U.S. GDP for 2023 was 27.721 trillion US dollars, a 6.59% increase from 2022.

<ul style='margin-top:20px;'>

<li>U.S. GDP for 2022 was <strong>26.007 trillion US dollars</strong>, a <strong>9.82% increase</strong> from 2021.</li>
<li>U.S. GDP for 2021 was <strong>23.681 trillion US dollars</strong>, a <strong>10.9% increase</strong> from 2020.</li>
<li>U.S. GDP for 2020 was <strong>21.354 trillion US dollars</strong>, a <strong>0.86% decline</strong> from 2019.</li>
</ul>GDP at purchaser's prices is the sum of gross value added by all resident producers in the economy plus any product taxes and minus any subsidies not included in the value of the products. It is calculated without making deductions for depreciation of fabricated assets or for depletion and degradation of natural resources. Data are in current U.S. dollars. Dollar figures for GDP are converted from domestic currencies using single year official exchange rates. For a few countries where the official exchange rate does not reflect the rate effectively applied to actual foreign exchange transactions, an alternative conversion factor is used.

The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the United States was worth 29184.89 billion US dollars in 2024, according to official data from the World Bank. The GDP value of the United States represents 27.49 percent of the world economy. This dataset provides - United States GDP - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

This statistic shows the share of consumers who purchased eco-friendly cleaning products in the United States in 2018, by state. According to the survey, a 28 percent share of consumers in San Diego and Boston purchased eco-friendly cleaning products in 2018.

PFAS concentration, stable isotope, and organism data are provided for archived samples of marine/estuarine organisms collected in Narragansett Bay, RI, and associated offshore waters from 2006-2014. Portions of this dataset are inaccessible because: Dataset will be provided as an Excel file upon publication in journal. They can be accessed through the following means: Dataset will be provided as an Excel file. Format: Dataset will be provided as an Excel file. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Hedgespeth, M.L., D.L. Taylor, S. Balint, M. Schwartz, and M.G. Cantwell. Ecological characteristics impact PFAS concentrations in a U.S. North Atlantic food web.. SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT. Elsevier BV, AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS, 880(1 July 2023): 163302, (2023).

During the most recently measured period, the digital economy added 4.27 trillion U.S. dollars in current dollar gross output to the overall U.S. economy. In 2022, the GDP of the United States amounted to 25.46 trillion U.S. dollars.

This statistic presents data regarding the digital economy as percentage of the total economy (GDP) in the United States from 2005 to 2018, sorted by commodity. During the most recently measured period, e-commerce accounted for 2.3 percent dollar value added of the GDP in the United States. Overall, the digital economy accounted for nine percent of current-dollar value added to the total U.S. economy.

U.S. economic growth for 2018 was $20,891, a 1.13% increase from 2018.

<ul style='margin-top:20px;'>

<li>U.S. economic growth for 2018 was <strong>$20,658</strong>, a <strong>1.21% increase</strong> from 2018.</li>
<li>U.S. economic growth for 2018 was <strong>$20,412</strong>, a <strong>1.85% increase</strong> from 2018.</li>
<li>U.S. economic growth for 2018 was <strong>$20,041</strong>, a <strong>1.05% increase</strong> from 2017.</li>
</ul>GDP at purchaser's prices is the sum of gross value added by all resident producers in the economy plus any product taxes and minus any subsidies not included in the value of the products. It is calculated without making deductions for depreciation of fabricated assets or for depletion and degradation of natural resources. Data are in current U.S. dollars. Dollar figures for GDP are converted from domestic currencies using single year official exchange rates. For a few countries where the official exchange rate does not reflect the rate effectively applied to actual foreign exchange transactions, an alternative conversion factor is used.

This layer contains data on the wages paid to employees working in the six economic sectors that are dependent on the resources of the oceans and Great Lakes. They include: Marine Construction, Living Resources, Offshore Mineral Extraction, Ship and Boat Building, Tourism and Recreation, Marine Transportation, and a total, All Ocean Sectors. http://coast.noaa.gov/dataregistry/search/dataset/info/enow

© NOAA Office for Coastal Management (coastal.info@noaa.gov)

© NOAA Office for Coastal Management (coastal.info@noaa.gov) This layer is a component of Ocean Economy by Indicator.

This map presents spatial information about the Economics: National Ocean Watch (ENOW) data in the Web Mercator projection. The ENOW data provides time-series data on the ocean and Great Lakes economy, which includes six economic sectors dependent on the oceans and Great Lakes, and measures four economic indicators: Establishments, Employment, Wages, and Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The annual time-series data are available for about 400 coastal counties, 30 coastal states, 8 regions, and the nation. The service was developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), but may contain data and information from a variety of data sources, including non-NOAA data. NOAA provides the information “as-is” and shall incur no responsibility or liability as to the completeness or accuracy of this information. NOAA assumes no responsibility arising from the use of this information. The NOAA Office for Coastal Management will make every effort to provide continual access to this service but it may need to be taken down during routine IT maintenance or in case of an emergency. If you plan to ingest this service into your own application and would like to be informed about planned and unplanned service outages or changes to existing services, please register for our Data Services Newsletter (http://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/publications/subscribe). For additional information, please contact the NOAA Office for Coastal Management (coastal.info@noaa.gov).

© None

Ecoregions by state were extracted from the seamless national shapefile. Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources. They are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. These general purpose regions are critical for structuring and implementing ecosystem management strategies across federal agencies, state agencies, and nongovernment organizations that are responsible for different types of resources within the same geographical areas. The approach used to compile this map is based on the premise that ecological regions can be identified through the analysis of patterns of biotic and abiotic phenomena, including geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. The relative importance of each characteristic varies from one ecological region to another. A Roman numeral hierarchical scheme has been adopted for different levels for ecological regions. Level I is the coarsest level, dividing North America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 50 regions (Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997). At Level III, the continental United States contains 105 regions whereas the conterminous United States has 85 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011). Level IV ecoregions are further subdivisions of Level III ecoregions. Methods used to define the ecoregions are explained in Omernik (1995, 2004), Omernik and others (2000), and Gallant and others (1989). Literature cited: Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997, Ecological regions of North America- toward a common perspective: Montreal, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 71 p. Gallant, A. L., Whittier, T.R., Larsen, D.P., Omernik, J.M., and Hughes, R.M., 1989, Regionalization as a tool for managing environmental resources: Corvallis, Oregon, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/3-89/060, 152p. Omernik, J.M., 1995, Ecoregions - a framework for environmental management, in Davis, W.S. and Simon, T.P., eds., Biological assessment and criteria-tools for water resource planning and decision making: Boca Raton, Florida, Lewis Publishers, p.49-62. Omernik, J.M., Chapman, S.S., Lillie, R.A., and Dumke, R.T., 2000, Ecoregions of Wisconsin: Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, v. 88, p. 77-103. Omernik, J.M., 2004, Perspectives on the nature and definitions of ecological regions: Environmental Management, v. 34, Supplement 1, p. s27-s38. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Level III and IV ecoregions of the continental United States. U.S. EPA, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon, Map scale 1:3,000,000. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii_iv.htm. Comments and questions regarding Ecoregions should be addressed to Glenn Griffith, USGS, c/o US EPA., 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333, (541)-754-4465, email:griffith.glenn@epa.gov Alternate: James Omernik, USGS, c/o US EPA, 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333, (541)-754-4458, email:omernik.james@epa.gov

In 2022, the digital economy added 2.57 trillion U.S. dollars in value to the overall U.S. economy, up from nearly 2.4 trillion U.S. dollars in the previous year. In 2022, the GDP of the United States amounted to 25.46 trillion U.S. dollars.

Ecoregions for EPA Administrative Regions were extracted from the seamless national shapefile. Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources. They are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. These general purpose regions are critical for structuring and implementing ecosystem management strategies across federal agencies, state agencies, and nongovernment organizations that are responsible for different types of resources within the same geographical areas. The approach used to compile this map is based on the premise that ecological regions can be identified through the analysis of patterns of biotic and abiotic phenomena, including geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. The relative importance of each characteristic varies from one ecological region to another. A Roman numeral hierarchical scheme has been adopted for different levels for ecological regions. Level I is the coarsest level, dividing North America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 50 regions (Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997). At Level III, the continental United States contains 105 regions whereas the conterminous United States has 85 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011). Level IV ecoregions are further subdivisions of Level III ecoregions. Methods used to define the ecoregions are explained in Omernik (1995, 2004), Omernik and others (2000), and Gallant and others (1989). Literature cited: Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997, Ecological regions of North America- toward a common perspective: Montreal, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 71 p. Gallant, A. L., Whittier, T.R., Larsen, D.P., Omernik, J.M., and Hughes, R.M., 1989, Regionalization as a tool for managing environmental resources: Corvallis, Oregon, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/3-89/060, 152p. Omernik, J.M., 1995, Ecoregions - a framework for environmental management, in Davis, W.S. and Simon, T.P., eds., Biological assessment and criteria-tools for water resource planning and decision making: Boca Raton, Florida, Lewis Publishers, p.49-62. Omernik, J.M., Chapman, S.S., Lillie, R.A., and Dumke, R.T., 2000, Ecoregions of Wisconsin: Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, v. 88, p. 77-103. Omernik, J.M., 2004, Perspectives on the nature and definitions of ecological regions: Environmental Management, v. 34, Supplement 1, p. s27-s38. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Level III and IV ecoregions of the continental United States. U.S. EPA, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon, Map scale 1:3,000,000. Available online at: https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/level-iii-and-iv-ecoregions-continental-united-states. Comments and questions regarding Ecoregions should be addressed to Glenn Griffith, USGS, c/o US EPA., 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333, (541)-754-4465, email:griffith.glenn@epa.gov Alternate: James Omernik, USGS, c/o US EPA, 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333, (541)-754-4458, email:omernik.james@epa.gov

CSI: Eco: Recent Buss Conditions: Unfavorable Trade Deficit data was reported at 3.000 % in May 2018. This records a decrease from the previous number of 8.000 % for Apr 2018. CSI: Eco: Recent Buss Conditions: Unfavorable Trade Deficit data is updated monthly, averaging 1.000 % from Jan 1978 (Median) to May 2018, with 485 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 15.000 % in Jul 2016 and a record low of 0.000 % in Feb 2018. CSI: Eco: Recent Buss Conditions: Unfavorable Trade Deficit data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by University of Michigan. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H028: Consumer Sentiment Index: Economic Conditions. During the last few months, have your heard of any favorable or unfavorable changes in business conditions? The question was: What did you hear?

mhani6/eco dataset hosted on Hugging Face and contributed by the HF Datasets community

Subscribers can find out export and import data of 23 countries by HS code or product’s name. This demo is helpful for market analysis.

The statistic shows total cost of violence to the U.S. economy in 2010, by static and dynamic indicators. The economic impact of incarceration is estimated to about 41 billion U.S. dollars in government costs and 71 billion U.S. dollars through lost productivity.

geo testing us eco

Subscribers can find out export and import data of 23 countries by HS code or product’s name. This demo is helpful for market analysis.

United States US: Net Lending (+) / Net Borrowing (-): % of GDP data was reported at -3.962 % in 2016. This records a decrease from the previous number of -3.311 % for 2015. United States US: Net Lending (+) / Net Borrowing (-): % of GDP data is updated yearly, averaging -2.972 % from Sep 1972 (Median) to 2016, with 45 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2.226 % in 2000 and a record low of -10.235 % in 2009. United States US: Net Lending (+) / Net Borrowing (-): % of GDP data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Government Revenue, Expenditure and Finance. Net lending (+) / net borrowing (–) equals government revenue minus expense, minus net investment in nonfinancial assets. It is also equal to the net result of transactions in financial assets and liabilities. Net lending/net borrowing is a summary measure indicating the extent to which government is either putting financial resources at the disposal of other sectors in the economy or abroad, or utilizing the financial resources generated by other sectors in the economy or from abroad.; ; International Monetary Fund, Government Finance Statistics Yearbook and data files.; Weighted average;

The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the United States expanded 2 percent in the first quarter of 2025 over the same quarter of the previous year. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - United States GDP Annual Growth Rate - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.

description: This map service displays Level III and Level IV Ecoregions of the United States and was created from ecoregion data obtained from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development's Western Ecology Division. The original ecoregion data was projected from Albers to Web Mercator for this map service. To download shapefiles of ecoregion data (in Albers), please go to: www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions.htm. IMPORTANT NOTE ABOUT LEVEL IV POLYGON LEGEND DISPLAY IN ARCMAP: Due to the limitations of Graphical Device Interface (GDI) resources per application on Windows, ArcMap does not display the legend in the Table of Contents for the ArcGIS Server service layer if the legend has more than 100 items. As of December 2011, there are 968 unique legend items in the Level IV Ecoregion Polygon legend. Follow this link (http://support.esri.com/en/knowledgebase/techarticles/detail/33741) for instructions about how to increase the maximum number of ArcGIS Server service layer legend items allowed for display in ArcMap. Note the instructions at this link provide a slightly incorrect path to "Maximum Legend Count". The correct path is HKEY_CURRENT_USER > Software > ESRI > ArcMap > Server > MapServerLayer > Maximum Legend Count. When editing the "Maximum Legend Count", update the field, "Value data" to 1000. To download a PDF version of the Level IV ecoregion map and legend, go to ftp://ftp.epa.gov/wed/ecoregions/us/Eco_Level_IV_US_pg.pdf. Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources. They are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. These general purpose regions are critical for structuring and implementing ecosystem management strategies across federal agencies, state agencies, and nongovernment organizations that are responsible for different types of resources within the same geographical areas. The approach used to compile this map is based on the premise that ecological regions can be identified through the analysis of patterns of biotic and abiotic phenomena, including geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. The relative importance of each characteristic varies from one ecological region to another. A Roman numeral hierarchical scheme has been adopted for different levels for ecological regions. Level I is the coarsest level, dividing North America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 52 regions (Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997). At Level III, the continental United States contains 104 regions whereas the conterminous United States has 85 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005). Level IV ecoregions (n = 968) are further subdivisions of Level III ecoregions. Methods used to define the ecoregions are explained in Omernik (1995, 2004), Omernik and others (2000), and Gallant and others (1989). Literature cited: Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997, Ecological regions of North America- toward a common perspective: Montreal, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 71 p. Gallant, A.L., Whittier, T.R., Larsen, D.P., Omernik, J.M., and Hughes, R.M., 1989, Regionalization as a tool for managing environmental resources: Corvallis, Oregon, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/3-89/060, 152p. Omernik, J.M., 1995, Ecoregions - a framework for environmental management, in Davis, W.S. and Simon, T.P., eds., Biological assessment and criteria-tools for water resource planning and decision making: Boca Raton, Florida, Lewis Publishers, p.49-62. Omernik, J.M., Chapman, S.S., Lillie, R.A., and Dumke, R.T., 2000, Ecoregions of Wisconsin: Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, v. 88, p. 77-103. Omernik, J.M., 2004, Perspectives on the nature and definitions of ecological regions: Environmental Management, v. 34, Supplement 1, p. s27-s38. Comments and questions regarding ecoregion development should be addressed to Glenn Griffith, Dynamac Corporation, c/o US EPA., 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333, 541-754-4465, email:griffith.glenn@epa.gov Alternate: James Omernik, USGS, c/o US EPA, 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333, 541-754-4458, email:omernik.james@epa.gov; abstract: This map service displays Level III and Level IV Ecoregions of the United States and was created from ecoregion data obtained from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development's Western Ecology Division. The original ecoregion data was projected from Albers to Web Mercator for this map service. To download shapefiles of ecoregion data (in Albers), please go to: www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions.htm. IMPORTANT NOTE ABOUT LEVEL IV POLYGON LEGEND DISPLAY IN ARCMAP: Due to the limitations of Graphical Device Interface (GDI) resources per application on Windows, ArcMap does not display the legend in the Table of Contents for the ArcGIS Server service layer if the legend has more than 100 items. As of December 2011, there are 968 unique legend items in the Level IV Ecoregion Polygon legend. Follow this link (http://support.esri.com/en/knowledgebase/techarticles/detail/33741) for instructions about how to increase the maximum number of ArcGIS Server service layer legend items allowed for display in ArcMap. Note the instructions at this link provide a slightly incorrect path to "Maximum Legend Count". The correct path is HKEY_CURRENT_USER > Software > ESRI > ArcMap > Server > MapServerLayer > Maximum Legend Count. When editing the "Maximum Legend Count", update the field, "Value data" to 1000. To download a PDF version of the Level IV ecoregion map and legend, go to ftp://ftp.epa.gov/wed/ecoregions/us/Eco_Level_IV_US_pg.pdf. Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources. They are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. These general purpose regions are critical for structuring and implementing ecosystem management strategies across federal agencies, state agencies, and nongovernment organizations that are responsible for different types of resources within the same geographical areas. The approach used to compile this map is based on the premise that ecological regions can be identified through the analysis of patterns of biotic and abiotic phenomena, including geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. The relative importance of each characteristic varies from one ecological region to another. A Roman numeral hierarchical scheme has been adopted for different levels for ecological regions. Level I is the coarsest level, dividing North America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 52 regions (Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997). At Level III, the continental United States contains 104 regions whereas the conterminous United States has 85 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005). Level IV ecoregions (n = 968) are further subdivisions of Level III ecoregions. Methods used to define the ecoregions are explained in Omernik (1995, 2004), Omernik and others (2000), and Gallant and others (1989). Literature cited: Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997, Ecological regions of North America- toward a common perspective: Montreal, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 71 p. Gallant, A.L., Whittier, T.R., Larsen, D.P., Omernik, J.M., and Hughes, R.M., 1989, Regionalization as a tool for managing environmental resources: Corvallis, Oregon, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/3-89/060, 152p. Omernik, J.M., 1995, Ecoregions - a framework for environmental management, in Davis, W.S. and Simon, T.P., eds., Biological assessment and criteria-tools for water resource planning and decision making: Boca Raton, Florida, Lewis Publishers, p.49-62. Omernik, J.M., Chapman, S.S., Lillie, R.A., and Dumke, R.T., 2000, Ecoregions of Wisconsin: Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, v. 88, p. 77-103. Omernik, J.M., 2004, Perspectives on the nature and definitions of ecological regions: Environmental Management, v. 34, Supplement 1, p. s27-s38. Comments and questions regarding ecoregion development should be addressed to Glenn Griffith, Dynamac Corporation, c/o US EPA., 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333, 541-754-4465, email:griffith.glenn@epa.gov Alternate: James Omernik, USGS, c/o US EPA, 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333, 541-754-4458, email:omernik.james@epa.gov