Mogadishu in Somalia led the ranking of cities with the highest population density in 2023, with ****** residents per square kilometer. When it comes to countries, Monaco is the most densely populated state worldwide.
Monaco led the ranking for countries with the highest population density in 2024, with nearly 26,000 residents per square kilometer. The Special Administrative Region of Macao came in second, followed by Singapore. The world’s second smallest country Monaco is the world’s second-smallest country, with an area of about two square kilometers and a population of only around 40,000. It is a constitutional monarchy located by the Mediterranean Sea, and while Monaco is not part of the European Union, it does participate in some EU policies. The country is perhaps most famous for the Monte Carlo casino and for hosting the Monaco Grand Prix, the world's most prestigious Formula One race. The global population Globally, the population density per square kilometer is about 60 inhabitants, and Asia is the most densely populated region in the world. The global population is increasing rapidly, so population density is only expected to increase. In 1950, for example, the global population stood at about 2.54 billion people, and it reached over eight billion during 2023.
As of 2023, the top five most densely populated cities in Latin America and the Caribbean were in Colombia. The capital, Bogotá, ranked first with over ****** inhabitants per square kilometer.
In 2023, Washington, D.C. had the highest population density in the United States, with 11,130.69 people per square mile. As a whole, there were about 94.83 residents per square mile in the U.S., and Alaska was the state with the lowest population density, with 1.29 residents per square mile. The problem of population density Simply put, population density is the population of a country divided by the area of the country. While this can be an interesting measure of how many people live in a country and how large the country is, it does not account for the degree of urbanization, or the share of people who live in urban centers. For example, Russia is the largest country in the world and has a comparatively low population, so its population density is very low. However, much of the country is uninhabited, so cities in Russia are much more densely populated than the rest of the country. Urbanization in the United States While the United States is not very densely populated compared to other countries, its population density has increased significantly over the past few decades. The degree of urbanization has also increased, and well over half of the population lives in urban centers.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
All cities with a population > 1000 or seats of adm div (ca 80.000)Sources and ContributionsSources : GeoNames is aggregating over hundred different data sources. Ambassadors : GeoNames Ambassadors help in many countries. Wiki : A wiki allows to view the data and quickly fix error and add missing places. Donations and Sponsoring : Costs for running GeoNames are covered by donations and sponsoring.Enrichment:add country name
https://www.florida-demographics.com/terms_and_conditionshttps://www.florida-demographics.com/terms_and_conditions
A dataset listing Florida cities by population for 2024.
https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
This is a dataset of the most highly populated city (if applicable) in a form easy to join with the COVID19 Global Forecasting (Week 1) dataset. You can see how to use it in this kernel
There are four columns. The first two correspond to the columns from the original COVID19 Global Forecasting (Week 1) dataset. The other two is the highest population density, at city level, for the given country/state. Note that some countries are very small and in those cases the population density reflects the entire country. Since the original dataset has a few cruise ships as well, I've added them there.
Thanks a lot to Kaggle for this competition that gave me the opportunity to look closely at some data and understand this problem better.
Summary: I believe that the square root of the population density should relate to the logistic growth factor of the SIR model. I think the SEIR model isn't applicable due to any intervention being too late for a fast-spreading virus like this, especially in places with dense populations.
After playing with the data provided in COVID19 Global Forecasting (Week 1) (and everything else online or media) a bit, one thing becomes clear. They have nothing to do with epidemiology. They reflect sociopolitical characteristics of a country/state and, more specifically, the reactivity and attitude towards testing.
The testing method used (PCR tests) means that what we measure could potentially be a proxy for the number of people infected during the last 3 weeks, i.e the growth (with lag). It's not how many people have been infected and recovered. Antibody or serology tests would measure that, and by using them, we could go back to normality faster... but those will arrive too late. Way earlier, China will have experimentally shown that it's safe to go back to normal as soon as your number of newly infected per day is close to zero.
https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F197482%2F429e0fdd7f1ce86eba882857ac7a735e%2Fcovid-summary.png?generation=1585072438685236&alt=media" alt="">
My view, as a person living in NYC, about this virus, is that by the time governments react to media pressure, to lockdown or even test, it's too late. In dense areas, everyone susceptible has already amble opportunities to be infected. Especially for a virus with 5-14 days lag between infections and symptoms, a period during which hosts spread it all over on subway, the conditions are hopeless. Active populations have already been exposed, mostly asymptomatic and recovered. Sensitive/older populations are more self-isolated/careful in affluent societies (maybe this isn't the case in North Italy). As the virus finishes exploring the active population, it starts penetrating the more isolated ones. At this point in time, the first fatalities happen. Then testing starts. Then the media and the lockdown. Lockdown seems overly effective because it coincides with the tail of the disease spread. It helps slow down the virus exploring the long-tail of sensitive population, and we should all contribute by doing it, but it doesn't cause the end of the disease. If it did, then as soon as people were back in the streets (see China), there would be repeated outbreaks.
Smart politicians will test a lot because it will make their condition look worse. It helps them demand more resources. At the same time, they will have a low rate of fatalities due to large denominator. They can take credit for managing well a disproportionally major crisis - in contrast to people who didn't test.
We were lucky this time. We, Westerners, have woken up to the potential of a pandemic. I'm sure we will give further resources for prevention. Additionally, we will be more open-minded, helping politicians to have more direct responses. We will also require them to be more responsible in their messages and reactions.
Open Government Licence - Canada 2.0https://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada
License information was derived automatically
Contained within the Atlas of Canada Poster Map Series, is a poster showing population density across Canada. There is a relief base to the map on top of which is shown all populated areas of Canada where the population density is great than 0.4 persons per square kilometer. This area is then divided into five colour classes of population density based on Statistics Canada's census divisions.
https://www.newyork-demographics.com/terms_and_conditionshttps://www.newyork-demographics.com/terms_and_conditions
A dataset listing New York cities by population for 2024.
This statistic shows the top 25 cities in the United States with the highest resident population as of July 1, 2022. There were about 8.34 million people living in New York City as of July 2022.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Due to rapid urbanization over the past 20 years, many newly developed areas have lagged in socio-economic maturity, creating an imbalance with older cities and leading to the rise of "ghost cities". However, the complexity of socio-economic factors has hindered global studies from measuring this phenomenon. To address this gap, a unified framework based on urban vitality theory and multi-source data is proposed to measure the Ghost City Index (GCI), which has been validated using various data sources. The study encompasses 8,841 natural cities worldwide with areas exceeding 5 km², categorizing each into new urban areas (developed after 2005) and old urban areas (developed before 2005). Urban vitality was gauged using the density of road networks, points of interest (POIs), and population density with 1 km resolution across morphological, functional, and social dimensions. By comparing urban vitality in new and old urban areas, we quantify the GCI globally using the theory of urban vitality for the first time. The results reveal that the vitality of new urban areas is 7.69% that of old ones. The top 5% (442) of cities were designated as ghost cities, a finding mirrored by news media and other research. This study sheds light on strategies for sustainable global urbanization, crucial for the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals.The code file gives the calculation process of data respectively, and the excel file gives the obtained data. For the explanation of the fields in “citypoint.shp”, please refer to the Supplementary Information of the paper (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2025.103350).Ref: Zhang, Y., Tu, T., & Long, Y. (2025). Inferring ghost cities on the globe in newly developed urban areas based on urban vitality with multi-source data. Habitat International, 158, 103350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2025.103350
As of 2025, Tokyo-Yokohama in Japan was the largest world urban agglomeration, with 37 million people living there. Delhi ranked second with more than 34 million, with Shanghai in third with more than 30 million inhabitants.
In 2025, approximately 23 million people lived in the São Paulo metropolitan area, making it the biggest in Latin America and the Caribbean and the sixth most populated in the world. The homonymous state of São Paulo was also the most populous federal entity in the country. The second place for the region was Mexico City with 22.75 million inhabitants. Brazil's cities Brazil is home to two large metropolises, only counting the population within the city limits, São Paulo had approximately 11.45 million inhabitants, and Rio de Janeiro around 6.21 million inhabitants. It also contains a number of smaller, but well known cities such as Brasília, Salvador, Belo Horizonte and many others, which report between 2 and 3 million inhabitants each. As a result, the country's population is primarily urban, with nearly 88 percent of inhabitants living in cities. Mexico City Mexico City's metropolitan area ranks sevenths in the ranking of most populated cities in the world. Founded over the Aztec city of Tenochtitlan in 1521 after the Spanish conquest as the capital of the Viceroyalty of New Spain, the city still stands as one of the most important in Latin America. Nevertheless, the preeminent economic, political, and cultural position of Mexico City has not prevented the metropolis from suffering the problems affecting the rest of the country, namely, inequality and violence. Only in 2023, the city registered a crime incidence of 52,723 reported cases for every 100,000 inhabitants and around 24 percent of the population lived under the poverty line.
https://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.htmlhttps://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.html
Invasive alien plants (IAPs) have serious environmental and economic impacts, especially in vulnerable areas of China. However, IAP richness distribution patterns, their driving factors, and the dynamic shifts in potential distribution areas remain elusive. We assessed IAP richness distribution patterns and drivers using 402 IAPs recorded in China at 88,926 occurrence points, and then predicted their potential distribution areas. The results show that IAP hotspots were mainly located in southeastern China, especially coastal areas of the South and East and large inland cities. Population density, gross domestic product (GDP), and four climate variables associated with precipitation and temperature jointly influenced the richness distribution pattern of all IAPs. Specifically, population density and GDP impacted the richness distribution pattern of narrow-range IAPs, and population density, GDP, distance to the nearest national highway, and five climate variables affected the richness distribution pattern of widespread IAPs. Only GDP contributed significantly to the richness distribution pattern of the top 5% hotspot grid cells, whereas population density, GDP, and precipitation in the driest month (BIO14) significantly influenced the richness distribution patterns of hotspots for both the top 10% and top 20%. Prediction analysis demonstrated that southeastern China would have a particularly high invasion risk under both current and future climate scenarios. Regions with increases in predicted species richness are more common (44.83%–64.97%) than those with decreases, except under the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5 scenario. Climate change will contribute greatly to the expansion of potential IAP distribution areas under both optimistic (RCP 2.5) and pessimistic scenarios (RCP 8.5). The results of this study provide insights into the priority management of IAPs through developing promising strategies for the control and prevention of IAP invasion.
This is the current Medical Service Study Area. California Medical Service Study Areas are created by the California Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI).Check the Data Dictionary for field descriptions.Search for the Medical Service Study Area data on the CHHS Open Data Portal.Checkout the California Healthcare Atlas for more Medical Service Study Area information.This is an update to the MSSA geometries and demographics to reflect the new 2020 Census tract data. The Medical Service Study Area (MSSA) polygon layer represents the best fit mapping of all new 2020 California census tract boundaries to the original 2010 census tract boundaries used in the construction of the original 2010 MSSA file. Each of the state's new 9,129 census tracts was assigned to one of the previously established medical service study areas (excluding tracts with no land area), as identified in this data layer. The MSSA Census tract data is aggregated by HCAI, to create this MSSA data layer. This represents the final re-mapping of 2020 Census tracts to the original 2010 MSSA geometries. The 2010 MSSA were based on U.S. Census 2010 data and public meetings held throughout California.Source of update: American Community Survey 5-year 2006-2010 data for poverty. For source tables refer to InfoUSA update procedural documentation. The 2010 MSSA Detail layer was developed to update fields affected by population change. The American Community Survey 5-year 2006-2010 population data pertaining to total, in households, race, ethnicity, age, and poverty was used in the update. The 2010 MSSA Census Tract Detail map layer was developed to support geographic information systems (GIS) applications, representing 2010 census tract geography that is the foundation of 2010 medical service study area (MSSA) boundaries. ***This version is the finalized MSSA reconfiguration boundaries based on the US Census Bureau 2010 Census. In 1976 Garamendi Rural Health Services Act, required the development of a geographic framework for determining which parts of the state were rural and which were urban, and for determining which parts of counties and cities had adequate health care resources and which were "medically underserved". Thus, sub-city and sub-county geographic units called "medical service study areas [MSSAs]" were developed, using combinations of census-defined geographic units, established following General Rules promulgated by a statutory commission. After each subsequent census the MSSAs were revised. In the scheduled revisions that followed the 1990 census, community meetings of stakeholders (including county officials, and representatives of hospitals and community health centers) were held in larger metropolitan areas. The meetings were designed to develop consensus as how to draw the sub-city units so as to best display health care disparities. The importance of involving stakeholders was heightened in 1992 when the United States Department of Health and Human Services' Health and Resources Administration entered a formal agreement to recognize the state-determined MSSAs as "rational service areas" for federal recognition of "health professional shortage areas" and "medically underserved areas". After the 2000 census, two innovations transformed the process, and set the stage for GIS to emerge as a major factor in health care resource planning in California. First, the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development [OSHPD], which organizes the community stakeholder meetings and provides the staff to administer the MSSAs, entered into an Enterprise GIS contract. Second, OSHPD authorized at least one community meeting to be held in each of the 58 counties, a significant number of which were wholly rural or frontier counties. For populous Los Angeles County, 11 community meetings were held. As a result, health resource data in California are collected and organized by 541 geographic units. The boundaries of these units were established by community healthcare experts, with the objective of maximizing their usefulness for needs assessment purposes. The most dramatic consequence was introducing a data simultaneously displayed in a GIS format. A two-person team, incorporating healthcare policy and GIS expertise, conducted the series of meetings, and supervised the development of the 2000-census configuration of the MSSAs.MSSA Configuration Guidelines (General Rules):- Each MSSA is composed of one or more complete census tracts.- As a general rule, MSSAs are deemed to be "rational service areas [RSAs]" for purposes of designating health professional shortage areas [HPSAs], medically underserved areas [MUAs] or medically underserved populations [MUPs].- MSSAs will not cross county lines.- To the extent practicable, all census-defined places within the MSSA are within 30 minutes travel time to the largest population center within the MSSA, except in those circumstances where meeting this criterion would require splitting a census tract.- To the extent practicable, areas that, standing alone, would meet both the definition of an MSSA and a Rural MSSA, should not be a part of an Urban MSSA.- Any Urban MSSA whose population exceeds 200,000 shall be divided into two or more Urban MSSA Subdivisions.- Urban MSSA Subdivisions should be within a population range of 75,000 to 125,000, but may not be smaller than five square miles in area. If removing any census tract on the perimeter of the Urban MSSA Subdivision would cause the area to fall below five square miles in area, then the population of the Urban MSSA may exceed 125,000. - To the extent practicable, Urban MSSA Subdivisions should reflect recognized community and neighborhood boundaries and take into account such demographic information as income level and ethnicity. Rural Definitions: A rural MSSA is an MSSA adopted by the Commission, which has a population density of less than 250 persons per square mile, and which has no census defined place within the area with a population in excess of 50,000. Only the population that is located within the MSSA is counted in determining the population of the census defined place. A frontier MSSA is a rural MSSA adopted by the Commission which has a population density of less than 11 persons per square mile. Any MSSA which is not a rural or frontier MSSA is an urban MSSA. Last updated December 6th 2024.
PARD’s Long Range Plan for Land, Facilities and Programs, Our Parks, Our Future (adopted November 2019) compared Austin’s park system to five peer cities: Atlanta, GA, Dallas, TX, Portland, OR, San Antonio, TX, and San Diego, CA. The peer cities were selected based on characteristics such as population, size, density, and governance type. Portland and San Diego were selected as aspirational cities known for their park systems. Note that the table below presents each scoring area’s 1 to 100 index, where 100 is the highest possible score.
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
ABSTRACT With the deepening of urban public sports service construction in China, the construction of public sports service system has become an important guarantee for mass sports rights in China. In view of this, this study takes City XX as an example, and analyzes the difference of public sports service construction in this city using the Theil index method, and determines the measurement index. It analyzes the equality degree of service resource allocation among and within the four regions of City XX, including A, B, C, D, and so on. The influencing factors of sports service efficiency are analyzed. The results show that there are significant differences in the allocation of public sports service resources among districts and counties of City XX. From the overall difference, the total Theil index of national fitness and sports clubs showed an upward trend, while others showed a downward trend. From the perspective of regional differences, there were 6 indicators with the highest equalization level in area C and 5 indicators in area A. The lowest level was found. Population density, per capita GDP, aging rate and urbanization rate of city XX have obvious positive correlations with public sports service efficiency. The aging rate is the most positive factor, while per capita GDP and population density have little influence. This study can provide some reference value for other cities in China in the construction of public sports services.
The 2015 cartographic boundary shapefiles are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. The records in this file allow users to map the parts of Urban Areas that overlap a particular county. After each decennial census, the Census Bureau delineates urban areas that represent densely developed territory, encompassing residential, commercial, and other nonresidential urban land uses. In general, this territory consists of areas of high population density and urban land use resulting in a representation of the "urban footprint." There are two types of urban areas: urbanized areas (UAs) that contain 50,000 or more people and urban clusters (UCs) that contain at least 2,500 people, but fewer than 50,000 people (except in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam which each contain urban clusters with populations greater than 50,000). Each urban area is identified by a 5-character numeric census code that may contain leading zeroes. The primary legal divisions of most states are termed counties. In Louisiana, these divisions are known as parishes. In Alaska, which has no counties, the equivalent entities are the organized boroughs, city and boroughs, municipalities, and for the unorganized area, census areas. The latter are delineated cooperatively for statistical purposes by the State of Alaska and the Census Bureau. In four states (Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia), there are one or more incorporated places that are independent of any county organization and thus constitute primary divisions of their states. These incorporated places are known as independent cities and are treated as equivalent entities for purposes of data presentation. The District of Columbia and Guam have no primary divisions, and each area is considered an equivalent entity for purposes of data presentation. The Census Bureau treats the following entities as equivalents of counties for purposes of data presentation: Municipios in Puerto Rico, Districts and Islands in American Samoa, Municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Islands in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas is covered by counties or equivalent entities. The boundaries for counties and equivalent entities are as of January 1, 2010.
Naples is the Italian city with the highest population density. As of 2024, the largest south Italian city counts 7,800 inhabitants per square kilometer. Milan followed with 7,600 residents per square kilometer, whereas Rome, the largest Italian city, registered a population density of only 2,100 people, 5,700 inhabitants per square kilometer less than Naples.
This table presents the 2021 and 2016 population and dwelling counts, land area, population density and population ranking for census metropolitan areas or census agglomerations. It also shows the percentage change in the population and dwelling counts between 2016 and 2021.
Mogadishu in Somalia led the ranking of cities with the highest population density in 2023, with ****** residents per square kilometer. When it comes to countries, Monaco is the most densely populated state worldwide.