The world population surpassed eight billion people in 2022, having doubled from its figure less than 50 years previously. Looking forward, it is projected that the world population will reach nine billion in 2038, and 10 billion in 2060, but it will peak around 10.3 billion in the 2080s before it then goes into decline. Regional variations The global population has seen rapid growth since the early 1800s, due to advances in areas such as food production, healthcare, water safety, education, and infrastructure, however, these changes did not occur at a uniform time or pace across the world. Broadly speaking, the first regions to undergo their demographic transitions were Europe, North America, and Oceania, followed by Latin America and Asia (although Asia's development saw the greatest variation due to its size), while Africa was the last continent to undergo this transformation. Because of these differences, many so-called "advanced" countries are now experiencing population decline, particularly in Europe and East Asia, while the fastest population growth rates are found in Sub-Saharan Africa. In fact, the roughly two billion difference in population between now and the 2080s' peak will be found in Sub-Saharan Africa, which will rise from 1.2 billion to 3.2 billion in this time (although populations in other continents will also fluctuate). Changing projections The United Nations releases their World Population Prospects report every 1-2 years, and this is widely considered the foremost demographic dataset in the world. However, recent years have seen a notable decline in projections when the global population will peak, and at what number. Previous reports in the 2010s had suggested a peak of over 11 billion people, and that population growth would continue into the 2100s, however a sooner and shorter peak is now projected. Reasons for this include a more rapid population decline in East Asia and Europe, particularly China, as well as a prolongued development arc in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Description

This comprehensive dataset provides a wealth of information about all countries worldwide, covering a wide range of indicators and attributes. It encompasses demographic statistics, economic indicators, environmental factors, healthcare metrics, education statistics, and much more. With every country represented, this dataset offers a complete global perspective on various aspects of nations, enabling in-depth analyses and cross-country comparisons.

Key Features

Country: Name of the country.

Density (P/Km2): Population density measured in persons per square kilometer.

Abbreviation: Abbreviation or code representing the country.

Agricultural Land (%): Percentage of land area used for agricultural purposes.

Land Area (Km2): Total land area of the country in square kilometers.

Armed Forces Size: Size of the armed forces in the country.

Birth Rate: Number of births per 1,000 population per year.

Calling Code: International calling code for the country.

Capital/Major City: Name of the capital or major city.

CO2 Emissions: Carbon dioxide emissions in tons.

CPI: Consumer Price Index, a measure of inflation and purchasing power.

CPI Change (%): Percentage change in the Consumer Price Index compared to the previous year.

Currency_Code: Currency code used in the country.

Fertility Rate: Average number of children born to a woman during her lifetime.

Forested Area (%): Percentage of land area covered by forests.

Gasoline_Price: Price of gasoline per liter in local currency.

GDP: Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services produced in the country.

Gross Primary Education Enrollment (%): Gross enrollment ratio for primary education.

Gross Tertiary Education Enrollment (%): Gross enrollment ratio for tertiary education.

Infant Mortality: Number of deaths per 1,000 live births before reaching one year of age.

Largest City: Name of the country's largest city.

Life Expectancy: Average number of years a newborn is expected to live.

Maternal Mortality Ratio: Number of maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.

Minimum Wage: Minimum wage level in local currency.

Official Language: Official language(s) spoken in the country.

Out of Pocket Health Expenditure (%): Percentage of total health expenditure paid out-of-pocket by individuals.

Physicians per Thousand: Number of physicians per thousand people.

Population: Total population of the country.

Population: Labor Force Participation (%): Percentage of the population that is part of the labor force.

Tax Revenue (%): Tax revenue as a percentage of GDP.

Total Tax Rate: Overall tax burden as a percentage of commercial profits.

Unemployment Rate: Percentage of the labor force that is unemployed.

Urban Population: Percentage of the population living in urban areas.

Latitude: Latitude coordinate of the country's location.

Longitude: Longitude coordinate of the country's location.

Potential Use Cases

Analyze population density and land area to study spatial distribution patterns.

Investigate the relationship between agricultural land and food security.

Examine carbon dioxide emissions and their impact on climate change.

Explore correlations between economic indicators such as GDP and various socio-economic factors.

Investigate educational enrollment rates and their implications for human capital development.

Analyze healthcare metrics such as infant mortality and life expectancy to assess overall well-being.

Study labor market dynamics through indicators such as labor force participation and unemployment rates.

Investigate the role of taxation and its impact on economic development.

Explore urbanization trends and their social and environmental consequences.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the population of International Falls by gender across 18 age groups. It lists the male and female population in each age group along with the gender ratio for International Falls. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of International Falls by gender and age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group for both Men and Women in International Falls. Additionally, it can be used to see how the gender ratio changes from birth to senior most age group and male to female ratio across each age group for International Falls.

Key observations

Largest age group (population): Male # 65-69 years (337) | Female # 40-44 years (306). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Content

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

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Scope of gender :

Please note that American Community Survey asks a question about the respondents current sex, but not about gender, sexual orientation, or sex at birth. The question is intended to capture data for biological sex, not gender. Respondents are supposed to respond with the answer as either of Male or Female. Our research and this dataset mirrors the data reported as Male and Female for gender distribution analysis.

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group for the International Falls population analysis. Total expected values are 18 and are define above in the age groups section.
• Population (Male): The male population in the International Falls is shown in the following column.
• Population (Female): The female population in the International Falls is shown in the following column.
• Gender Ratio: Also known as the sex ratio, this column displays the number of males per 100 females in International Falls for each age group.

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 International Falls Population by Gender. You can refer the same here

Context

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

Querying BigQuery tables

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

Sample Query 1

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

standardSQL

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

Sample Query 2

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

standardSQL

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

Sample Query 3

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

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

Update frequency

Historic (none)

Dataset source

United States Census Bureau

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

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

Context

This is a dataset of the most highly populated city (if applicable) in a form easy to join with the COVID19 Global Forecasting (Week 1) dataset. You can see how to use it in this kernel

Content

There are four columns. The first two correspond to the columns from the original COVID19 Global Forecasting (Week 1) dataset. The other two is the highest population density, at city level, for the given country/state. Note that some countries are very small and in those cases the population density reflects the entire country. Since the original dataset has a few cruise ships as well, I've added them there.

Acknowledgements

Thanks a lot to Kaggle for this competition that gave me the opportunity to look closely at some data and understand this problem better.

Inspiration

Summary: I believe that the square root of the population density should relate to the logistic growth factor of the SIR model. I think the SEIR model isn't applicable due to any intervention being too late for a fast-spreading virus like this, especially in places with dense populations.

After playing with the data provided in COVID19 Global Forecasting (Week 1) (and everything else online or media) a bit, one thing becomes clear. They have nothing to do with epidemiology. They reflect sociopolitical characteristics of a country/state and, more specifically, the reactivity and attitude towards testing.

The testing method used (PCR tests) means that what we measure could potentially be a proxy for the number of people infected during the last 3 weeks, i.e the growth (with lag). It's not how many people have been infected and recovered. Antibody or serology tests would measure that, and by using them, we could go back to normality faster... but those will arrive too late. Way earlier, China will have experimentally shown that it's safe to go back to normal as soon as your number of newly infected per day is close to zero.

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F197482%2F429e0fdd7f1ce86eba882857ac7a735e%2Fcovid-summary.png?generation=1585072438685236&alt=media" alt="">

My view, as a person living in NYC, about this virus, is that by the time governments react to media pressure, to lockdown or even test, it's too late. In dense areas, everyone susceptible has already amble opportunities to be infected. Especially for a virus with 5-14 days lag between infections and symptoms, a period during which hosts spread it all over on subway, the conditions are hopeless. Active populations have already been exposed, mostly asymptomatic and recovered. Sensitive/older populations are more self-isolated/careful in affluent societies (maybe this isn't the case in North Italy). As the virus finishes exploring the active population, it starts penetrating the more isolated ones. At this point in time, the first fatalities happen. Then testing starts. Then the media and the lockdown. Lockdown seems overly effective because it coincides with the tail of the disease spread. It helps slow down the virus exploring the long-tail of sensitive population, and we should all contribute by doing it, but it doesn't cause the end of the disease. If it did, then as soon as people were back in the streets (see China), there would be repeated outbreaks.

Smart politicians will test a lot because it will make their condition look worse. It helps them demand more resources. At the same time, they will have a low rate of fatalities due to large denominator. They can take credit for managing well a disproportionally major crisis - in contrast to people who didn't test.

We were lucky this time. We, Westerners, have woken up to the potential of a pandemic. I'm sure we will give further resources for prevention. Additionally, we will be more open-minded, helping politicians to have more direct responses. We will also require them to be more responsible in their messages and reactions.

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

The World Religion Project (WRP) aims to provide detailed information about religious adherence worldwide since 1945. It contains data about the number of adherents by religion in each of the states in the international system. These numbers are given for every half-decade period (1945, 1950, etc., through 2010). Percentages of the states' populations that practice a given religion are also provided. (Note: These percentages are expressed as decimals, ranging from 0 to 1, where 0 indicates that 0 percent of the population practices a given religion and 1 indicates that 100 percent of the population practices that religion.) Some of the religions (as detailed below) are divided into religious families. To the extent data are available, the breakdown of adherents within a given religion into religious families is also provided.

The project was developed in three stages. The first stage consisted of the formation of a religion tree. A religion tree is a systematic classification of major religions and of religious families within those major religions. To develop the religion tree we prepared a comprehensive literature review, the aim of which was (i) to define a religion, (ii) to find tangible indicators of a given religion of religious families within a major religion, and (iii) to identify existing efforts at classifying world religions. (Please see the original survey instrument to view the structure of the religion tree.) The second stage consisted of the identification of major data sources of religious adherence and the collection of data from these sources according to the religion tree classification. This created a dataset that included multiple records for some states for a given point in time. It also contained multiple missing data for specific states, specific time periods and specific religions. The third stage consisted of cleaning the data, reconciling discrepancies of information from different sources and imputing data for the missing cases.

The Global Religion Dataset: This dataset uses a religion-by-five-year unit. It aggregates the number of adherents of a given religion and religious group globally by five-year periods.

Norway NO: Population in Largest City data was reported at 997,451.000 Person in 2017. This records an increase from the previous number of 982,894.000 Person for 2016. Norway NO: Population in Largest City data is updated yearly, averaging 677,489.500 Person from Dec 1960 (Median) to 2017, with 58 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 997,451.000 Person in 2017 and a record low of 578,044.000 Person in 1960. Norway NO: Population in Largest City data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Norway – Table NO.World Bank.WDI: Population and Urbanization Statistics. Population in largest city is the urban population living in the country's largest metropolitan area.; ; United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects.; ;

Global patterns of current and future road infrastructure - Supplementary spatial data

Authors: Johan Meijer, Mark Huijbregts, Kees Schotten, Aafke Schipper

Research paper summary: Georeferenced information on road infrastructure is essential for spatial planning, socio-economic assessments and environmental impact analyses. Yet current global road maps are typically outdated or characterized by spatial bias in coverage. In the Global Roads Inventory Project we gathered, harmonized and integrated nearly 60 geospatial datasets on road infrastructure into a global roads dataset. The resulting dataset covers 222 countries and includes over 21 million km of roads, which is two to three times the total length in the currently best available country-based global roads datasets. We then related total road length per country to country area, population density, GDP and OECD membership, resulting in a regression model with adjusted R2 of 0.90, and found that that the highest road densities are associated with densely populated and wealthier countries. Applying our regression model to future population densities and GDP estimates from the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios, we obtained a tentative estimate of 3.0–4.7 million km additional road length for the year 2050. Large increases in road length were projected for developing nations in some of the world's last remaining wilderness areas, such as the Amazon, the Congo basin and New Guinea. This highlights the need for accurate spatial road datasets to underpin strategic spatial planning in order to reduce the impacts of roads in remaining pristine ecosystems.

Contents: The GRIP dataset consists of global and regional vector datasets in ESRI filegeodatabase and shapefile format, and global raster datasets of road density at a 5 arcminutes resolution (~8x8km). The GRIP dataset is mainly aimed at providing a roads dataset that is easily usable for scientific global environmental and biodiversity modelling projects. The dataset is not suitable for navigation. GRIP4 is based on many different sources (including OpenStreetMap) and to the best of our ability we have verified their public availability, as a criteria in our research. The UNSDI-Transportation datamodel was applied for harmonization of the individual source datasets. GRIP4 is provided under a Creative Commons License (CC-0) and is free to use. The GRIP database and future global road infrastructure scenario projections following the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) are described in the paper by Meijer et al (2018). Due to shapefile file size limitations the global file is only available in ESRI filegeodatabase format.

Regional coding of the other vector datasets in shapefile and ESRI fgdb format:

• Region 1: North America
• Region 2: Central and South America
• Region 3: Africa
• Region 4: Europe
• Region 5: Middle East and Central Asia
• Region 6: South and East Asia
• Region 7: Oceania

Road density raster data:

• Total density, all types combined
• Type 1 density (highways)
• Type 2 density (primary roads)
• Type 3 density (secondary roads)
• Type 4 density (tertiary roads)
• Type 5 density (local roads)

Keyword: global, data, roads, infrastructure, network, global roads inventory project (GRIP), SSP scenarios

Summary

This dataset accompanies the publication "Flock size and structure influence reproductive success in four species of flamingo in 540 captive populations worldwide" published in Zoo Biology. It contains anonymised data from 540 captive flamingo populations, and includes the four species: Phoeniconaias minor, Phoenicopterus chilensis, Phoenicopterus roseus and Phoenicopterus ruber. Data were sourced from the Zoological Information Management System (ZIMS), operated by Species360 (https://www.species360.org/). ZIMS is the largest real-time database of comprehensive and standardized information spanning more than 1,200 zoological collections globally, and provides the number of institutions currently managing each flamingo species and both their current and historic population sizes. These data were used to investigate the relationship between reproductive success and both flock size, and structure, on a global scale.

This dataset also contains climatic data provided by WorldClim, which were used to assess the influence of climatic variables on captive flamingo reproductive success globally. The WorldClim database averages 19 different climatic variables derived from monthly temperature and rainfall values at a 1 km spatial resolution for the period 1970-2000. Using geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude) we calculated several climatic metrics for each institution.

Description of the Dataset

One file is provided for each species (P. minor, P. chilensis, P. roseus and P. ruber) as a csv file. Each file contains the following 15 columns:

• Institution Code: An anonymous code used to identify individual zoological institutions.
• Country: The country where the institution is located.
• Year: Current year (t).
• Flock Size: Flock size in year t.
• Males: The number of males in the flock in year t.
• Females: The number of females in the flock in year t.
• Unsexed: The number of unsexed individuals in the flock in year t.
• Proportion of Females: The proportion of the flock made up of female individuals in year t.
• Proportion of Unsexed: The proportion of the flock made up of unsexed individuals in year t.
• Hatches: Number of birds hatched in year t.
• Proportion of Additions: The proportion of the flock in year t made up of additions from year t-1 (not including new birds hatched into the flock).
• MAP: Mean annual precipitation (mm).
• MAT: Mean annual temperature (°C).
• MAP Var: Mean annual variation in precipitation (MAP coefficient of variation).
• MAT Var: Mean annual variation in temperature (MAT standard deviation).

Note: Mean Annual Temperature (MAT) is provided by WorldClim as °C multiplied by 10, and similarly mean annual variation in temperature as MAT standard deviation multiplied by 100. In the corresponding publication, both were divided (by 10 and 100 respectively) prior to modelling to avoid confusion in the units used.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge and thank all Species360 member institutions for their continued support and data input. The research which data refers to was funded by the Irish Research Council Laureate Awards 2017/2018 IRCLA/2017/60 to Y.M.B. Additionally, S.Q.S. received funding from the International Max Planck Research School for Organismal Biology. The Species360 Conservation Science Alliance would like to thank their sponsors: the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Wildlife Reserves of Singapore, and Copenhagen Zoo.

Disclaimer

Despite our best efforts at screening the data for errors and inconsistencies, some information could be erroneous. Similarly, data contained within ZIMS are based on submitted records from individual institutions, and are not subject to editorial verification, potentially permitting errors or failure to update species holdings etc. Despite this, ZIMS represents the only global database of zoo collection composition records, and as a result, is used by the IUCN, Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Network (TRAFFIC), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).

Credit

If you use this dataset, please cite the corresponding publication:

Mooney, A., Teare, J. A., Staerk, J.,Smeele, S. Q., Rose, P., Edell, R. H., King, C. E., Conrad, L., & Buckley, Y. M. (2023). Flock size and structure influence reproductive success in four species of flamingo in 540 captive populations worldwide. Zoo Biology, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/zoo.21753

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.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Non-Hispanic population of International Falls by race. It includes the distribution of the Non-Hispanic population of International Falls across various race categories as identified by the Census Bureau. The dataset can be utilized to understand the Non-Hispanic population distribution of International Falls across relevant racial categories.

Key observations

Of the Non-Hispanic population in International Falls, the largest racial group is White alone with a population of 5,198 (92.71% of the total Non-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.

Racial categories include:

• White
• Black or African American
• American Indian and Alaska Native
• Asian
• Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
• Some other race
• Two or more races (multiracial)

Variables / Data Columns

• Race: This column displays the racial categories (for Non-Hispanic) for the International Falls
• Population: The population of the racial category (for Non-Hispanic) in the International Falls is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the percentage distribution of each race as a proportion of International Falls total Non-Hispanic 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 International Falls Population by Race & Ethnicity. You can refer the same here

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

Daytime population - The estimated number of people in a borough in the daytime during an average day, broken down by component sub-groups.

The figures given are an average day during school term-time. No account has been made for seasonal variations, or for people who are usually in London (resident, at school or working), but are away visiting another place.

Sources include the Business Register and Employment Survey (BRES) (available under license), Annual Population Survey (APS), 2011 Census, Department for Education (DfE), International Passenger Survey (IPS), GB Tourism Survey (GBTS), Great Britain Day Visit Survey (GBDVS), GLA Population Projections, and GLA Economics estimates (GLAE).

The figures published in these sources have been used exactly as they appear - no further adjustments have been made to account for possible sampling errors or questionnaire design flaws.

Day trip visitors are defined as those on day trips away from home for three hours or more and not undertaking activities that would regularly constitute part of their work or would be a regular leisure activity.

International visitors – people from a country other than the UK visiting the location;
Domestic overnight tourists – people from other parts of the UK staying in the location for at least one night.
All visitor data is modelled and unrounded.

This edition was released on 7 October 2015 and replaces the previous estimates for 2013.

GLA resident population, 2011 Census resident population, and 2011 Census workday populations (by sex) included for comparison.

See a visualisation of this data using Tableau.

For more workday population data by age use the Custom Age-Range Tool for Census 2011 Workday population , or download data for a range of geographical levels from NOMIS.

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

Burkina Faso BF: Population in Largest City data was reported at 3,358,934.000 Person in 2024. This records an increase from the previous number of 3,203,923.000 Person for 2023. Burkina Faso BF: Population in Largest City data is updated yearly, averaging 585,920.000 Person from Dec 1960 (Median) to 2024, with 65 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3,358,934.000 Person in 2024 and a record low of 59,126.000 Person in 1960. Burkina Faso BF: Population in Largest City data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Burkina Faso – Table BF.World Bank.WDI: Population and Urbanization Statistics. Population in largest city is the urban population living in the country's largest metropolitan area.;United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects.;;

The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) was designed to capture various aspects of firm creation and entrepreneurship across countries. The data have been collected over a number of years (1998-2003) and include responses from 4,685 experts in over 38 countries and three subnational regions. This study seeks to measure the national attributes considered critical for new firm births and small firm growth. The dataset is a harmonized file capturing the results from all of the surveys. The expert, or key informant, questionnaire was improved and adjusted each year to increase the reliability of multi-item indices and provide for the addition of new dimensions. For each version of the questionnaire, respondents completed 70-80 standardized items that were the basis for 12-15 multi-item indices. Respondents were initially asked a series of general questions pertaining to starting a business, such as whether they were currently trying to start a new business, whether they knew anyone who had started a new business, and whether they thought it was a good time to do so. Respondents were also asked about the process of starting up a new business; whether they had done anything to start a new business in the past 12 months; whether they would own all, part, or none of the new business; how many people would be involved with the new business; what sort of business they were starting; and what they would sell. In addition, respondents identified the total start-up costs, the various sources of the start-up money, and why they were involved in the start-up. Respondents then answered a set of questions to assess the national conditions influencing entrepreneurial activity in their own country. In this respect, respondents provided their opinions on business and entrepreneurial education, the integration of new technology in businesses, the availability of financial support through government policies and programs, the availability of subcontractors, yearly changes in the economic market, and the physical infrastructure in their country. Views were also elicited from respondents about their national cultures in regard to entrepreneurial efforts and opportunities, attitudes towards entrepreneurs in general, women entrepreneurs and the resources available to them, and citizens' knowledge and experience with new businesses. They also gave their views on the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) legislation and its enforcement in their respective countries. Respondents were then queried on the technological strengths of their country by ranking the top five sectors in which there has been development of the greatest number of technology-intensive start-up companies in the past ten years. Finally, respondents were asked the same general questions as those used in the GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP MONITOR (GEM): ADULT POPULATION SURVEY DATA SET, 1998-2003 (ICPSR 20320) in order to ascertain whether the opinions and behaviors of the current "expert" respondents differ from those of the general population. These questions included whether they were starting a new business, if there were opportunities for new businesses, funding sources for a new business, skills required to start a new business, shutting down a business, and whether a fear of failure was preventing the start of a new business. The dataset also contains variables that describe the respondent's gender, age, educational attainment, labor force status, the entrepreneurial areas in which they feel they have strong expertise, and the month and year the survey was conducted.

The latest population figures produced by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on 28 June 2018 show that an estimated 534,800 people live in Bradford District – an increase of 2,300 people (0.4%) since the previous year.

Bradford District is the fifth largest metropolitan district (in terms of population) in England, after Birmingham, Leeds, Sheffield and Manchester although the District’s population growth is lower than other major cities.

The increase in the District’s population is largely due to “natural change”- there have been around 3,300 more births than deaths, although this has been balanced by a larger number of people leaving Bradford to live in other parts of the UK than coming to live here and a lower number of international migrants. In 2016/17 the net internal migration was -2,700 and the net international migration was 1,700.

A large proportion of Bradford’s population is dominated by the younger age groups. More than one-quarter (29%) of the District’s population is aged less than 20 and nearly seven in ten people are aged less than 50. Bradford has the highest percentage of the under 16 population in England after the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham, Slough Borough Council and Luton Borough Council.

The population of Bradford is ethnically diverse. The largest proportion of the district’s population (63.9%) identifies themselves as White British. The district has the largest proportion of people of Pakistani ethnic origin (20.3%) in England.

The largest religious group in Bradford is Christian (45.9% of the population). Nearly one quarter of the population (24.7%) are Muslim. Just over one fifth of the district’s population (20.7%) stated that they had no religion.

There are 216,813 households in the Bradford district. Most households own their own home (29.3% outright and 35.7% with a mortgage). The percentage of privately rented households is 18.1%. 29.6% of households were single person households.

Information from the Annual Population Survey in December 2017 found that Bradford has 228,100 people aged 16-64 in employment. At 68% this is significantly lower than the national rate (74.9%). 91,100 (around 1 in 3 people) aged 16-64, are not in work. The claimant count rate is 2.9% which is higher than the regional and national averages.

Skill levels are improving with 26.5% of 16 to 74 year olds educated to degree level. 18% of the district’s employed residents work in retail/wholesale. The percentage of people working in manufacturing has continued to decrease from 13.4% in 2009 to 11.9% in 2016. This is still higher than the average for Great Britain (8.1%).

What is the Counter-Trafficking Data Collaborative?

The Counter-Trafficking Data Collaborative is the first global data hub on human trafficking, publishing harmonized data from counter-trafficking organizations around the world. Launched in November 2017, the goal of CTDC is to break down information-sharing barriers and equip the counter-trafficking community with up to date, reliable data on human trafficking.

The global victim of trafficking dataset

The CTDC global victim of trafficking dataset is the largest of its kind in the world, and currently exists in two forms. The data are based on case management data, gathered from identified cases of human trafficking, disaggregated at the level of the individual. The cases are recorded in a case management system during the provision of protection and assistance services, or are logged when individuals contact a counter-trafficking hotline. The number of observations in the dataset increases as new records are added by the contributing organizations. The global victim of trafficking dataset that is available to download from the website in csv format has been mathematically anonymized, and the complete, non k-anonymized version of the dataset is displayed throughout the website through visualizations and charts showing detailed analysis.

Where do the data come from?

The data come from a variety of sources. The data featured in the global victim of trafficking dataset come from the assistance activities of the contributing organizations, including from case management services and from counter-trafficking hotline logs.

How are the global datasets created?

Each dataset has been created through a process of comparing and harmonizing existing data models of contributing partners and data classification systems. Initial areas of compatibility were identified to create a unified system for organizing and mapping data to a single standard. Each contributing organization transforms its data to this shared standard and any identifying information is removed before the datasets are made available.

How is the individual-level data protected?

Step 1

Counter-trafficking case data contains highly sensitive information, and maintaining privacy and confidentiality is of paramount importance for CTDC. For example, all explicit identifiers, such as names, were removed from the global victim dataset and some data such as age has been transformed into age ranges. No personally identifying information is transferred to or hosted by CTDC, and organizations that want to contribute are asked to anonymize in accordance to the standards set by CTDC.

Step 2

In addition to the safeguard measures outlined in step 1 the global victim dataset has been anonymized to a higher level, through a mathematical approach called k-anonymization. For a full description of k-anonymization, please refer to the definitions page.

IOM collects and processes data in accordance to its own Data Protection Policy. The other contributors adhere to relevant national and international standards through their policies for collecting and processing personal data.

How to interpret the data?

These data reflect the victims assisted/identified/referred/reported to the contributing organizations, which may not represent all victims identified within a country. Nevertheless, the larger the sample size for a given country (or, the more victims displayed on the map for a given country), the more representative the data are likely to be of the identified victim of trafficking population.

A larger number of identified victims of trafficking does not imply that there is a larger number of undetected victims of trafficking (i.e. a higher prevalence of trafficking).

In addition, samples of identified victims of trafficking cannot be considered random samples of the wider population of victims of trafficking (which includes unidentified victims), since counter-trafficking agencies may be more likely to identify some trafficking cases rather than others. However, with this caveat in mind, the profile of identified victims of trafficking tends to be considered as indicative of the profile of the wider population, given that the availability of other data sources is close to zero.

How does human trafficking case data relate to prevalence data?

There are currently no global or regional estimates of the prevalence of human trafficking. National estimates have been conducted in a few countries but they are also based on modelling of existing administrative data from identified cases and should therefore only be considered as basic baseline estimates. Historically, producing estimates of the prevalence of trafficking based on the collection of new primary data through surveys, for example, has been difficult. This is due to trafficking’s complicated legal definition and the challenges of a...

Sweden SE: Population in Largest City data was reported at 1,553,180.000 Person in 2017. This records an increase from the previous number of 1,523,953.000 Person for 2016. Sweden SE: Population in Largest City data is updated yearly, averaging 1,058,018.000 Person from Dec 1960 (Median) to 2017, with 58 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1,553,180.000 Person in 2017 and a record low of 804,595.000 Person in 1960. Sweden SE: Population in Largest City data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Sweden – Table SE.World Bank.WDI: Population and Urbanization Statistics. Population in largest city is the urban population living in the country's largest metropolitan area.; ; United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects.; ;