Spatial population concentration (SPC) is a new measure indicating how close people live together. This measure intuitively captures how many people live on average within a given radius of every person in a specific area. This dataset provides a guidance note along with spatial population concentration for 50km and 100km radius.

Polygons in this layer represent low food access areas: areas of the District of Columbia which are estimated to be more than a 10-minute walk from the nearest full-service grocery store. These have been merged with Census poverty data to estimate how much of the population within these areas is food insecure (below 185% of the federal poverty line in addition to living in a low food access area).Office of Planning GIS followed several steps to create this layer, including: transit analysis, to eliminate areas of the District within a 10-minute walk of a grocery store; non-residential analysis, to eliminate areas of the District which do not contain residents and cannot classify as low food access areas (such as parks and the National Mall); and Census tract division, to estimate population and poverty rates within the newly created polygon boundaries.Fields contained in this layer include:Intermediary calculation fields for the aforementioned analysis, and:PartPop2: The total population estimated to live within the low food access area polygon (derived from Census tract population, assuming even distribution across the polygon after removing non-residential areas, followed by the removal of population living within a grocery store radius.)PrtOver185: The portion of PartPop2 which is estimated to have household income above 185% of the federal poverty line (the food secure population)PrtUnd185: The portion of PartPop2 which is estimated to have household income below 185% of the federal poverty line (the food insecure population)PercentUnd185: A calculated field showing PrtUnd185 as a percent of PartPop2. This is the percent of the population in the polygon which is food insecure (both living in a low food access area and below 185% of the federal poverty line).Note that the polygon representing Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling was removed from this analysis. While technically classifying as a low food access area based on the OP Grocery Stores layer (since the JBAB Commissary, which only serves military members, is not included in that layer), it is recognized that those who do live on the base have access to the commissary for grocery needs.Last updated November 2017.

This map shows the population density and total population in the United States in 2010. This is shown by state, county, tract, and block group. The color shows the population per square mile (population density), while the size of each feature shows the total population living there. This is a valuable way to represent population by understanding the quantity and density of the people living there. Areas with high population density are more tightly packed, while low population density means the population is more spread out.The map shows this pattern for states, counties, tracts, and block groups. There is increasing geographic detail as you zoom in, and only one geography is configured to show at any time. The data source is the US Census Bureau, and the vintage is 2010. The original service and data metadata can be found here.

This is part of analysis from Outer Urban Public Transport, which was released in October 2018.

This layer presents the proportion of people within walking distance to high-medium frequency public transport stops/stations in 2017. Walking distance is defined as 800 metres for heavy rail, and 400 metres for all other modes. High-frequency public transport is defined as having at least four services per hour during AM peak. This analysis was performed using 2017 timetables.

See pages 80-81 of the report for a detailed explanation of methodology.

NEXIS population density exposure is a web map service displaying the number of people per NEXIS residential building within a neighbourhood radius. Population density is calculated by the number of people within 10sqkm, 5sqkm, 1sqkm, 500sqm and 100sqm.

Around ** percent of the rural population in Africa lived within ** kilometers of a city as of 2019. Moreover, roughly half of the rural residents lived within a 14-kilometer distance from a city. In contrast, only less than *** percent of the rural households resided further than 100 kilometers from a city. Urbanization in Africa has increased in recent years. Gabon, Libya, and Djibouti had the highest urbanization rate on the continent in 2020.

BackgroundAssessing exposure to infections in early childhood is of interest in many epidemiological investigations. Because exposure to infections is difficult to measure directly, epidemiological studies have used surrogate measures available from routine data such as birth order and population density. However, the association between population density and exposure to infections is unclear. We assessed whether neighbourhood child population density is associated with respiratory infections in infants.MethodsWith the Basel-Bern lung infant development study (BILD), a prospective Swiss cohort study of healthy neonates, respiratory symptoms and infections were assessed by weekly telephone interviews with the mother throughout the first year of life. Using population census data, we calculated neighbourhood child density as the number of children < 16 years of age living within a 250 m radius around the residence of each child. We used negative binomial regression models to assess associations between neighbourhood child density and the number of weeks with respiratory infections and adjusted for potential confounders including the number of older siblings, day-care attendance and duration of breastfeeding. We investigated possible interactions between neighbourhood child population density and older siblings assuming that older siblings mix with other children in the neighbourhood.ResultsThe analyses included 487 infants. We found no evidence of an association between quintiles of neighbourhood child density and number of respiratory symptoms (p = 0.59, incidence rate ratios comparing highest to lowest quintile: 1.15, 95%-confidence interval: 0.90–1.47). There was no evidence of interaction with older siblings (p = 0.44). Results were similar in crude and in fully adjusted models.ConclusionsOur study suggests that in Switzerland neighbourhood child density is a poor proxy for exposure to infections in infancy.

Our model is a full-annual-cycle population model {hostetler2015full} that tracks groups of bat surviving through four seasons: breeding season/summer, fall migration, non-breeding/winter, and spring migration. Our state variables are groups of bats that use a specific maternity colony/breeding site and hibernaculum/non-breeding site. Bats are also accounted for by life stages (juveniles/first-year breeders versus adults) and seasonal habitats (breeding versus non-breeding) during each year, This leads to four states variable (here depicted in vector notation): the population of juveniles during the non-breeding season, the population of adults during the non-breeding season, the population of juveniles during the breeding season, and the population of adults during the breeding season, Each vector's elements depict a specific migratory pathway, e.g., is comprised of elements, {non-breeding sites}, {breeding sites}The variables may be summed by either breeding site or non-breeding site to calculate the total population using a specific geographic _location. Within our code, we account for this using an index column for breeding sites and an index column for non-breeding sides within the data table. Our choice of state variables caused the time step (i.e. (t)) to be 1 year. However, we recorded the population of each group during the breeding and non-breeding season as an artifact of our state-variable choice. We choose these state variables partially for their biological information and partially to simplify programming. We ran our simulation for 30 years because the USFWS currently issues Indiana Bat take permits for 30 years. Our model covers the range of the Indiana Bat, which is approximately the eastern half of the contiguous United States (Figure \ref{fig:BatInput}). The boundaries of our range was based upon the United States boundary, the NatureServe Range map, and observations of the species. The maximum migration distance was 500-km, which was based upon field observations reported in the literature \citep{gardner2002seasonal, winhold2006aspects}. The landscape was covered with approximately 33,000, 6475-ha grid cells and the grid size was based upon management considerations. The U.S.~Fish and Wildlife Service considers a 2.5 mile radius around a known maternity colony to be its summer habitat range and all of the hibernaculum within a 2.5 miles radius to be a single management unit. Hence the choice of 5-by-5 square grids (25 miles(^2) or 6475 ha). Each group of bats within the model has a summer and winter grid cell as well as a pathway connecting the cells. It is possible for a group to be in the cell for both seasons, but improbable for females (which we modeled). The straight line between summer and winter cells were buffered with different distances (1-km, 2-km, 10-km, 20-km, 100-km, and 200-km) as part of the turbine sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. We dropped the largest two buffer sizes during the model development processes because they were biologically unrealistic and including them caused all populations to go extinct all of the time. Note a 1-km buffer would be a 2-km wide path. An example of two pathways are included in Figure \ref{fig:BatPath}. The buffers accounts for bats not migrating in a straight line. If we had precise locations for all summer maternity colonies, other approaches such as Circuitscape \citep{hanks2013circuit} could have been used to model migration routes and this would have reduced migration uncertainty.

Social distancing is a public health measure intended to reduce infectious disease transmission, by maintaining physical distance between individuals or households. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, populations in many countries around the world have been advised to maintain social distance (also referred to as physical distance), with distances of 6 feet or 2 metres commonly advised. Feasibility of social distancing is dependent on the availability of space and the number of people, which varies geographically. In locations where social distancing is difficult, a focus on alternative measures to reduce disease transmission may be needed. To help identify locations where social distancing is difficult, we have developed an ease of social distancing index. By index, we mean a composite measure, intended to highlight variations in ease of social distancing in urban settings, calculated based on the space available around buildings and estimated population density. Index values were calculated for small spatial units (vector polygons), typically bounded by roads, rivers or other features. This dataset provides index values for small spatial units within urban areas in Sierra Leone. Measures of population density were calculated from high-resolution gridded population datasets from WorldPop, and the space available around buildings was calculated using building footprint polygons derived from satellite imagery (Ecopia.AI and Maxar Technologies. 2020). These data were produced by the WorldPop Research Group at the University of Southampton. This work was part of the GRID3 project with funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development. Project partners included the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) in the Earth Institute at Columbia University, and the Flowminder Foundation.

This table contains data on the percent of population residing within ½ mile of a major transit stop for four California regions and the counties, cities/towns, and census tracts within the regions. The percent was calculated using data from four metropolitan planning organizations (San Diego Association of Governments, Southern California Association of Governments, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and Sacramento Council of Governments) and the U.S. Census Bureau. The table is part of a series of indicators in the Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity. A strong and sustainable transportation system supports safe, reliable, and affordable transportation opportunities for walking, bicycling, and public transit, and helps reduce health inequities by providing more opportunities for access to healthy food, jobs, health care, education, and other essential services. Active and public transportation promote health by enabling individuals to increase their level of physical activity, potentially reducing the risk of heart disease and obesity, improving mental health, and lowering blood pressure. More information about the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the About/Attachments section.

Experimental public transit transport performance statistics by 200 metre grids for a subset of urban centres in France, with the following fields (Note: These data are experimental, please see the Methods and Known Limitations/Caveats Sections for more details).AttributeDescriptionidUnique IdentifierpopulationGlobal Human Settlement Layer population estimate downsampled to 200 metre (represents the total population across adjacent 100 metre cells)access_popThe total population that can reach the destination cell within 45 minutes using the public transit network (origins within 11.25 kilometres of the destination cell)proxim_popThe total population within an 11.25 kilometre radius of the destination celltrans_perfThe transport performance of the 200 metre cell. The percentage ratio of accessible to proximal populationcity_nmName of the urban centrecountry_nmName of the country that the urban centre belongs toMethods: For more information please visit: · Python Package: https://github.com/datasciencecampus/transport-network-performance · Docker Image: https://github.com/datasciencecampus/transport-performance-docker Known Limitations/Caveats: These data are experimental – see the ONS guidance on experimental statistics for more details. They are being published at this early stage to involve potential users and stakeholders in assessing their quality and suitability. The known caveats and limitations of these experimental statistics are summarised below. Urban Centre and Population Estimates: · Population estimates are derived from data using a hybrid method of satellite imagery and national censuses. The alignment of national census boundaries to gridded estimates introduce measurement errors, particularly in newer housing and built-up developments. See section 2.5 of the GHSL technical report release 2023A for more details. Public Transit Schedule Data (GTFS): · Does not include effects due to delays (such as congestion and diversions). · Common GTFS issues are resolved during preprocessing where possible, including removing trips with unrealistic fast travel between stops, cleaning IDs, cleaning arrival/departure times, route name deduplication, dropping stops with no stop times, removing undefined parent stations, and dropping trips, shapes, and routes with no stops. Certain GTFS cleaning steps were not possible in all instances, and in those cases the impacted steps were skipped. Additional work is required to further support GTFS validation and cleaning. Transport Network Routing: · “Trapped” centroids: the centroid of destination cells on very rare occasions falls on a private road/pathway. Routing to these cells cannot be performed. This greatly decreases the transport performance in comparison with the neighbouring cells. Potential solutions include interpolation based on neighbouring cells or snapping to the nearest public OSM node (and adjusting the travel time accordingly). Further development to adapt the method for this consideration is necessary. Please also visit the Python package and Docker Image GitHub issues pages for more details. How to Contribute: We hope that the public, other public sector organisations, and National Statistics Institutions can collaborate and build on these data, to help improve the international comparability of statistics and enable higher frequency and more timely comparisons. We welcome feedback and contribution either through GitHub or by contacting datacampus@ons.gov.uk.

Updated 10/6/2022: In the Time/Distance analysis process, points that were found to have been included initially, but with no significant or year-round population were removed. The layer of removed points is also available for viewing. MCNA - Removed Population PointsThe Network Adequacy Standards Representative Population Points feature layer contains 97,694 points spread across California that were created from USPS postal delivery route data and US Census data. Each population point also contains the variables for Time and Distance Standards for the County that the point is within. These standards differ by County due to the County "type" which is based on the population density of the county. There are 5 county categories within California: Rural (<50 people/sq mile), Small (51-200 people/sq mile), Medium (201-599 people/sq mile), and Dense (>600 people/sq mile). The Time and Distance data is divided out by Provider Type, Adult and Pediatric separately, so that the Time or Distance analysis can be performed with greater detail. HospitalsOB/GYN SpecialtyAdult Cardiology/Interventional CardiologyAdult DermatologyAdult EndocrinologyAdult ENT/OtolaryngologyAdult GastroenterologyAdult General SurgeryAdult HematologyAdult HIV/AIDS/Infectious DiseaseAdult Mental Health Outpatient ServicesAdult NephrologyAdult NeurologyAdult OncologyAdult OphthalmologyAdult Orthopedic SurgeryAdult PCPAdult Physical Medicine and RehabilitationAdult PsychiatryAdult PulmonologyPediatric Cardiology/Interventional CardiologyPediatric DermatologyPediatric EndocrinologyPediatric ENT/OtolaryngologyPediatric GastroenterologyPediatric General SurgeryPediatric HematologyPediatric HIV/AIDS/Infectious DiseasePediatric Mental Health Outpatient ServicesPediatric NephrologyPediatric NeurologyPediatric OncologyPediatric OphthalmologyPediatric Orthopedic SurgeryPediatric PCPPediatric Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPediatric PsychiatryPediatric Pulmonology

1. Estimating feral cat population densities in urban environments can be difficult due to lack of public space and human interference. The purpose of this study was to use distance sampling in a citywide landscape to determine population size and areas of high abundance to inform trap-neuter-release management programs.
2. Line transect distance sampling was used to estimate density of the feral cat population in Windsor, Ontario from June to July 2014. Windsor has a human population of 217,188 and is about 146 km2 in size. Most transects were placed along local roads.
3. Density was estimated at about 13.3 (95% CI 9.7 – 18.1) cats per km2, and an estimated population size of 1858 cats (95% CI 1361 – 2537) with the highest relative density occurring in West and Central Windsor.
4. Urban wildlife managers could utilize these methods to monitor feral cat populations and evaluate the effectiveness of trap-neuter-release programs.

Social distancing is a public health measure intended to reduce infectious disease transmission, by maintaining physical distance between individuals or households. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, populations in many countries around the world have been advised to maintain social distance (also referred to as physical distance), with distances of 6 feet or 2 metres commonly advised. Feasibility of social distancing is dependent on the availability of space and the number of people, which varies geographically. In locations where social distancing is difficult, a focus on alternative measures to reduce disease transmission may be needed. To help identify locations where social distancing is difficult, we have developed an ease of social distancing index. By index, we mean a composite measure, intended to highlight variations in ease of social distancing in urban settings, calculated based on the space available around buildings and estimated population density. Index values were calculated for small spatial units (vector polygons), typically bounded by roads, rivers or other features. This dataset provides index values for small spatial units within urban areas in Tanzania. Measures of population density were calculated from high-resolution gridded population datasets from WorldPop, and the space available around buildings was calculated using building footprint polygons derived from satellite imagery (Ecopia.AI and Maxar Technologies. 2020). These data were produced by the WorldPop Research Group at the University of Southampton. This work was part of the GRID3 project with funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development. Project partners included the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) in the Earth Institute at Columbia University, and the Flowminder Foundation.

Experimental public transit transport performance statistics by 200 metre grids for a subset of urban centres in Great Britain, with the following fields (Note: These data are experimental, please see the Methods and Known Limitations/Caveats Sections for more details).AttributeDescriptionidUnique IdentifierpopulationGlobal Human Settlement Layer population estimate downsampled to 200 metre (represents the total population across adjacent 100 metre cells)access_popThe total population that can reach the destination cell within 45 minutes using the public transit network (origins within 11.25 kilometres of the destination cell)proxim_popThe total population within an 11.25 kilometre radius of the destination celltrans_perfThe transport performance of the 200 metre cell. The percentage ratio of accessible to proximal populationcity_nmName of the urban centrecountry_nmName of the country that the urban centre belongs toMethods: For more information please visit: · Python Package: https://github.com/datasciencecampus/transport-network-performance · Docker Image: https://github.com/datasciencecampus/transport-performance-docker Known Limitations/Caveats: These data are experimental – see the ONS guidance on experimental statistics for more details. They are being published at this early stage to involve potential users and stakeholders in assessing their quality and suitability. The known caveats and limitations of these experimental statistics are summarised below. Urban Centre and Population Estimates: · Population estimates are derived from data using a hybrid method of satellite imagery and national censuses. The alignment of national census boundaries to gridded estimates introduce measurement errors, particularly in newer housing and built-up developments. See section 2.5 of the GHSL technical report release 2023A for more details. Public Transit Schedule Data (GTFS): · Does not include effects due to delays (such as congestion and diversions). · Common GTFS issues are resolved during preprocessing where possible, including removing trips with unrealistic fast travel between stops, cleaning IDs, cleaning arrival/departure times, route name deduplication, dropping stops with no stop times, removing undefined parent stations, and dropping trips, shapes, and routes with no stops. Certain GTFS cleaning steps were not possible in all instances, and in those cases the impacted steps were skipped. Additional work is required to further support GTFS validation and cleaning. Transport Network Routing: · “Trapped” centroids: the centroid of destination cells on very rare occasions falls on a private road/pathway. Routing to these cells cannot be performed. This greatly decreases the transport performance in comparison with the neighbouring cells. Potential solutions include interpolation based on neighbouring cells or snapping to the nearest public OSM node (and adjusting the travel time accordingly). Further development to adapt the method for this consideration is necessary. Please also visit the Python package and Docker Image GitHub issues pages for more details. How to Contribute: We hope that the public, other public sector organisations, and National Statistics Institutions can collaborate and build on these data, to help improve the international comparability of statistics and enable higher frequency and more timely comparisons. We welcome feedback and contribution either through GitHub or by contacting datacampus@ons.gov.uk.

🇸🇪 스웨덴

We compared population trends for rock ptarmigan (Lagopus muta) densities (2003‒2019) derived from walked transects and driven road transects in Mosfellsheiði and Slétta in southwest and northeast Iceland, respectively. The walked transects were laid out according to a random rule. Convenience-based road transects could give biased population density estimates if roads affect the distribution of ptarmigan. We used distance sampling to compare density estimates provided by the two survey types. Our results showed that road transects were more than five times faster to conduct than walked transects. Estimated ptarmigan density changed in synchrony for the two survey methods in both study areas. Mean density estimates in Mosfellsheiði were similar for the two survey methods (walked transects 1.6 males × km-2, 95% CI 1.4‒1.8; road transects 1.7 males × km-2, 95% CI 1.4‒2.0), but not in Slétta, where density estimates for road transects were significantly lower (walked transects 5.2 males × ..., Study area

Our study occurred in two distinct areas, one in southwest Iceland called Mosfellsheiði (N64.13591, W21.44585) and the other in northeast Iceland called Slétta (N66.4683, W16.476; Fig. 1). The linear distance between the two areas is 360 km. The Mosfellsheiði study area (210 km2) is 15 km from the coast and has altitudes ranging from 200 to 400 m above sea level. The Slétta study area (50 km2) is close to the coast, and altitudes range from sea level to approximately 40 m above sea level. The landscape on Slétta is best described as flat or gently undulating; on Mosfellsheiði, the ground is less flat, with low ridges and shallow depressions between them. Both study areas are treeless. The habitat types on Mosfellsheiði were more variable than those on Slétta. The dominant habitat types on Mosfellsheiði were mosslands (57%) and heathlands (23%), but other components included lava fields (7%), wetlands (7%), and fell fields, moraines, and sands (combined 4%). The dominan..., , # Distance sampling: Comparing walked transects and road transects for rock ptarmigan densities and population trends

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

Description of the data and file structure

Spring surveys of territorial ptarmigan males have been used to derive annual densities in Iceland. These counts were started in the early 1960s using the territory mapping method on designated plots, but since 1999, walked and road (driven) transects have been included, applying the distance sampling technique to collect and analyze the transect data. While the territory mapping method assumes the detection of all individuals on the designated plot, distance sampling considers variable detection probabilities based on the distance from the transect and other covariates. Road transects for ptarmigan are less demanding than walked transects. Still, they may break one of the basic assumptions of distance sampling, namely random spacing of tran...,

The "Forest Proximate People" (FPP) dataset is one of the data layers contributing to the development of indicator #13, “number of forest-dependent people in extreme poverty,” of the Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF) Global Core Set of forest-related indicators (GCS). The FPP dataset provides an estimate of the number of people living in or within 1 kilometer of forests (forest-proximate people) for the year 2019 with a spatial resolution of 100 meters at a global level.

For more detail, such as the theory behind this indicator and the definition of parameters, and to cite this data, see: Newton, P., Castle, S.E., Kinzer, A.T., Miller, D.C., Oldekop, J.A., Linhares-Juvenal, T., Pina, L., Madrid, M., & de Lamo, J. 2022. The number of forest- and tree-proximate people: a new methodology and global estimates. Background Paper to The State of the World’s Forests 2022 report. Rome, FAO.

Contact points:

Maintainer: Leticia Pina

Distributor: Sarah E., Castle

Data lineage:

The FPP data are generated using Google Earth Engine. Forests are defined by the Copernicus Global Land Cover (CGLC) (Buchhorn et al. 2020) classification system’s definition of forests: tree cover ranging from 15-100%, with or without understory of shrubs and grassland, and including both open and closed forests. Any area classified as forest sized ≥ 1 ha in 2019 was included in this definition. Population density was defined by the WorldPop global population data for 2019 (WorldPop 2018). High density urban populations were excluded from the analysis. High density urban areas were defined as any contiguous area with a total population (using 2019 WorldPop data for population) of at least 50,000 people and comprised of pixels all of which met at least one of two criteria: either the pixel a) had at least 1,500 people per square km, or b) was classified as “built-up” land use by the CGLC dataset (where “built-up” was defined as land covered by buildings and other manmade structures) (Dijkstra et al. 2020). Using these datasets, any rural people living in or within 1 kilometer of forests in 2019 were classified as forest proximate people. Euclidean distance was used as the measure to create a 1-kilometer buffer zone around each forest cover pixel. The scripts for generating the forest-proximate people and the rural-urban datasets using different parameters or for different years are published and available to users. For more detail, such as the theory behind this indicator and the definition of parameters, and to cite this data, see: Newton, P., Castle, S.E., Kinzer, A.T., Miller, D.C., Oldekop, J.A., Linhares-Juvenal, T., Pina, L., Madrid, M., & de Lamo, J. 2022. The number of forest- and tree-proximate people: a new methodology and global estimates. Background Paper to The State of the World’s Forests 2022. Rome, FAO.

References:

Buchhorn, M., Smets, B., Bertels, L., De Roo, B., Lesiv, M., Tsendbazar, N.E., Herold, M., Fritz, S., 2020. Copernicus Global Land Service: Land Cover 100m: collection 3 epoch 2019. Globe.

Dijkstra, L., Florczyk, A.J., Freire, S., Kemper, T., Melchiorri, M., Pesaresi, M. and Schiavina, M., 2020. Applying the degree of urbanisation to the globe: A new harmonised definition reveals a different picture of global urbanisation. Journal of Urban Economics, p.103312.

WorldPop (www.worldpop.org - School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton; Department of Geography and Geosciences, University of Louisville; Departement de Geographie, Universite de Namur) and Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Columbia University, 2018. Global High Resolution Population Denominators Project - Funded by The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1134076). https://dx.doi.org/10.5258/SOTON/WP00645

Online resources:

GEE asset for "Forest proximate people – 1km cutoff distance (100-m resolution)"

Social distancing is a public health measure intended to reduce infectious disease transmission, by maintaining physical distance between individuals or households. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, populations in many countries around the world have been advised to maintain social distance (also referred to as physical distance), with distances of 6 feet or 2 metres commonly advised. Feasibility of social distancing is dependent on the availability of space and the number of people, which varies geographically. In locations where social distancing is difficult, a focus on alternative measures to reduce disease transmission may be needed. To help identify locations where social distancing is difficult, we have developed an ease of social distancing index. By index, we mean a composite measure, intended to highlight variations in ease of social distancing in urban settings, calculated based on the space available around buildings and estimated population density. Index values were calculated for small spatial units (vector polygons), typically bounded by roads, rivers or other features. This dataset provides index values for small spatial units within urban areas in Senegal. Measures of population density were calculated from high-resolution gridded population datasets from WorldPop, and the space available around buildings was calculated using building footprint polygons derived from satellite imagery (Ecopia.AI and Maxar Technologies. 2020). These data were produced by the WorldPop Research Group at the University of Southampton. This work was part of the GRID3 project with funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development. Project partners included the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) in the Earth Institute at Columbia University, and the Flowminder Foundation.