Payments, and Resilience in the Age of COVID-19. Washington, DC: World Bank.

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.

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.

The dataset has been created by using the open-source code released by LNDS (Luxembourg National Data Service). It is meant to be an example of the dataset structure anyone can generate and personalize in terms of some fixed parameter, including the sample size. The file format is .csv, and the data are organized by individual profiles on the rows and their personal features on the columns. The information in the dataset has been generated based on the statistical information about the age-structure distribution, the number of populations over municipalities, the number of different nationalities present in Luxembourg, and salary statistics per municipality. The STATEC platform, the statistics portal of Luxembourg, is the public source we used to gather the real information that we ingested into our synthetic generation model. Other features like Date of birth, Social matricule, First name, Surname, Ethnicity, and physical attributes have been obtained by a logical relationship between variables without exploiting any additional real information. We are in compliance with the law in putting close to zero the risk of identifying a real person completely by chance.

Sample size for each population and phenotype from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) dataset.

Context

The United States Census Bureau’s international dataset provides estimates of country populations since 1950 and projections through 2050. Specifically, the dataset includes midyear population figures broken down by age and gender assignment at birth. Additionally, time-series data is provided for attributes including fertility rates, birth rates, death rates, and migration rates.

Querying BigQuery tables

You can use the BigQuery Python client library to query tables in this dataset in Kernels. Note that methods available in Kernels are limited to querying data. Tables are at bigquery-public-data.census_bureau_international.

Sample Query 1

What countries have the longest life expectancy? In this query, 2016 census information is retrieved by joining the mortality_life_expectancy and country_names_area tables for countries larger than 25,000 km2. Without the size constraint, Monaco is the top result with an average life expectancy of over 89 years!

standardSQL

SELECT age.country_name, age.life_expectancy, size.country_area FROM ( SELECT country_name, life_expectancy FROM bigquery-public-data.census_bureau_international.mortality_life_expectancy WHERE year = 2016) age INNER JOIN ( SELECT country_name, country_area FROM bigquery-public-data.census_bureau_international.country_names_area where country_area > 25000) size ON age.country_name = size.country_name ORDER BY 2 DESC /* Limit removed for Data Studio Visualization */ LIMIT 10

Sample Query 2

Which countries have the largest proportion of their population under 25? Over 40% of the world’s population is under 25 and greater than 50% of the world’s population is under 30! This query retrieves the countries with the largest proportion of young people by joining the age-specific population table with the midyear (total) population table.

standardSQL

SELECT age.country_name, SUM(age.population) AS under_25, pop.midyear_population AS total, ROUND((SUM(age.population) / pop.midyear_population) * 100,2) AS pct_under_25 FROM ( SELECT country_name, population, country_code FROM bigquery-public-data.census_bureau_international.midyear_population_agespecific WHERE year =2017 AND age < 25) age INNER JOIN ( SELECT midyear_population, country_code FROM bigquery-public-data.census_bureau_international.midyear_population WHERE year = 2017) pop ON age.country_code = pop.country_code GROUP BY 1, 3 ORDER BY 4 DESC /* Remove limit for visualization*/ LIMIT 10

Sample Query 3

The International Census dataset contains growth information in the form of birth rates, death rates, and migration rates. Net migration is the net number of migrants per 1,000 population, an important component of total population and one that often drives the work of the United Nations Refugee Agency. This query joins the growth rate table with the area table to retrieve 2017 data for countries greater than 500 km2.

SELECT growth.country_name, growth.net_migration, CAST(area.country_area AS INT64) AS country_area FROM ( SELECT country_name, net_migration, country_code FROM bigquery-public-data.census_bureau_international.birth_death_growth_rates WHERE year = 2017) growth INNER JOIN ( SELECT country_area, country_code FROM bigquery-public-data.census_bureau_international.country_names_area

Update frequency

Historic (none)

Dataset source

United States Census Bureau

Terms of use: This dataset is publicly available for anyone to use under the following terms provided by the Dataset Source - http://www.data.gov/privacy-policy#data_policy - and is provided "AS IS" without any warranty, express or implied, from Google. Google disclaims all liability for any damages, direct or indirect, resulting from the use of the dataset.

See the GCP Marketplace listing for more details and sample queries: https://console.cloud.google.com/marketplace/details/united-states-census-bureau/international-census-data

Abstract

Gallup Worldwide Research continually surveys residents in more than 150 countries, representing more than 98% of the world's adult population, using randomly selected, nationally representative samples. Gallup typically surveys 1,000 individuals in each country, using a standard set of core questions that has been translated into the major languages of the respective country. In some regions, supplemental questions are asked in addition to core questions. Face-to-face interviews are approximately 1 hour, while telephone interviews are about 30 minutes. In many countries, the survey is conducted once per year, and fieldwork is generally completed in two to four weeks. The Country Dataset Details spreadsheet displays each country's sample size, month/year of the data collection, mode of interviewing, languages employed, design effect, margin of error, and details about sample coverage.

Gallup is entirely responsible for the management, design, and control of Gallup Worldwide Research. For the past 70 years, Gallup has been committed to the principle that accurately collecting and disseminating the opinions and aspirations of people around the globe is vital to understanding our world. Gallup's mission is to provide information in an objective, reliable, and scientifically grounded manner. Gallup is not associated with any political orientation, party, or advocacy group and does not accept partisan entities as clients. Any individual, institution, or governmental agency may access the Gallup Worldwide Research regardless of nationality. The identities of clients and all surveyed respondents will remain confidential.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

SAMPLING AND DATA COLLECTION METHODOLOGY With some exceptions, all samples are probability based and nationally representative of the resident population aged 15 and older. The coverage area is the entire country including rural areas, and the sampling frame represents the entire civilian, non-institutionalized, aged 15 and older population of the entire country. Exceptions include areas where the safety of interviewing staff is threatened, scarcely populated islands in some countries, and areas that interviewers can reach only by foot, animal, or small boat.

Telephone surveys are used in countries where telephone coverage represents at least 80% of the population or is the customary survey methodology (see the Country Dataset Details for detailed information for each country). In Central and Eastern Europe, as well as in the developing world, including much of Latin America, the former Soviet Union countries, nearly all of Asia, the Middle East, and Africa, an area frame design is used for face-to-face interviewing.

The typical Gallup Worldwide Research survey includes at least 1,000 surveys of individuals. In some countries, oversamples are collected in major cities or areas of special interest. Additionally, in some large countries, such as China and Russia, sample sizes of at least 2,000 are collected. Although rare, in some instances the sample size is between 500 and 1,000. See the Country Dataset Details for detailed information for each country.

FACE-TO-FACE SURVEY DESIGN

FIRST STAGE In countries where face-to-face surveys are conducted, the first stage of sampling is the identification of 100 to 135 ultimate clusters (Sampling Units), consisting of clusters of households. Sampling units are stratified by population size and or geography and clustering is achieved through one or more stages of sampling. Where population information is available, sample selection is based on probabilities proportional to population size, otherwise simple random sampling is used. Samples are drawn independent of any samples drawn for surveys conducted in previous years.

There are two methods for sample stratification:

METHOD 1: The sample is stratified into 100 to 125 ultimate clusters drawn proportional to the national population, using the following strata: 1) Areas with population of at least 1 million 2) Areas 500,000-999,999 3) Areas 100,000-499,999 4) Areas 50,000-99,999 5) Areas 10,000-49,999 6) Areas with less than 10,000

The strata could include additional stratum to reflect populations that exceed 1 million as well as areas with populations less than 10,000. Worldwide Research Methodology and Codebook Copyright © 2008-2012 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved. 8

METHOD 2:

A multi-stage design is used. The country is first stratified by large geographic units, and then by smaller units within geography. A minimum of 33 Primary Sampling Units (PSUs), which are first stage sampling units, are selected. The sample design results in 100 to 125 ultimate clusters.

SECOND STAGE

Random route procedures are used to select sampled households. Unless an outright refusal occurs, interviewers make up to three attempts to survey the sampled household. To increase the probability of contact and completion, attempts are made at different times of the day, and where possible, on different days. If an interviewer cannot obtain an interview at the initial sampled household, he or she uses a simple substitution method. Refer to Appendix C for a more in-depth description of random route procedures.

THIRD STAGE

Respondents are randomly selected within the selected households. Interviewers list all eligible household members and their ages or birthdays. The respondent is selected by means of the Kish grid (refer to Appendix C) in countries where face-to-face interviewing is used. The interview does not inform the person who answers the door of the selection criteria until after the respondent has been identified. In a few Middle East and Asian countries where cultural restrictions dictate gender matching, respondents are randomly selected using the Kish grid from among all eligible adults of the matching gender.

TELEPHONE SURVEY DESIGN

In countries where telephone interviewing is employed, random-digit-dial (RDD) or a nationally representative list of phone numbers is used. In select countries where cell phone penetration is high, a dual sampling frame is used. Random respondent selection is achieved by using either the latest birthday or Kish grid method. At least three attempts are made to reach a person in each household, spread over different days and times of day. Appointments for callbacks that fall within the survey data collection period are made.

PANEL SURVEY DESIGN

Prior to 2009, United States data were collected using The Gallup Panel. The Gallup Panel is a probability-based, nationally representative panel, for which all members are recruited via random-digit-dial methodology and is only used in the United States. Participants who elect to join the panel are committing to the completion of two to three surveys per month, with the typical survey lasting 10 to 15 minutes. The Gallup Worldwide Research panel survey is conducted over the telephone and takes approximately 30 minutes. No incentives are given to panel participants. Worldwide Research Methodology and Codebook Copyright © 2008-2012 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved. 9

Research instrument

QUESTION DESIGN

Many of the Worldwide Research questions are items that Gallup has used for years. When developing additional questions, Gallup employed its worldwide network of research and political scientists1 to better understand key issues with regard to question development and construction and data gathering. Hundreds of items were developed, tested, piloted, and finalized. The best questions were retained for the core questionnaire and organized into indexes. Most items have a simple dichotomous ("yes or no") response set to minimize contamination of data because of cultural differences in response styles and to facilitate cross-cultural comparisons.

The Gallup Worldwide Research measures key indicators such as Law and Order, Food and Shelter, Job Creation, Migration, Financial Wellbeing, Personal Health, Civic Engagement, and Evaluative Wellbeing and demonstrates their correlations with world development indicators such as GDP and Brain Gain. These indicators assist leaders in understanding the broad context of national interests and establishing organization-specific correlations between leading indexes and lagging economic outcomes.

Gallup organizes its core group of indicators into the Gallup World Path. The Path is an organizational conceptualization of the seven indexes and is not to be construed as a causal model. The individual indexes have many properties of a strong theoretical framework. A more in-depth description of the questions and Gallup indexes is included in the indexes section of this document. In addition to World Path indexes, Gallup Worldwide Research questions also measure opinions about national institutions, corruption, youth development, community basics, diversity, optimism, communications, religiosity, and numerous other topics. For many regions of the world, additional questions that are specific to that region or country are included in surveys. Region-specific questions have been developed for predominantly Muslim nations, former Soviet Union countries, the Balkans, sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, China and India, South Asia, and Israel and the Palestinian Territories.

The questionnaire is translated into the major conversational languages of each country. The translation process starts with an English, French, or Spanish version, depending on the region. One of two translation methods may be used.

METHOD 1: Two independent translations are completed. An independent third party, with some knowledge of survey research methods, adjudicates the differences. A professional translator translates the final version back into the source language.

METHOD 2: A translator

This layer shows Population by Age and Sex. 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 Total population ages 65 and over. 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, B01002, DP05Data 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.