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

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 5 kilometers 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

Maintainer: 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 5 kilometers of forests in 2019 were classified as forest proximate people. Euclidean distance was used as the measure to create a 5-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 - 5km cutoff distance"

The Rural Access Index (RAI) is a measure of access, developed by the World Bank in 2006. It was adopted as Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator 9.1.1 in 2015, to measure the accessibility of rural populations. It is currently the only indicator for the SDGs that directly measures rural access.The RAI measures the proportion of the rural population that lives within 2 km of an all-season road. An all-season road is one that is motorable all year, but may be temporarily unavailable during inclement weather (Roberts, Shyam, & Rastogi, 2006). This dataset implements and expands on the most recent official methodology put forward by the World Bank, ReCAP's 2019 RAI Supplemental Guidelines. This is, to date, the only publicly available application of this method at a global scale.MethodologyReCAP's methodology provided new insight on what makes a road all-season and how this data should be handled: instead of removing unpaved roads from the network, the ones that are classified as unpaved are to be intersected with topographic and climatic conditions and, whenever there’s an overlap with excess precipitation and slope, a multiplying factor ranging from 0% to 100% is applied to the population that would access to that road. This present dataset developed by SDSN's SDG Transformation Centre proposes that authorities ability to maintain and remediate road conditions also be taken into account.Data sourcesThe indicator relies on four major items of geospatial data: land cover (rural or urban), population distribution, road network extent and the “all-season” status of those roads.Land cover data (urban/rural distinction)Since the indicator measures the acess rural populations, it's necessary to define what is and what isn't rural. This dataset uses the DegUrba Methodology, proposed by the United Nations Expert Group on Statistical Methodology for Delineating Cities and Rural Areas (United Nations Expert Group, 2019). This approach has been developed by the European Commission Global Human Settlement Layer (GHSL-SMOD) project, and is designed to instil some consistency into the definitions based on population density on a 1-km grid, but adjusted for local situations.Population distributionThe source for population distribution data is WorldPop. This uses national census data, projections and other ancillary data from countries to produce aggregated, 100 m2 population data. Road extentTwo widely recognized road datasets are used: the real-time updated crowd-sourced OpenStreetMap (OSM) or the GLOBIO’s 2018 GRIP database, which draws data from official national sources. The reasons for picking the latter are mostly related to its ability to provide information on the surface (pavement) of these roads, to the detriment of the timeliness of the data, which is restrained to the year 2018. Additionally, data from Microsoft Bing's recent Road Detection project is used to ensure completeness. This dataset is completely derived from machine learning methods applied over satellite imagery, and detected 1,165 km of roads missing from OSM.Roads’ all-season statusThe World Bank's original 2006 methodology defines the term all-season as “… a road that is motorable all year round by the prevailing means of rural transport, allowing for occasional interruptions of short duration”. ReCAP's 2019 methodology makes a case for passability equating to the all-season status of a road, along with the assumption that typically the wet season is when roads become impassable, especially so in steep roads that are more exposed to landslides.This dataset follows the ReCAP methodology by creating an passability index. The proposed use of passability factors relies on the following three aspects:• Surface type. Many rural roads in LICs (and even in large high-income countries including the USA and Australia) are unpaved. As mentioned before, unpaved roads deteriorate rapidly and in a different way to paved roads. They are very susceptible to water ingress to the surface, which softens the materials and makes them very vulnerable to the action of traffic. So, when a road surface becomes saturated and is subject to traffic, the deterioration is accelerated. • Climate. Precipitation has a significant effect on the condition of a road, especially on unpaved roads, which predominate in LICs and provide much of the extended connectivity to rural and poor areas. As mentioned above, the rainfall on a road is a significant factor in its deterioration, but the extent depends on the type of rainfall in terms of duration and intensity, and how well the roadside drainage copes with this. While ReCAP suggested the use of general climate zones, we argue that better spatial and temporal resolutions can be acquired through the Copernicus Programme precipitation data, which is made available freely at ~30km pixel size for each month of the year.• Terrain. The gradient and altitude of roads also has an effect on their accessibility. Steep roads become impassable more easily due to the potential for scour during heavy rainfall, and also due to slipperiness as a result of the road surface materials used. Here this is drawn from slope calculated from SRTM Digital Terrain data.• Road maintenance. The ability of local authorities to remediate damaged caused by precipitation and landslides is proposed as a correcting factor to the previous ones. Ideally this would be measured by the % of GDP invested in road construction and maintenance, but this isn't available for all countries. For this reason, GDP per capita is adopted as a proxy instead. The data range is normalized in such a way that a road maxed out in terms of precipitation and slope (accessibility score of 0.25) in a country at the top of the GDP per capita range is brought back at to the higher end of the accessibility score (0.95), while the accessibility score of a road meeting the same passability conditions in a country which GDP per capita is towards the lower end is kept unchanged.Data processingThe roads from the three aforementioned datasets (Bing, GRIP and OSM) are merged together to them is applied a 2km buffer. The populations falling exclusively on unpaved road buffers are multiplied by the resulting passability index, which is defined as the normalized sum of the aforementioned components, ranging from 0.25 to. 0.9, with 0.95 meaning 95% probability that the road is all-season. The index applied to the population data, so, when calculated, the RAI includes the probability that the roads which people are using in each area will be all-season or not. For example, an unpaved road in a flat area with low rainfall would have an accessibility factor of 0.95, as this road is designed to be accessible all year round and the environmental effects on its impassability are minimal.The code for generating this dataset is available on Github at: https://github.com/sdsna/rai

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.

Global Human Footprint Index represents the relative human influence in each terrestrial biome expressed as a percentage. The purpose is to provide an updated map of anthropogenic impacts on the environment in geographic projection which can be used in wildlife conservation planning, natural resource management, and research on human-environment interactions. Dataset SummaryThe Global Human Footprint Index Dataset of the Last of the Wild Project, Version 2, 2005 (LWP-2) is the Human Influence Index (HII) normalized by biome and realm. The HII is a global dataset of 1-kilometer grid cells, created from nine global data layers of human population pressure (population density), human land use and infrastructure (built-up areas, nighttime lights, land use/land cover), and human access (coastlines, roads, railroads, navigable rivers). A value of zero represents the least influenced–the “most wild” part of the biome with value of 100 representing the most influenced (least wild) part of the biome. The dataset is produced by the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and the Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN).Recommended CitationWildlife Conservation Society - WCS, and Center for International Earth Science Information Network - CIESIN - Columbia University. 2005. Last of the Wild Project, Version 2, 2005 (LWP-2): Global Human Footprint Dataset (Geographic). Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). http://dx.doi.org/10.7927/H4M61H5F. Accessed DAY MONTH YEAR.

Updates

• Notice of data discontinuation: Since the start of the pandemic, AP has reported case and death counts from data provided by Johns Hopkins University. Johns Hopkins University has announced that they will stop their daily data collection efforts after March 10. As Johns Hopkins stops providing data, the AP will also stop collecting daily numbers for COVID cases and deaths. The HHS and CDC now collect and visualize key metrics for the pandemic. AP advises using those resources when reporting on the pandemic going forward.

  • CDC Weekly case and death counts (national and state level)
  • CDC County level cases and deaths
  • HHS New hospital admissions
  • CDC NowCast COVID variant proportions (national and regional level)

• April 9, 2020

  • The population estimate data for New York County, NY has been updated to include all five New York City counties (Kings County, Queens County, Bronx County, Richmond County and New York County). This has been done to match the Johns Hopkins COVID-19 data, which aggregates counts for the five New York City counties to New York County.

• April 20, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins death totals in the US now include confirmed and probable deaths in accordance with CDC guidelines as of April 14. One significant result of this change was an increase of more than 3,700 deaths in the New York City count. This change will likely result in increases for death counts elsewhere as well. The AP does not alter the Johns Hopkins source data, so probable deaths are included in this dataset as well.

• April 29, 2020

  • The AP is now providing timeseries data for counts of COVID-19 cases and deaths. The raw counts are provided here unaltered, along with a population column with Census ACS-5 estimates and calculated daily case and death rates per 100,000 people. Please read the updated caveats section for more information.

• September 1st, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins is now providing counts for the five New York City counties individually.

• February 12, 2021

  • The Ohio Department of Health recently announced that as many as 4,000 COVID-19 deaths may have been underreported through the state’s reporting system, and that the "daily reported death counts will be high for a two to three-day period."
  • Because deaths data will be anomalous for consecutive days, we have chosen to freeze Ohio's rolling average for daily deaths at the last valid measure until Johns Hopkins is able to back-distribute the data. The raw daily death counts, as reported by Johns Hopkins and including the backlogged death data, will still be present in the new_deaths column.

• February 16, 2021

  - Johns Hopkins has reconciled Ohio's historical deaths data with the state.

  Overview

The AP is using data collected by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering as our source for outbreak caseloads and death counts for the United States and globally.

The Hopkins data is available at the county level in the United States. The AP has paired this data with population figures and county rural/urban designations, and has calculated caseload and death rates per 100,000 people. Be aware that caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.

This data is from the Hopkins dashboard that is updated regularly throughout the day. Like all organizations dealing with data, Hopkins is constantly refining and cleaning up their feed, so there may be brief moments where data does not appear correctly. At this link, you’ll find the Hopkins daily data reports, and a clean version of their feed.

The AP is updating this dataset hourly at 45 minutes past the hour.

To learn more about AP's data journalism capabilities for publishers, corporations and financial institutions, go here or email kromano@ap.org.

Queries

Use AP's queries to filter the data or to join to other datasets we've made available to help cover the coronavirus pandemic

• Filter cases by state here

• Rank states by their status as current hotspots. Calculates the 7-day rolling average of new cases per capita in each state: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=481e82a4-1b2f-41c2-9ea1-d91aa4b3b1ac

• Find recent hotspots within your state by running a query to calculate the 7-day rolling average of new cases by capita in each county: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=b566f1db-3231-40fe-8099-311909b7b687&showTemplatePreview=true

• Join county-level case data to an earlier dataset released by AP on local hospital capacity here. To find out more about the hospital capacity dataset, see the full details.

• Pull the 100 counties with the highest per-capita confirmed cases here

• Rank all the counties by the highest per-capita rate of new cases in the past 7 days here. Be aware that because this ranks per-capita caseloads, very small counties may rise to the very top, so take into account raw caseload figures as well.

Interactive

The AP has designed an interactive map to track COVID-19 cases reported by Johns Hopkins.

@(https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/15/)

Interactive Embed Code

<iframe title="USA counties (2018) choropleth map Mapping COVID-19 cases by county" aria-describedby="" id="datawrapper-chart-nRyaf" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/10/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important;" height="400"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">(function() {'use strict';window.addEventListener('message', function(event) {if (typeof event.data['datawrapper-height'] !== 'undefined') {for (var chartId in event.data['datawrapper-height']) {var iframe = document.getElementById('datawrapper-chart-' + chartId) || document.querySelector("iframe[src*='" + chartId + "']");if (!iframe) {continue;}iframe.style.height = event.data['datawrapper-height'][chartId] + 'px';}}});})();</script>

Caveats

• This data represents the number of cases and deaths reported by each state and has been collected by Johns Hopkins from a number of sources cited on their website.
• In some cases, deaths or cases of people who've crossed state lines -- either to receive treatment or because they became sick and couldn't return home while traveling -- are reported in a state they aren't currently in, because of state reporting rules.
• In some states, there are a number of cases not assigned to a specific county -- for those cases, the county name is "unassigned to a single county"
• This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University's COVID-19 tracking project. The AP is simply making it available here for ease of use for reporters and members.
• Caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.
• Population estimates at the county level are drawn from 2014-18 5-year estimates from the American Community Survey.
• The Urban/Rural classification scheme is from the Center for Disease Control and Preventions's National Center for Health Statistics. It puts each county into one of six categories -- from Large Central Metro to Non-Core -- according to population and other characteristics. More details about the classifications can be found here.

Johns Hopkins timeseries data - Johns Hopkins pulls data regularly to update their dashboard. Once a day, around 8pm EDT, Johns Hopkins adds the counts for all areas they cover to the timeseries file. These counts are snapshots of the latest cumulative counts provided by the source on that day. This can lead to inconsistencies if a source updates their historical data for accuracy, either increasing or decreasing the latest cumulative count. - Johns Hopkins periodically edits their historical timeseries data for accuracy. They provide a file documenting all errors in their timeseries files that they have identified and fixed here

Attribution

This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 tracking project

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Blue Earth City township Hispanic or Latino population. It includes the distribution of the Hispanic or Latino population, of Blue Earth City township, by their ancestries, as identified by the Census Bureau. The dataset can be utilized to understand the origin of the Hispanic or Latino population of Blue Earth City township.

Key observations

Among the Hispanic population in Blue Earth City township, regardless of the race, the largest group is of Mexican origin, with a population of 26 (100% of the total Hispanic population).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Origin for Hispanic or Latino population include:

• Mexican
• Puerto Rican
• Cuban
• Other Hispanic or Latino

Variables / Data Columns

• Origin: This column displays the origin for Hispanic or Latino population for the Blue Earth City township
• Population: The population of the specific origin for Hispanic or Latino population in the Blue Earth City township is shown in this column.
• % of Total Hispanic Population: This column displays the percentage distribution of each Hispanic origin as a proportion of Blue Earth City township total Hispanic or Latino population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Blue Earth City township Population by Race & Ethnicity. You can refer the same here

Sentinel2GlobalLULC is a deep learning-ready dataset of RGB images from the Sentinel-2 satellites designed for global land use and land cover (LULC) mapping. Sentinel2GlobalLULC v2.0 contains 194,877 images in GeoTiff and JPEG format corresponding to 29 broad LULC classes. Each image has 224 x 224 pixels at 10 m spatial resolution and was produced by assigning the 25th percentile of all available observations in the Sentinel-2 collection between June 2015 and October 2020 in order to remove atmospheric effects (i.e., clouds, aerosols, shadows, snow, etc.). A spatial purity value was assigned to each image based on the consensus across 15 different global LULC products available in Google Earth Engine (GEE). Our dataset is structured into 3 main zip-compressed folders, an Excel file with a dictionary for class names and descriptive statistics per LULC class, and a python script to convert RGB GeoTiff images into JPEG format. The first folder contains 29 zip-compressed subfolders where each one corresponds to a specific LULC class with hundreds to thousands of GeoTiff Sentinel-2 RGB images. The second folder contains 29 zip-compressed subfolders with a JPEG formatted version of the same images provided in the first main folder. The third folder includes 29 zip-compressed CSV files with as many rows as images and with 12 columns containing the following metadata (this same metadata is provided in the image filenames): Land Cover Class ID: is the identification number of each LULC class Land Cover Class Short Name: is the short name of each LULC class Pixel purity Value: is the spatial purity of each pixel for its corresponding LULC class calculated as the spatial consensus across up to 15 land-cover products Image ID: is the identification number of each image within its corresponding LULC class GHM Value: is the spatial average of the Global Human Modification index (gHM) for each image Latitude: is the latitude of the center point of each image Longitude: is the longitude of the center point of each image Country Code: is the Alpha-2 country code of each image as described in the ISO 3166 international standard. To understand the country codes, we recommend the user to visit the following website where they present the Alpha-2 code for each country as described in the ISO 3166 international standard:https: //www.iban.com/country-codes Administrative Department Level1: is the administrative level 1 name to which each image belongs Administrative Department Level2: is the administrative level 2 name to which each image belongs Locality: is the name of the locality to which each image belongs Number of S2 images : is the number of found instances in the corresponding Sentinel-2 image collection between June 2015 and October 2020, when aggregated and exported as a final image For seven LULC classes, we could not export from GEE all images that fulfilled a spatial purity of 100% since there were millions of them. In this case, we exported a stratified random sample of 14,000 images and provided an additional CSV file with the images actually contained in our dataset. That is, for these seven LULC classes, we provide these 2 CSV files: A CSV file that contains all exported images for this class A CSV file that contains all images available for this class at spatial purity of 100%, both the ones exported and the ones not exported, in case the user wants to export them. These CSV filenames end with "including_non_downloaded_images". © Sentinel2GlobalLULC Dataset by Yassir Benhammou, Domingo Alcaraz-Segura, Emilio Guirado, Rohaifa Khaldi, Boujemâa Achchab, Francisco Herrera & Siham Tabik is marked with Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0)

This map service, derived from World Bank data, shows various characteristics of the Health topic. The World Bank Group provides financing, state-of-the-art analysis, and policy advice to help countries expand access to quality, affordable health care; protects people from falling into poverty or worsening poverty due to illness; and promotes investments in all sectors that form the foundation of healthy societies.Age Dependency Ratio: Age dependency ratio is the ratio of dependents--people younger than 15 or older than 64--to the working-age population--those ages 15-64. Data are shown as the proportion of dependents per 100 working-age population. Data from 1960 – 2012.Age Dependency Ratio Old: Age dependency ratio, old, is the ratio of older dependents--people older than 64--to the working-age population--those ages 15-64. Data are shown as the proportion of dependents per 100 working-age population. Data from 1960 – 2012.Birth/Death Rate: Crude birth/death rate indicates the number of births/deaths occurring during the year, per
1,000 population estimated at midyear. Subtracting the crude death rate from the crude birth rate provides the rate of natural increase, which is equal to the rate of population change in the absence of migration. Data spans from 1960 – 2008.Total Fertility: Total fertility rate represents the number of children that would be born to a woman if she were to live to the end of her childbearing years and bear children in accordance with current age-specific fertility rates. Data shown is for 1960 - 2008.Population Growth: Annual population growth rate for year t is the exponential rate of growth of midyear population from year t-1 to t, expressed as a percentage.
Population is based on the de facto definition of population, which
counts all residents regardless of legal status or citizenship--except
for refugees not permanently settled in the country of asylum, who are
generally considered part of the population of the country of origin. Data spans from 1960 – 2009.Life Expectancy: Life expectancy at birth indicates the number of years a newborn infant
would live if prevailing patterns of mortality at the time of its birth were to stay the same throughout its life. Data spans from 1960 – 2008.Population Female: Female population is the percentage of the population that is female. Population is based on the de facto definition of population. Data from 1960 – 2009.For more information, please visit: World Bank Open Data. _Other International User Community content that may interest you World Bank World Bank Age World Bank Health

The ChokePoint dataset is designed for experiments in person identification/verification under real-world surveillance conditions using existing technologies. An array of three cameras was placed above several portals (natural choke points in terms of pedestrian traffic) to capture subjects walking through each portal in a natural way. While a person is walking through a portal, a sequence of face images (ie. a face set) can be captured. Faces in such sets will have variations in terms of illumination conditions, pose, sharpness, as well as misalignment due to automatic face localisation/detection. Due to the three camera configuration, one of the cameras is likely to capture a face set where a subset of the faces is near-frontal.

The dataset consists of 25 subjects (19 male and 6 female) in portal 1 and 29 subjects (23 male and 6 female) in portal 2. The recording of portal 1 and portal 2 are one month apart. The dataset has frame rate of 30 fps and the image resolution is 800X600 pixels. In total, the dataset consists of 48 video sequences and 64,204 face images. In all sequences, only one subject is presented in the image at a time. The first 100 frames of each sequence are for background modelling where no foreground objects were presented.

Each sequence was named according to the recording conditions (eg. P2E_S1_C3) where P, S, and C stand for portal, sequence and camera, respectively. E and L indicate subjects either entering or leaving the portal. The numbers indicate the respective portal, sequence and camera label. For example, P2L_S1_C3 indicates that the recording was done in Portal 2, with people leaving the portal, and captured by camera 3 in the first recorded sequence.

To pose a more challenging real-world surveillance problems, two seqeunces (P2E_S5 and P2L_S5) were recorded with crowded scenario. In additional to the aforementioned variations, the sequences were presented with continuous occlusion. This phenomenon presents challenges in identidy tracking and face verification.

This dataset can be applied, but not limited, to the following research areas:

person re-identification

image set matching

face quality measurement

face clustering

3D face reconstruction

pedestrian/face tracking

background estimation and subtraction

Please cite the following paper if you use the ChokePoint dataset in your work (papers, articles, reports, books, software, etc):

Y. Wong, S. Chen, S. Mau, C. Sanderson, B.C. Lovell Patch-based Probabilistic Image Quality Assessment for Face Selection and Improved Video-based Face Recognition IEEE Biometrics Workshop, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) Workshops, pages 81-88, 2011. http://doi.org/10.1109/CVPRW.2011.5981881

Data DescriptionThe DIPSER dataset is designed to assess student attention and emotion in in-person classroom settings, consisting of RGB camera data, smartwatch sensor data, and labeled attention and emotion metrics. It includes multiple camera angles per student to capture posture and facial expressions, complemented by smartwatch data for inertial and biometric metrics. Attention and emotion labels are derived from self-reports and expert evaluations. The dataset includes diverse demographic groups, with data collected in real-world classroom environments, facilitating the training of machine learning models for predicting attention and correlating it with emotional states.Data Collection and Generation ProceduresThe dataset was collected in a natural classroom environment at the University of Alicante, Spain. The recording setup consisted of six general cameras positioned to capture the overall classroom context and individual cameras placed at each student’s desk. Additionally, smartwatches were used to collect biometric data, such as heart rate, accelerometer, and gyroscope readings.Experimental SessionsNine distinct educational activities were designed to ensure a comprehensive range of engagement scenarios:News Reading – Students read projected or device-displayed news.Brainstorming Session – Idea generation for problem-solving.Lecture – Passive listening to an instructor-led session.Information Organization – Synthesizing information from different sources.Lecture Test – Assessment of lecture content via mobile devices.Individual Presentations – Students present their projects.Knowledge Test – Conducted using Kahoot.Robotics Experimentation – Hands-on session with robotics.MTINY Activity Design – Development of educational activities with computational thinking.Technical SpecificationsRGB Cameras: Individual cameras recorded at 640×480 pixels, while context cameras captured at 1280×720 pixels.Frame Rate: 9-10 FPS depending on the setup.Smartwatch Sensors: Collected heart rate, accelerometer, gyroscope, rotation vector, and light sensor data at a frequency of 1–100 Hz.Data Organization and FormatsThe dataset follows a structured directory format:/groupX/experimentY/subjectZ.zip Each subject-specific folder contains:images/ (individual facial images)watch_sensors/ (sensor readings in JSON format)labels/ (engagement & emotion annotations)metadata/ (subject demographics & session details)Annotations and LabelingEach data entry includes engagement levels (1-5) and emotional states (9 categories) based on both self-reported labels and evaluations by four independent experts. A custom annotation tool was developed to ensure consistency across evaluations.Missing Data and Data QualitySynchronization: A centralized server ensured time alignment across devices. Brightness changes were used to verify synchronization.Completeness: No major missing data, except for occasional random frame drops due to embedded device performance.Data Consistency: Uniform collection methodology across sessions, ensuring high reliability.Data Processing MethodsTo enhance usability, the dataset includes preprocessed bounding boxes for face, body, and hands, along with gaze estimation and head pose annotations. These were generated using YOLO, MediaPipe, and DeepFace.File Formats and AccessibilityImages: Stored in standard JPEG format.Sensor Data: Provided as structured JSON files.Labels: Available as CSV files with timestamps.The dataset is publicly available under the CC-BY license and can be accessed along with the necessary processing scripts via the DIPSER GitHub repository.Potential Errors and LimitationsDue to camera angles, some student movements may be out of frame in collaborative sessions.Lighting conditions vary slightly across experiments.Sensor latency variations are minimal but exist due to embedded device constraints.CitationIf you find this project helpful for your research, please cite our work using the following bibtex entry:@misc{marquezcarpintero2025dipserdatasetinpersonstudent1, title={DIPSER: A Dataset for In-Person Student1 Engagement Recognition in the Wild}, author={Luis Marquez-Carpintero and Sergio Suescun-Ferrandiz and Carolina Lorenzo Álvarez and Jorge Fernandez-Herrero and Diego Viejo and Rosabel Roig-Vila and Miguel Cazorla}, year={2025}, eprint={2502.20209}, archivePrefix={arXiv}, primaryClass={cs.CV}, url={https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.20209}, } Usage and ReproducibilityResearchers can utilize standard tools like OpenCV, TensorFlow, and PyTorch for analysis. The dataset supports research in machine learning, affective computing, and education analytics, offering a unique resource for engagement and attention studies in real-world classroom environments.

Stop relying on outdated and inaccurate databases and let Wiza be your source of truth for all deal sourcing and founder / CEO outreach.

Why we're different: The search fund market is dynamic and competitive - Wiza is not a static financial database that gets refreshed on occasion. Every datapoint is sourced and verified the moment that you receive the information. We verify deliverability of every single email ahead of providing the data, and we ensure that each person in your dataset has 100% job title and company accuracy by leveraging Linkedin Data sourced through their live Linkedin profile.

Key Features:

Comprehensive Data Coverage: Stop contacting the same people as everyone else. Wiza's search fund Data is sourced live, not stored in a limited database. When you tell us the type of company or person you would like to contact, we leverage Linkedin Data (the largest, most accurate database in the world) to find everyone who matches your ICP, and then we source the contact data and company data in real-time.

High-Quality, Accurate Data: Wiza ensures accuracy of all datapoints by taking a few key steps that other data providers fail to take: (1) Every email is SMTP verified ahead of delivery, ensuring they will not bounce (2) Every person's Linkedin profile is checked live to ensure we have 100% job title, company, location, etc. accuracy, ahead of providing any data (3) Phone numbers are constantly being verified with AI to ensure accuracy

Linkedin Data: Wiza is able to provide Linkedin Data points, sourced live from each person's Linkedin profile, including Subtitle, Bio, Job Title, Job Description, Skills, Languages, Certifications, Work History, Education, Open to Work, Premium Status, and more!

Personal Data: Wiza has access to industry leading volumes of B2C Contact Data, meaning you can find gmail/yahoo/hotmail email addresses, and mobile phone number data to contact your potential partners.

Content

This dataset includes procurement tender notices for World Bank financed projects. For the official procurement notices API go to http://search.worldbank.org/api/procnotices

Learn more about the World Bank Group's operations in procurement at https://step.worldbank.org

Context

This is a dataset hosted by the World Bank. The organization has an open data platform found here and they update their information according the amount of data that is brought in. Explore World Bank's Financial Data using Kaggle and all of the data sources available through the World Bank organization page!

• Update Frequency: This dataset is updated daily.

Acknowledgements

This dataset is maintained using Socrata's API and Kaggle's API. Socrata has assisted countless organizations with hosting their open data and has been an integral part of the process of bringing more data to the public.

This dataset is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license.

Cover photo by Ivan Bandura on Unsplash
Unsplash Images are distributed under a unique Unsplash License.

This dataset is distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO

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

South Ossetia and Abkhazia were not included for the safety of the interviewers. In addition, very remote mountainous villages or those with less than 100 inhabitants were also excluded. The excluded areas represent approximately 8 percent of the total population.

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 Georgia is 1000.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

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.

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

DEEPEN stands for DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments. As part of the development of the DEEPEN 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) methodology for magmatic plays (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical), weights needed to be developed for use in the weighted sum of the different favorability index models produced from geoscientific exploration datasets. This was done using two different approaches: one based on expert opinions, and one based on statistical learning. This GDR submission includes the datasets used to produce the statistical learning-based weights. While expert opinions allow us to include more nuanced information in the weights, expert opinions are subject to human bias. Data-centric or statistical approaches help to overcome these potential human biases by focusing on and drawing conclusions from the data alone. The drawback is that, to apply these types of approaches, a dataset is needed. Therefore, we attempted to build comprehensive standardized datasets mapping anomalies in each exploration dataset to each component of each play. This data was gathered through a literature review focused on magmatic hydrothermal plays along with well-characterized areas where superhot or supercritical conditions are thought to exist. Datasets were assembled for all three play types, but the hydrothermal dataset is the least complete due to its relatively low priority. For each known or assumed resource, the dataset states what anomaly in each exploration dataset is associated with each component of the system. The data is only a semi-quantitative, where values are either high, medium, or low, relative to background levels. In addition, the dataset has significant gaps, as not every possible exploration dataset has been collected and analyzed at every known or suspected geothermal resource area, in the context of all possible play types. The following training sites were used to assemble this dataset: - Conventional magmatic hydrothermal: Akutan (from AK PFA), Oregon Cascades PFA, Glass Buttes OR, Mauna Kea (from HI PFA), Lanai (from HI PFA), Mt St Helens Shear Zone (from WA PFA), Wind River Valley (From WA PFA), Mount Baker (from WA PFA). - Superhot EGS: Newberry (EGS demonstration project), Coso (EGS demonstration project), Geysers (EGS demonstration project), Eastern Snake River Plain (EGS demonstration project), Utah FORGE, Larderello, Kakkonda, Taupo Volcanic Zone, Acoculco, Krafla. - Supercritical: Coso, Geysers, Salton Sea, Larderello, Los Humeros, Taupo Volcanic Zone, Krafla, Reyjanes, Hengill. **Disclaimer: Treat the supercritical fluid anomalies with skepticism. They are based on assumptions due to the general lack of confirmed supercritical fluid encounters and samples at the sites included in this dataset, at the time of assembling the dataset. The main assumption was that the supercritical fluid in a given geothermal system has shared properties with the hydrothermal fluid, which may not be the case in reality. Once the datasets were assembled, principal component analysis (PCA) was applied to each. PCA is an unsupervised statistical learning technique, meaning that labels are not required on the data, that summarized the directions of variance in the data. This approach was chosen because our labels are not certain, i.e., we do not know with 100% confidence that superhot resources exist at all the assumed positive areas. We also do not have data for any known non-geothermal areas, meaning that it would be challenging to apply a supervised learning technique. In order to generate weights from the PCA, an analysis of the PCA loading values was conducted. PCA loading values represent how much a feature is contributing to each principal component, and therefore the overall variance in the data.

Tel: Penetration Rate: Mobile per 100 People: Beijing data was reported at 184.100 Unit in 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 179.400 Unit for 2022. Tel: Penetration Rate: Mobile per 100 People: Beijing data is updated yearly, averaging 131.290 Unit from Dec 1999 (Median) to 2023, with 25 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 189.460 Unit in 2014 and a record low of 14.820 Unit in 1999. Tel: Penetration Rate: Mobile per 100 People: Beijing data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. The data is categorized under Global Database’s China – Table CN.ICA: Telephone: Number of Mobile per 100 People: By Region.

The European Copernicus Coastal Flood Awareness System (ECFAS) project will contribute to the evolution of the Copernicus Emergency Monitoring Service by demonstrating the technical and operational feasibility of a European Coastal Flood Awareness System. Specifically, ECFAS will provide a much-needed solution to bolster coastal resilience to climate risk and reduce population and infrastructure exposure by monitoring and supporting disaster preparedness, two factors that are fundamental to damage prevention and recovery if a storm hits.

The ECFAS Proof-of-Concept development will run from January 2021-December 2022. The ECFAS project is a collaboration between Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori IUSS di Pavia (Italy, ECFAS Coordinator), Mercator Ocean International (France), Planetek Hellas (Greece), Collecte Localisation Satellites (France), Consorzio Futuro in Ricerca (Italy), Universitat Politecnica de Valencia (Spain), University of the Aegean (Greece), and EurOcean (Portugal), and is funded by the European Commission H2020 Framework Programme within the call LC-SPACE-18-EO-2020 - Copernicus evolution: research activities in support of the evolution of the Copernicus services.

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 programme

Description of the containing files inside the Dataset.

The dataset was divided at European country level, except the Adriatic area which was extracted as a region and not on a country level due to the small size of the countries. The buffer zone of each data was 10km inland in order to be correlated with the new Copernicus product Coastal Zone LU/LC.

Specifically, the dataset includes the new Coastal LU/LC product which was implemented by the EEA and became available at the end of 2020. Additional information collected in relation to the location and characteristics of transport (road and railway) and utility networks (power plants), population density and time variability. Furthermore, some of the publicly available datasets that were used in CEMS related to the abovementioned assets were gathered such as OpenStreetMap (building footprints, road and railway network infrastructures), GeoNames (populated places but also names of administrative units, rivers and lakes, forests, hills and mountains, parks and recreational areas, etc.), the Global Human Settlement Layer (GHS) and Global Human Settlement Population Grid (GHS-POP) generated by JRC. Also, the dataset contains 2 layers with statistics information regarding the population of Europe per sex and age divided in administrative units at NUTS level 3. The first layers includes information fro the whole Europe and the second layer has only the information regaridng the population at the Coastal area. Finally, the dataset includes the global database of Floods protection standars. Below there are tables which present the dataset.

Copernicus Land Monitoring Service	Resolution	Comment
Coastal LU/LC	1:10.000	A Copernicus hotspot product to monitor landscape dynamics in coastal zones
EU-Hydro - Coastline	1:30.000	EU-Hydro is a dataset for all European countries providing the coastline
Natura 2000	1: 100000	A Copernicus hotspot product to monitor important areas for nature conservation
European Settlement Map	10m	A spatial raster dataset that is mapping human settlements in Europe
Imperviousness Density	10m	The percentage of sealed area
Impervious Built-up	10m	The part of the sealed surfaces where buildings can be found
Grassland 2018	10m	A binary grassland/non-grassland product
Tree Cover Density 2018	10m	Level of tree cover density in a range from 0-100%

Joint Research Center	Resolution	Comment
Global Human Settlement Population Grid GHS-POP)	250m	Residential population estimates for target year 2015
GHS settlement model layer (GHS-SMOD)	1km	The GHS Settlement Model grid delineates and classify settlement typologies via a logic of population size, population and built-up area densities
GHS-BUILT	10m	Built-up grid derived from Sentinel-2 global image composite for reference year 2018
ENACT 2011 Population Grid (ENACT-POP R2020A)	1km	The ENACT is a population density for the European Union that take into account major daily and monthly population variations
JRC Open Power Plants Database (JRC-PPDB-OPEN)	-	Europe’s open power plant database
GHS functional urban areas (GHS-FUA R2019A)	1km	City and its commuting zone (area of influence of the city in terms of labour market flows)
GHS Urban Centre Database (GHS-UCDB R2019A)	1km	Urban Centres defined by specific cut-off values on resident population and built-up surface

Additional Data	Resolution	Comment
Open Street Map (OSM)	-	BF, Transportation Network, Utilities Network, Places of Interest
CEMS	-	Data from Rapid Mapping activations in Europe
GeoNames	-	Populated places, Adm. units, Hydrography, Forests, Hills/Mountains, Parks, etc.
Global Administrative Areas	-	Administrative areas of all countries, at all levels of sub-division
NUTS3 Population Age/Sex Group	-	Eurostat population by age ansd sex statistics interesected with the NUTS3 Units
FLOPROS		A global database of FLOod PROtection Standards, which comprises information in the form of the flood return period associated with protection measures, at different spatial scales

Disclaimer:

ECFAS partners provide the data "as is" and "as available" without warranty of any kind. The ECFAS partners shall not be held liable resulting from the use of the information and data provided.

This project has received funding from the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 101004211

Use this global model layer when performing analysis across continents. This layer displays a global land cover map and model for the year 2050 at a pixel resolution of 300m. ESA CCI land cover from the years 2010 and 2018 were used to create this prediction.Variable mapped: Projected land cover in 2050.Data Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaMosaic Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaExtent: Global Cell Size: 300mSource Type: ThematicVisible Scale: 1:50,000 and smallerSource: Clark UniversityPublication date: April 2021What you can do with this layer?This layer may be added to online maps and compared with the ESA CCI Land Cover from any year from 1992 to 2018. To do this, add Global Land Cover 1992-2018 to your map and choose the processing template (image display) from that layer called “Simplified Renderer.” This layer can also be used in analysis in ecological planning to find specific areas that may need to be set aside before they are converted to human use.Links to the six Clark University land cover 2050 layers in ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World:There are three scales (country, regional, and world) for the land cover and vulnerability models. They’re all slightly different since the country model can be more fine-tuned to the drivers in that particular area. Regional (continental) and global have more spatially consistent model weights. Which should you use? If you’re analyzing one country or want to make accurate comparisons between countries, use the country level. If mapping larger patterns, use the global or regional extent (depending on your area of interest). Land Cover 2050 - GlobalLand Cover 2050 - RegionalLand Cover 2050 - CountryLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 GlobalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 RegionalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 CountryWhat these layers model (and what they don’t model)The model focuses on human-based land cover changes and projects the extent of these changes to the year 2050. It seeks to find where agricultural and urban land cover will cover the planet in that year, and what areas are most vulnerable to change due to the expansion of the human footprint. It does not predict changes to other land cover types such as forests or other natural vegetation during that time period unless it is replaced by agriculture or urban land cover. It also doesn’t predict sea level rise unless the model detected a pattern in changes in bodies of water between 2010 and 2018. A few 300m pixels might have changed due to sea level rise during that timeframe, but not many.The model predicts land cover changes based upon patterns it found in the period 2010-2018. But it cannot predict future land use. This is partly because current land use is not necessarily a model input. In this model, land set aside as a result of political decisions, for example military bases or nature reserves, may be found to be filled in with urban or agricultural areas in 2050. This is because the model is blind to the political decisions that affect land use.Quantitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomassCrop SuitabilityDistance to AirportsDistance to Cropland 2010Distance to Primary RoadsDistance to RailroadsDistance to Secondary RoadsDistance to Settled AreasDistance to Urban 2010ElevationGDPHuman Influence IndexPopulation DensityPrecipitationRegions SlopeTemperatureQualitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomesEcoregionsIrrigated CropsProtected AreasProvincesRainfed CropsSoil ClassificationSoil DepthSoil DrainageSoil pHSoil TextureWere small countries modeled?Clark University modeled some small countries that had a few transitions. Only five countries were modeled with this procedure: Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu.As a rule of thumb, the MLP neural network in the Land Change Modeler requires at least 100 pixels of change for model calibration. Several countries experienced less than 100 pixels of change between 2010 & 2018 and therefore required an alternate modeling methodology. These countries are Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu. To overcome the lack of samples, these select countries were resampled from 300 meters to 150 meters, effectively multiplying the number of pixels by four. As a result, we were able to empirically model countries which originally had as few as 25 pixels of change.Once a selected country was resampled to 150 meter resolution, three transition potential images were calibrated and averaged to produce one final transition potential image per transition. Clark Labs chose to create averaged transition potential images to limit artifacts of model overfitting. Though each model contained at least 100 samples of "change", this is still relatively little for a neural network-based model and could lead to anomalous outcomes. The averaged transition potentials were used to extrapolate change and produce a final hard prediction and risk map of natural land cover conversion to Cropland and Artificial Surfaces in 2050.39 Small Countries Not ModeledThere were 39 countries that were not modeled because the transitions, if any, from natural to anthropogenic were very small. In this case the land cover for 2050 for these countries are the same as the 2018 maps and their vulnerability was given a value of 0. Here were the countries not modeled:AndorraAntigua and BarbudaBarbadosCape VerdeComorosCook IslandsDjiboutiDominicaFaroe IslandsFrench GuyanaFrench PolynesiaGibraltarGrenadaGuamGuyanaIcelandJan MayenKiribatiLiechtensteinLuxembourgMaldivesMaltaMarshall IslandsMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldovaMonacoNauruSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSeychellesSurinameSvalbardThe BahamasTongaTuvaluVatican CityIndex to land cover values in this dataset:The Clark University Land Cover 2050 projections display a ten-class land cover generalized from ESA Climate Change Initiative Land Cover. 1 Mostly Cropland2 Grassland, Scrub, or Shrub3 Mostly Deciduous Forest4 Mostly Needleleaf/Evergreen Forest5 Sparse Vegetation6 Bare Area7 Swampy or Often Flooded Vegetation8 Artificial Surface or Urban Area9 Surface Water10 Permanent Snow and Ice

WorldPop produces different types of gridded population count datasets, depending on the methods used and end application. Please make sure you have read our Mapping Populations overview page before choosing and downloading a dataset.


Bespoke methods used to produce datasets for specific individual countries are available through the WorldPop Open Population Repository (WOPR) link below. These are 100m resolution gridded population estimates using customized methods ("bottom-up" and/or "top-down") developed for the latest data available from each country. They can also be visualised and explored through the woprVision App.
The remaining datasets in the links below are produced using the "top-down" method, with either the unconstrained or constrained top-down disaggregation method used. Please make sure you read the Top-down estimation modelling overview page to decide on which datasets best meet your needs. Datasets are available to download in Geotiff and ASCII XYZ format at a resolution of 3 and 30 arc-seconds (approximately 100m and 1km at the equator, respectively):

- Unconstrained individual countries 2000-2020 ( 1km resolution ): Consistent 1km resolution population count datasets created using unconstrained top-down methods for all countries of the World for each year 2000-2020.
- Unconstrained individual countries 2000-2020 ( 100m resolution ): Consistent 100m resolution population count datasets created using unconstrained top-down methods for all countries of the World for each year 2000-2020.
- Unconstrained individual countries 2000-2020 UN adjusted ( 100m resolution ): Consistent 100m resolution population count datasets created using unconstrained top-down methods for all countries of the World for each year 2000-2020 and adjusted to match United Nations national population estimates (UN 2019)
-Unconstrained individual countries 2000-2020 UN adjusted ( 1km resolution ): Consistent 1km resolution population count datasets created using unconstrained top-down methods for all countries of the World for each year 2000-2020 and adjusted to match United Nations national population estimates (UN 2019).
-Unconstrained global mosaics 2000-2020 ( 1km resolution ): Mosaiced 1km resolution versions of the "Unconstrained individual countries 2000-2020" datasets.
-Constrained individual countries 2020 ( 100m resolution ): Consistent 100m resolution population count datasets created using constrained top-down methods for all countries of the World for 2020.
-Constrained individual countries 2020 UN adjusted ( 100m resolution ): Consistent 100m resolution population count datasets created using constrained top-down methods for all countries of the World for 2020 and adjusted to match United Nations national population estimates (UN 2019).

Older datasets produced for specific individual countries and continents, using a set of tailored geospatial inputs and differing "top-down" methods and time periods are still available for download here: Individual countries and Whole Continent.

Data for earlier dates is available directly from WorldPop.

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