Mogadishu in Somalia led the ranking of cities with the highest population density in 2023, with ****** residents per square kilometer. When it comes to countries, Monaco is the most densely populated state worldwide.

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.

In 2023, Washington, D.C. had the highest population density in the United States, with 11,130.69 people per square mile. As a whole, there were about 94.83 residents per square mile in the U.S., and Alaska was the state with the lowest population density, with 1.29 residents per square mile. The problem of population density Simply put, population density is the population of a country divided by the area of the country. While this can be an interesting measure of how many people live in a country and how large the country is, it does not account for the degree of urbanization, or the share of people who live in urban centers. For example, Russia is the largest country in the world and has a comparatively low population, so its population density is very low. However, much of the country is uninhabited, so cities in Russia are much more densely populated than the rest of the country. Urbanization in the United States While the United States is not very densely populated compared to other countries, its population density has increased significantly over the past few decades. The degree of urbanization has also increased, and well over half of the population lives in urban centers.

As of 2023, the top five most densely populated cities in Latin America and the Caribbean were in Colombia. The capital, Bogotá, ranked first with over ****** inhabitants per square kilometer.

The population density picture of Boston is generally a story of two Bostons: the high density central and northern neighborhoods, and the low density southern neighborhoods.The highest density areas of Boston are particularly concentrated in Brighton, Allston, and the Fenway area, areas of the city with large numbers of college students and young adults. There is also high population density in areas such as the Back Bay, the South End, Charlestown, the North End, and South Boston. These are all relatively small areas geographically, but have housing stock conducive to population density (e.g. multi-family dwelling units, row housing, large apartment buildings). The southern neighborhoods, specifically Hyde Park and West Roxbury, have significant numbers of people living in them, but lots sizes tend to be much larger. These areas of the city also tend to have more single family dwelling units. In that, there are fewer people per square mile than places north in the city. Census data reveals that population density varies noticeably from area to area. Small area census data do a better job depicting where the crowded neighborhoods are. In this map, areas of highest density exceed 30,000 persons per square kilometer. Very high density areas exceed 7,000 persons per square kilometer. High density areas exceed 5,200 persons per square kilometer. The last categories break at 3,330 persons per square kilometer, and 1,500 persons per square kilometer.How to make this map for your city

This statistic shows the top 25 cities in the United States with the highest resident population as of July 1, 2022. There were about 8.34 million people living in New York City as of July 2022.

This map layer includes cities and towns in the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. A city or town is a place with a recorded population, usually with at least one central area that provides commercial activities. Cities are generally larger than towns; no distinction is made between cities and towns in this map layer.

This layer is a component of Populated Places.

This map layer includes cities and towns in the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands (NTAD 2015). A city or town is a place with a recorded population, usually with at least one central area that provides commercial activities. Cities are generally larger than towns; no distinction is made between cities and towns in this map layer.

© The National Atlas

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

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Population (LU1)

FULL MEASURE NAME
Population estimates

LAST UPDATED
February 2023

DESCRIPTION
Population is a measurement of the number of residents that live in a given geographical area, be it a neighborhood, city, county or region.

DATA SOURCE
California Department of Finance: Population and Housing Estimates - http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/
Table E-6: County Population Estimates (1960-1970)
Table E-4: Population Estimates for Counties and State (1970-2021)
Table E-8: Historical Population and Housing Estimates (1990-2010)
Table E-5: Population and Housing Estimates (2010-2021)

Bay Area Jurisdiction Centroids (2020) - https://data.bayareametro.gov/Boundaries/Bay-Area-Jurisdiction-Centroids-2020-/56ar-t6bs
Computed using 2020 US Census TIGER boundaries

U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census Population Estimates - http://www.s4.brown.edu/us2010/index.htm- via Longitudinal Tract Database Spatial Structures in the Social Sciences, Brown University
1970-2020

U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey (5-year rolling average; tract) - https://data.census.gov/
2011-2021
Form B01003

Priority Development Areas (Plan Bay Area 2050) - https://opendata.mtc.ca.gov/datasets/MTC::priority-development-areas-plan-bay-area-2050/about

CONTACT INFORMATION
vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator)
All historical data reported for Census geographies (metropolitan areas, county, city and tract) use current legal boundaries and names. A Priority Development Area (PDA) is a locally-designated area with frequent transit service, where a jurisdiction has decided to concentrate most of its housing and jobs growth for development in the foreseeable future. PDA boundaries are current as of December 2022.

Population estimates for Bay Area counties and cities are from the California Department of Finance, which are as of January 1st of each year. Population estimates for non-Bay Area regions are from the U.S. Census Bureau. Decennial Census years reflect population as of April 1st of each year whereas population estimates for intercensal estimates are as of July 1st of each year. Population estimates for Bay Area tracts are from the decennial Census (1970-2020) and the American Community Survey (2011-2021 5-year rolling average). Estimates of population density for tracts use gross acres as the denominator.

Population estimates for Bay Area tracts and PDAs are from the decennial Census (1970-2020) and the American Community Survey (2011-2021 5-year rolling average). Population estimates for PDAs are allocated from tract-level Census population counts using an area ratio. For example, if a quarter of a Census tract lies with in a PDA, a quarter of its population will be allocated to that PDA. Estimates of population density for PDAs use gross acres as the denominator. Note that the population densities between PDAs reported in previous iterations of Vital Signs are mostly not comparable due to minor differences and an updated set of PDAs (previous iterations reported Plan Bay Area 2040 PDAs, whereas current iterations report Plan Bay Area 2050 PDAs).

The following is a list of cities and towns by geographical area:

Big Three: San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland

Bayside: Alameda, Albany, Atherton, Belmont, Belvedere, Berkeley, Brisbane, Burlingame, Campbell, Colma, Corte Madera, Cupertino, Daly City, East Palo Alto, El Cerrito, Emeryville, Fairfax, Foster City, Fremont, Hayward, Hercules, Hillsborough, Larkspur, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Menlo Park, Mill Valley, Millbrae, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Newark, Pacifica, Palo Alto, Piedmont, Pinole, Portola Valley, Redwood City, Richmond, Ross, San Anselmo, San Bruno, San Carlos, San Leandro, San Mateo, San Pablo, San Rafael, Santa Clara, Saratoga, Sausalito, South San Francisco, Sunnyvale, Tiburon, Union City, Vallejo, Woodside

Inland, Delta and Coastal: American Canyon, Antioch, Benicia, Brentwood, Calistoga, Clayton, Cloverdale, Concord, Cotati, Danville, Dixon, Dublin, Fairfield, Gilroy, Half Moon Bay, Healdsburg, Lafayette, Livermore, Martinez, Moraga, Morgan Hill, Napa, Novato, Oakley, Orinda, Petaluma, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Pleasanton, Rio Vista, Rohnert Park, San Ramon, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Sonoma, St. Helena, Suisun City, Vacaville, Walnut Creek, Windsor, Yountville

Unincorporated: all unincorporated towns

This graph shows the population density of the United States of America from 1790 to 2019. In 2019, the population density was approximately 92.9 residents per square mile of land area. Population density in the United States Population density has been tracked for over two hundred years in the United States. Over the last two centuries, the number of people living in the United States per square mile has grown from 4.5 in 1790 to 87.4 in 2010. After examining the data in detail, it becomes clear that a major population increase started around 1870. Population density was roughly 11 at the time and has doubled in the last century. Since then, population density grew by about 16 percent each decade. Population density doubled in 1900, and grew in total by around 800 percent until 2010.

The population density of the United States varies from state to state. The most densely populated state is New Jersey, with 1,208 people per square mile living there. Rhode Island is the second most densely populated state, with slightly over 1,000 inhabitants per square mile. A number of New England states follow at the top of the ranking, making the northeastern region of the United States the most densely populated region of the country.

The least populated U.S. state is the vast territory of Alaska. Only 1.3 inhabitants per square mile reside in the largest state of the U.S.

Compared to other countries around the world, the United States does not rank within the top 50, in terms of population density. Most of the leading countries and territories are city states. However, the U.S. is one of the most populous countries in the world, with a total population of over 327 million inhabitants, as of 2018.

This point feature layer represents the U.S.-Mexico border region sister cities. There are a total of 15 pairs of sister cities (31 total features) recognized in the U.S.-Mexico Border Program that span the entire length of the U.S.-Mexico border. These sister cities highlight the areas along the border that contain the most dense populations. Data was gathered by Jacoup Roiz from Google Maps GPS coordinates in 2019. These data support the U.S.-Mexico Border Program Map, which highlights the projects funded through the U.S.-Mexico Border Program (2013-2020) in both Region 9 and Region 6 of the U.S. EPA, including U.S. Federally recognized Tribal communities and states of Texas, New Mexico, Chihuahua, Nuevo Leon, Tamaulipas, Coahuila, California, Baja California, Sonora, and Arizona within 62 miles (100 kilometers) of the U.S.-Mexico Border. The projects stem from the Border 2020 framework that has five goals to reduce air pollution, improve access to clean water, promote materials and waste management, improve emergency preparedness, and enhance environmental stewardship, and fundamental strategies that includes children's health and environmental education and outreach. For more information about Border 2020 and/or current U.S.-Mexico Border program visit this website: https://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder

20 year Projected Urban Growth scenarios. Base year is 2000. Projected year in this dataset is 2020.

By 2020, most forecasters agree, California will be home to between 43 and 46 million residents-up from 35 million today. Beyond 2020 the size of California's population is less certain. Depending on the composition of the population, and future fertility and migration rates, California's 2050 population could be as little as 50 million or as much as 70 million. One hundred years from now, if present trends continue, California could conceivably have as many as 90 million residents.

Where these future residents will live and work is unclear. For most of the 20th Century, two-thirds of Californians have lived south of the Tehachapi Mountains and west of the San Jacinto Mountains-in that part of the state commonly referred to as Southern California. Yet most of coastal Southern California is already highly urbanized, and there is relatively little vacant land available for new development. More recently, slow-growth policies in Northern California and declining developable land supplies in Southern California are squeezing ever more of the state's population growth into the San Joaquin Valley.

How future Californians will occupy the landscape is also unclear. Over the last fifty years, the state's population has grown increasingly urban. Today, nearly 95 percent of Californians live in metropolitan areas, mostly at densities less than ten persons per acre. Recent growth patterns have strongly favored locations near freeways, most of which where built in the 1950s and 1960s. With few new freeways on the planning horizon, how will California's future growth organize itself in space? By national standards, California's large urban areas are already reasonably dense, and economic theory suggests that densities should increase further as California's urban regions continue to grow. In practice, densities have been rising in some urban counties, but falling in others.

These are important issues as California plans its long-term future. Will California have enough land of the appropriate types and in the right locations to accommodate its projected population growth? Will future population growth consume ever-greater amounts of irreplaceable resource lands and habitat? Will jobs continue decentralizing, pushing out the boundaries of metropolitan areas? Will development densities be sufficient to support mass transit, or will future Californians be stuck in perpetual gridlock? Will urban and resort and recreational growth in the Sierra Nevada and Trinity Mountain regions lead to the over-fragmentation of precious natural habitat? How much water will be needed by California's future industries, farms, and residents, and where will that water be stored? Where should future highway, transit, and high-speed rail facilities and rights-of-way be located? Most of all, how much will all this growth cost, both economically, and in terms of changes in California's quality of life?

Clearly, the more precise our current understanding of how and where California is likely to grow, the sooner and more inexpensively appropriate lands can be acquired for purposes of conservation, recreation, and future facility siting. Similarly, the more clearly future urbanization patterns can be anticipated, the greater our collective ability to undertake sound city, metropolitan, rural, and bioregional planning.

Consider two scenarios for the year 2100. In the first, California's population would grow to 80 million persons and would occupy the landscape at an average density of eight persons per acre, the current statewide urban average. Under this scenario, and assuming that 10% percent of California's future population growth would occur through infill-that is, on existing urban land-California's expanding urban population would consume an additional 5.06 million acres of currently undeveloped land. As an alternative, assume the share of infill development were increased to 30%, and that new population were accommodated at a density of about 12 persons per acre-which is the current average density of the City of Los Angeles. Under this second scenario, California's urban population would consume an additional 2.6 million acres of currently undeveloped land. While both scenarios accommodate the same amount of population growth and generate large increments of additional urban development-indeed, some might say even the second scenario allows far too much growth and development-the second scenario is far kinder to California's unique natural landscape.

This report presents the results of a series of baseline population and urban growth projections for California's 38 urban counties through the year 2100. Presented in map and table form, these projections are based on extrapolations of current population trends and recent urban development trends. The next section, titled Approach, outlines the methodology and data used to develop the various projections. The following section, Baseline Scenario, reviews the projections themselves. A final section, entitled Baseline Impacts, quantitatively assesses the impacts of the baseline projections on wetland, hillside, farmland and habitat loss.

A population is a subgroup of individuals within the same species that are living and breeding within a geographic area. The number of individuals living within that specific location determines the population density, or the number of individuals divided by the size of the area.Population density can be used to describe the location, growth, and migration of many organisms. In the case of humans, population density is often discussed in relation to urbanization, immigration, and population demographics.Globally, statistics related to population density are tracked by the United Nations Statistics Division, and the United States Constitution requires population data to be collected every 10 years, an operation carried out by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, data on human population density at the country level, and even at regional levels, may not be very informative; society tends to form clusters that can be surrounded by sparsely inhabited areas. Therefore, the most useful data describes smaller, more discrete population centers.Dense population clusters generally coincide with geographical locations often referred to as city, or as an urban or metropolitan area; sparsely populated areas are often referred to as rural. These terms do not have globally agreed upon definitions, but they are useful in general discussions about population density and geographic location.Population density data can be important for many related studies, including studies of ecosystems and improvements to human health and infrastructure. For example, the World Health Organization, the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the U.S. Global Change Research Program, and the U.S. Departments of Energy and Agriculture all use population data from the U.S. Census or UN statistics to understand and better predict resource use and health trends.Key areas of study include the following:Ecology: how increasing population density in certain areas impacts biodiversity and use of natural resources.Epidemiology: how densely populated areas differ with respect to incidence, prevalence, and transmission of infectious disease.Infrastructure: how population density drives specific requirements for energy use and the transport of goods.This list is not inclusive—the way society structures its living spaces affects many other fields of study as well. Scientists have even studied how happiness correlates with population density. A substantial area of study, however, focuses on demographics of populations as they relate to density. Areas of demographic breakdown and study include, but are not limited to:age (including tracking of elderly population centers);sex (biological classification as male or female); andrace and ethnic group, or cultural characteristics (ethnic origin and language use).

A dataset listing New York cities by population for 2024.

This global accessibility map enumerates land-based travel time to the nearest densely-populated area for all areas between 85 degrees north and 60 degrees south for a nominal year 2015. Densely-populated areas are defined as contiguous areas with 1,500 or more inhabitants per square kilometer or a majority of built-up land cover types coincident with a population centre of at least 50,000 inhabitants. This map was produced through a collaboration between the University of Oxford Malaria Atlas Project (MAP), Google, the European Union Joint Research Centre (JRC), and the University of Twente, Netherlands. The underlying datasets used to produce the map, include roads (comprising the first ever global-scale use of Open Street Map and Google roads datasets), railways, rivers, lakes, oceans, topographic conditions (slope and elevation), landcover types, and national borders. These datasets were each allocated a speed or speeds of travel in terms of time to cross each pixel of that type. The datasets were then combined to produce a “friction surface”, a map where every pixel is allocated a nominal overall speed of travel based on the types occurring within that pixel. Least-cost-path algorithms (running in Google Earth Engine and, for high-latitude areas, in R) were used in conjunction with this friction surface to calculate the time of travel from all locations to the nearest city (by travel time). Cities were determined using the high-density-cover product created by the Global Human Settlement Project. Each pixel in the resultant accessibility map thus represents the modeled shortest time from that location to a city. Full Citation D.J. Weiss, A. Nelson, H.S. Gibson, W. Temperley, S. Peedell, A. Lieber, M. Hancher, E. Poyart, S. Belchior, N. Fullman, B. Mappin, U. Dalrymple, J. Rozier, T.C.D. Lucas, R.E. Howes, L.S. Tusting, S.Y. Kang, E. Cameron, D. Bisanzio, K.E. Battle, S. Bhatt, and P.W. Gething. A global map of travel time to cities to assess inequalities in accessibility in 2015. (2018). Nature. doi:10.1038/nature25181.

Green spaces in urban areas-- like remnant habitat, parks, constructed wetlands, and street trees-- supply multiple benefits. Many studies show green spaces in and near urban areas play important roles harboring biodiversity and promoting human well-being. On the other hand, evidence suggests that greater human population density enables compact, low-carbon cities that spare habitat conversion at the fringes of expanding urban areas, while also allowing more walkable and livable cities. How then can urban areas have abundant green spaces as well as density?
This data archive contains data created as part of a scientific manuscript that attempts to answer this question, entitled "Denser and greener cities: Green interventions to achieve both urban density and nature". Please see that manuscript for details on sources of data and details of methodology. We found that there is a negative correlation between population density and urban green spaces. For Functional Urban Areas in the OECD, a doubling of density is associated with a 2.9% decline in tree cover. We argue that there are competing tradeoffs between the benefits of density for sustainability and the benefits of nature for human well-being. Planners must decide an appropriate density by choosing where to be on this tradeoff curve, taking into account city-specific urban planning goals and context. However, while the negative correlation between population density and tree cover is modest at the level of US urbanized areas (R2=0.22), it is weak at the US Census block level (R2=0.05), showing that there are significant brightspots, neighborhoods that manage to have more tree canopy than would be expected based upon their level of density. We then describe techniques for how urban planners and designers can create more brightspots, identifying a typology of urban forms and listing green interventions appropriate for each form. We also analyze policies that enable these green interventions illustrating them with the case studies of Curitiba and Singapore. We conclude that while there are tensions between density and urban green spaces, an urban world that is both green and dense is possible, if society chooses to take advantage of the available green interventions and create it. Methods Please see the Methods section in McDonald et al. (People and Nature) for details on our methods.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Population (LU1)

FULL MEASURE NAME Population estimates

LAST UPDATED October 2019

DESCRIPTION Population is a measurement of the number of residents that live in a given geographical area, be it a neighborhood, city, county or region.

DATA SOURCES U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census No link available (1960-1990) http://factfinder.census.gov (2000-2010)

California Department of Finance: Population and Housing Estimates Table E-6: County Population Estimates (1961-1969) Table E-4: Population Estimates for Counties and State (1971-1989) Table E-8: Historical Population and Housing Estimates (2001-2018) Table E-5: Population and Housing Estimates (2011-2019) http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/

U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census - via Longitudinal Tract Database Spatial Structures in the Social Sciences, Brown University Population Estimates (1970 - 2010) http://www.s4.brown.edu/us2010/index.htm

U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey 5-Year Population Estimates (2011-2017) http://factfinder.census.gov

U.S. Census Bureau: Intercensal Estimates Estimates of the Intercensal Population of Counties (1970-1979) Intercensal Estimates of the Resident Population (1980-1989) Population Estimates (1990-1999) Annual Estimates of the Population (2000-2009) Annual Estimates of the Population (2010-2017) No link available (1970-1989) http://www.census.gov/popest/data/metro/totals/1990s/tables/MA-99-03b.txt http://www.census.gov/popest/data/historical/2000s/vintage_2009/metro.html https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/time-series/demo/popest/2010s-total-metro-and-micro-statistical-areas.html

CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) All legal boundaries and names for Census geography (metropolitan statistical area, county, city, and tract) are as of January 1, 2010, released beginning November 30, 2010, by the U.S. Census Bureau. A Priority Development Area (PDA) is a locally-designated area with frequent transit service, where a jurisdiction has decided to concentrate most of its housing and jobs growth for development in the foreseeable future. PDA boundaries are current as of August 2019. For more information on PDA designation see http://gis.abag.ca.gov/website/PDAShowcase/.

Population estimates for Bay Area counties and cities are from the California Department of Finance, which are as of January 1st of each year. Population estimates for non-Bay Area regions are from the U.S. Census Bureau. Decennial Census years reflect population as of April 1st of each year whereas population estimates for intercensal estimates are as of July 1st of each year. Population estimates for Bay Area tracts are from the decennial Census (1970 -2010) and the American Community Survey (2008-2012 5-year rolling average; 2010-2014 5-year rolling average; 2013-2017 5-year rolling average). Estimates of population density for tracts use gross acres as the denominator.

Population estimates for Bay Area PDAs are from the decennial Census (1970 - 2010) and the American Community Survey (2006-2010 5 year rolling average; 2010-2014 5-year rolling average; 2013-2017 5-year rolling average). Population estimates for PDAs are derived from Census population counts at the tract level for 1970-1990 and at the block group level for 2000-2017. Population from either tracts or block groups are allocated to a PDA using an area ratio. For example, if a quarter of a Census block group lies with in a PDA, a quarter of its population will be allocated to that PDA. Tract-to-PDA and block group-to-PDA area ratios are calculated using gross acres. Estimates of population density for PDAs use gross acres as the denominator.

Annual population estimates for metropolitan areas outside the Bay Area are from the Census and are benchmarked to each decennial Census. The annual estimates in the 1990s were not updated to match the 2000 benchmark.

The following is a list of cities and towns by geographical area: Big Three: San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland Bayside: Alameda, Albany, Atherton, Belmont, Belvedere, Berkeley, Brisbane, Burlingame, Campbell, Colma, Corte Madera, Cupertino, Daly City, East Palo Alto, El Cerrito, Emeryville, Fairfax, Foster City, Fremont, Hayward, Hercules, Hillsborough, Larkspur, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Menlo Park, Mill Valley, Millbrae, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Newark, Pacifica, Palo Alto, Piedmont, Pinole, Portola Valley, Redwood City, Richmond, Ross, San Anselmo, San Bruno, San Carlos, San Leandro, San Mateo, San Pablo, San Rafael, Santa Clara, Saratoga, Sausalito, South San Francisco, Sunnyvale, Tiburon, Union City, Vallejo, Woodside Inland, Delta and Coastal: American Canyon, Antioch, Benicia, Brentwood, Calistoga, Clayton, Cloverdale, Concord, Cotati, Danville, Dixon, Dublin, Fairfield, Gilroy, Half Moon Bay, Healdsburg, Lafayette, Livermore, Martinez, Moraga, Morgan Hill, Napa, Novato, Oakley, Orinda, Petaluma, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Pleasanton, Rio Vista, Rohnert Park, San Ramon, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Sonoma, St. Helena, Suisun City, Vacaville, Walnut Creek, Windsor, Yountville Unincorporated: all unincorporated towns

Census data reveals that population density varies noticeably from area to area. Small area census data do a better job depicting where the crowded neighborhoods are. In this map, the yellow areas of highest density range from 30,000 to 150,000 persons per square kilometer. In those areas, if the people were spread out evenly across the area, there would be just 4 to 9 meters between them. Very high density areas exceed 7,000 persons per square kilometer. High density areas exceed 5,200 persons per square kilometer. The last categories break at 3,330 persons per square kilometer, and 1,500 persons per square kilometer.This dataset is comprised of multiple sources. All of the demographic data are from Michael Bauer Research with the exception of the following countries:Australia: Esri Australia and MapData ServicesCanada: Esri Canada and EnvironicsFrance: Esri FranceGermany: Esri Germany and NexigaIndia: Esri India and IndicusJapan: Esri JapanSouth Korea: Esri Korea and OPENmateSpain: Esri España and AISUnited States: Esri Demographics

This city boundary shapefile was extracted from Esri Data and Maps for ArcGIS 2014 - U.S. Populated Place Areas. This shapefile can be joined to 500 Cities city-level Data (GIS Friendly Format) in a geographic information system (GIS) to make city-level maps.

Monaco led the ranking for countries with the highest population density in 2024, with nearly 26,000 residents per square kilometer. The Special Administrative Region of Macao came in second, followed by Singapore. The world’s second smallest country Monaco is the world’s second-smallest country, with an area of about two square kilometers and a population of only around 40,000. It is a constitutional monarchy located by the Mediterranean Sea, and while Monaco is not part of the European Union, it does participate in some EU policies. The country is perhaps most famous for the Monte Carlo casino and for hosting the Monaco Grand Prix, the world's most prestigious Formula One race. The global population Globally, the population density per square kilometer is about 60 inhabitants, and Asia is the most densely populated region in the world. The global population is increasing rapidly, so population density is only expected to increase. In 1950, for example, the global population stood at about 2.54 billion people, and it reached over eight billion during 2023.