Until the 1800s, population growth was incredibly slow on a global level. The global population was estimated to have been around 188 million people in the year 1CE, and did not reach one billion until around 1803. However, since the 1800s, a phenomenon known as the demographic transition has seen population growth skyrocket, reaching eight billion people in 2023, and this is expected to peak at over 10 billion in the 2080s.

The earliest point where scientists can make reasonable estimates for the population of global regions is around 10,000 years before the Common Era (or 12,000 years ago). Estimates suggest that Asia has consistently been the most populated continent, and the least populated continent has generally been Oceania (although it was more heavily populated than areas such as North America in very early years). Population growth was very slow, but an increase can be observed between most of the given time periods. There were, however, dips in population due to pandemics, the most notable of these being the impact of plague in Eurasia in the 14th century, and the impact of European contact with the indigenous populations of the Americas after 1492, where it took almost four centuries for the population of Latin America to return to its pre-1500 level. The world's population first reached one billion people in 1803, which also coincided with a spike in population growth, due to the onset of the demographic transition. This wave of growth first spread across the most industrially developed countries in the 19th century, and the correlation between demographic development and industrial or economic maturity continued until today, with Africa being the final major region to begin its transition in the late-1900s.

The world's population first reached one billion people in 1805, and reached eight billion in 2022, and will peak at almost 10.2 billion by the end of the century. Although it took thousands of years to reach one billion people, it did so at the beginning of a phenomenon known as the demographic transition; from this point onwards, population growth has skyrocketed, and since the 1960s the population has increased by one billion people every 12 to 15 years. The demographic transition sees a sharp drop in mortality due to factors such as vaccination, sanitation, and improved food supply; the population boom that follows is due to increased survival rates among children and higher life expectancy among the general population; and fertility then drops in response to this population growth. Regional differences The demographic transition is a global phenomenon, but it has taken place at different times across the world. The industrialized countries of Europe and North America were the first to go through this process, followed by some states in the Western Pacific. Latin America's population then began growing at the turn of the 20th century, but the most significant period of global population growth occurred as Asia progressed in the late-1900s. As of the early 21st century, almost two-thirds of the world's population lives in Asia, although this is set to change significantly in the coming decades. Future growth The growth of Africa's population, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, will have the largest impact on global demographics in this century. From 2000 to 2100, it is expected that Africa's population will have increased by a factor of almost five. It overtook Europe in size in the late 1990s, and overtook the Americas a few years later. In contrast to Africa, Europe's population is now in decline, as birth rates are consistently below death rates in many countries, especially in the south and east, resulting in natural population decline. Similarly, the population of the Americas and Asia are expected to go into decline in the second half of this century, and only Oceania's population will still be growing alongside Africa. By 2100, the world's population will have over three billion more than today, with the vast majority of this concentrated in Africa. Demographers predict that climate change is exacerbating many of the challenges that currently hinder progress in Africa, such as political and food instability; if Africa's transition is prolonged, then it may result in further population growth that would place a strain on the region's resources, however, curbing this growth earlier would alleviate some of the pressure created by climate change.

In the past four centuries, the population of the Thirteen Colonies and United States of America has grown from a recorded 350 people around the Jamestown colony in Virginia in 1610, to an estimated 346 million in 2025. While the fertility rate has now dropped well below replacement level, and the population is on track to go into a natural decline in the 2040s, projected high net immigration rates mean the population will continue growing well into the next century, crossing the 400 million mark in the 2070s. Indigenous population Early population figures for the Thirteen Colonies and United States come with certain caveats. Official records excluded the indigenous population, and they generally remained excluded until the late 1800s. In 1500, in the first decade of European colonization of the Americas, the native population living within the modern U.S. borders was believed to be around 1.9 million people. The spread of Old World diseases, such as smallpox, measles, and influenza, to biologically defenseless populations in the New World then wreaked havoc across the continent, often wiping out large portions of the population in areas that had not yet made contact with Europeans. By the time of Jamestown's founding in 1607, it is believed the native population within current U.S. borders had dropped by almost 60 percent. As the U.S. expanded, indigenous populations were largely still excluded from population figures as they were driven westward, however taxpaying Natives were included in the census from 1870 to 1890, before all were included thereafter. It should be noted that estimates for indigenous populations in the Americas vary significantly by source and time period. Migration and expansion fuels population growth The arrival of European settlers and African slaves was the key driver of population growth in North America in the 17th century. Settlers from Britain were the dominant group in the Thirteen Colonies, before settlers from elsewhere in Europe, particularly Germany and Ireland, made a large impact in the mid-19th century. By the end of the 19th century, improvements in transport technology and increasing economic opportunities saw migration to the United States increase further, particularly from southern and Eastern Europe, and in the first decade of the 1900s the number of migrants to the U.S. exceeded one million people in some years. It is also estimated that almost 400,000 African slaves were transported directly across the Atlantic to mainland North America between 1500 and 1866 (although the importation of slaves was abolished in 1808). Blacks made up a much larger share of the population before slavery's abolition. Twentieth and twenty-first century The U.S. population has grown steadily since 1900, reaching one hundred million in the 1910s, two hundred million in the 1960s, and three hundred million in 2007. Since WWII, the U.S. has established itself as the world's foremost superpower, with the world's largest economy, and most powerful military. This growth in prosperity has been accompanied by increases in living standards, particularly through medical advances, infrastructure improvements, clean water accessibility. These have all contributed to higher infant and child survival rates, as well as an increase in life expectancy (doubling from roughly 40 to 80 years in the past 150 years), which have also played a large part in population growth. As fertility rates decline and increases in life expectancy slows, migration remains the largest factor in population growth. Since the 1960s, Latin America has now become the most common origin for migrants in the U.S., while immigration rates from Asia have also increased significantly. It remains to be seen how immigration restrictions of the current administration affect long-term population projections for the United States.

This dataset is extracted from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_in_1500. Context: There s a story behind every dataset and heres your opportunity to share yours.Content: What s inside is more than just rows and columns. Make it easy for others to get started by describing how you acquired the data and what time period it represents, too. Acknowledgements:We wouldn t be here without the help of others. If you owe any attributions or thanks, include them here along with any citations of past research.Inspiration: Your data will be in front of the world s largest data science community. What questions do you want to see answered?

Brazil and the United States are the two most populous countries in the Americas today. In 1500, the year that Pedro Álvares Cabral made landfall in present-day Brazil and claimed it for the Portuguese crown, it is estimated that there were roughly one million people living in the region. Some estimates for the present-day United States give a population of two million in the year 1500, although estimates vary greatly. By 1820, the population of the U.S. was still roughly double that of Brazil, but rapid growth in the 19th century would see it grow 4.5 times larger by 1890, before the difference shrunk during the 20th century. In 2024, the U.S. has a population over 340 million people, making it the third most populous country in the world, while Brazil has a population of almost 218 million and is the sixth most populous. Looking to the future, population growth is expected to be lower in Brazil than in the U.S. in the coming decades, as Brazil's fertility rates are already lower, and migration rates into the United States will be much higher. Historical development The indigenous peoples of present-day Brazil and the U.S. were highly susceptible to diseases brought from the Old World; combined with mass displacement and violence, their population growth rates were generally low, therefore migration from Europe and the import of enslaved Africans drove population growth in both regions. In absolute numbers, more Europeans migrated to North America than Brazil, whereas more slaves were transported to Brazil than the U.S., but European migration to Brazil increased significantly in the early 1900s. The U.S. also underwent its demographic transition much earlier than in Brazil, therefore its peak period of population growth was almost a century earlier than Brazil. Impact of ethnicity The demographics of these countries are often compared, not only because of their size, location, and historical development, but also due to the role played by ethnicity. In the mid-1800s, these countries had the largest slave societies in the world, but a major difference between the two was the attitude towards interracial procreation. In Brazil, relationships between people of different ethnic groups were more common and less stigmatized than in the U.S., where anti-miscegenation laws prohibited interracial relationships in many states until the 1960s. Racial classification was also more rigid in the U.S., and those of mixed ethnicity were usually classified by their non-white background. In contrast, as Brazil has a higher degree of mixing between those of ethnic African, American, and European heritage, classification is less obvious, and factors such as physical appearance or societal background were often used to determine racial standing. For most of the 20th century, Brazil's government promoted the idea that race was a non-issue and that Brazil was racially harmonious, but most now acknowledge that this actually ignored inequality and hindered progress. Racial inequality has been a prevalent problem in both countries since their founding, and today, whites generally fare better in terms of education, income, political representation, and even life expectancy. Despite this adversity, significant progress has been made in recent decades, as public awareness of inequality has increased, and authorities in both countries have made steps to tackle disparities in areas such as education, housing, and employment.

Between 1500 and 1800, London grew to be the largest city in Western Europe, with its population growing almost 22 times larger in this period. London would eventually overtake Constantinople as Europe's largest in the 1700s, before becoming the largest city in the world (ahead of Beijing) in the early-1800s.

The most populous cities in this period were the capitals of European empires, with Paris, Amsterdam, and Vienna growing to become the largest cities, alongside the likes of Lisbon and Madrid in Iberia, and Naples or Venice in Italy. Many of northwestern Europe's largest cities in 1500 would eventually be overtaken by others not shown here, such as the port cities of Hamburg, Marseilles or Rotterdam, or more industrial cities such as Berlin, Birmingham, and Munich.

Brazil and the United States are the two most populous countries in the Americas today. In 1500, the year that Pedro Álvares Cabral made landfall in present-day Brazil and claimed it for the Portuguese crown, it is estimated that there were roughly one million people living in the region. Some estimates for the present-day United States give a population of two million in the year 1500, although estimates vary greatly. By 1820, the population of the U.S. was still roughly double that of Brazil, but rapid growth in the 19th century would see it grow 4.5 times larger by 1890, before the difference shrunk during the 20th century. In 2024, the U.S. has a population over 340 million people, making it the third most populous country in the world, while Brazil has a population of almost 218 million and is the sixth most populous. Looking to the future, population growth is expected to be lower in Brazil than in the U.S. in the coming decades, as Brazil's fertility rates are already lower, and migration rates into the United States will be much higher. Historical development The indigenous peoples of present-day Brazil and the U.S. were highly susceptible to diseases brought from the Old World; combined with mass displacement and violence, their population growth rates were generally low, therefore migration from Europe and the import of enslaved Africans drove population growth in both regions. In absolute numbers, more Europeans migrated to North America than Brazil, whereas more slaves were transported to Brazil than the U.S., but European migration to Brazil increased significantly in the early 1900s. The U.S. also underwent its demographic transition much earlier than in Brazil, therefore its peak period of population growth was almost a century earlier than Brazil. Impact of ethnicity The demographics of these countries are often compared, not only because of their size, location, and historical development, but also due to the role played by ethnicity. In the mid-1800s, these countries had the largest slave societies in the world, but a major difference between the two was the attitude towards interracial procreation. In Brazil, relationships between people of different ethnic groups were more common and less stigmatized than in the U.S., where anti-miscegenation laws prohibited interracial relationships in many states until the 1960s. Racial classification was also more rigid in the U.S., and those of mixed ethnicity were usually classified by their non-white background. In contrast, as Brazil has a higher degree of mixing between those of ethnic African, American, and European heritage, classification is less obvious, and factors such as physical appearance or societal background were often used to determine racial standing. For most of the 20th century, Brazil's government promoted the idea that race was a non-issue and that Brazil was racially harmonious, but most now acknowledge that this actually ignored inequality and hindered progress. Racial inequality has been a prevalent problem in both countries since their founding, and today, whites generally fare better in terms of education, income, political representation, and even life expectancy. Despite this adversity, significant progress has been made in recent decades, as public awareness of inequality has increased, and authorities in both countries have made steps to tackle disparities in areas such as education, housing, and employment.

Labour Relations in Venice: 1500, 1650, 1800

An abridged data format, created by Daan Jansen (IISH) and continuing on earlier work by Joris Kok (IISH), is being offered as an alternative in October 2020. This new version of the dataset includes only records that contain labour relations, leaving out all population data. This update also involved (depending on the dataset in question, substantial) data cleaning, separating male and female individuals, and removing any duplicate records. Hence, the aggregated number of people mentioned in these updated datasets should equal the total population.

Labour Relations in Taiwan: 1500, 1650, 1800

An abridged data format, created by Daan Jansen (IISH) and continuing on earlier work by Joris Kok (IISH), is being offered as an alternative in October 2020. This new version of the dataset includes only records that contain labour relations, leaving out all population data. This update also involved (depending on the dataset in question, substantial) data cleaning, separating male and female individuals, and removing any duplicate records. Hence, the aggregated number of people mentioned in these updated datasets should equal the total population.

Labour Relations in China: 1500, 1800

An abridged data format, created by Daan Jansen (IISH) and continuing on earlier work by Joris Kok (IISH), is being offered as an alternative in October 2020. This new version of the dataset includes only records that contain labour relations, leaving out all population data. This update also involved (depending on the dataset in question, substantial) data cleaning, separating male and female individuals, and removing any duplicate records. Hence, the aggregated number of people mentioned in these updated datasets should equal the total population.

Labour Relations in Russia: 1500, 1650, 1800, 1900, 2000

An abridged data format, created by Daan Jansen (IISH) and continuing on earlier work by Joris Kok (IISH), is being offered as an alternative in October 2020. This new version of the dataset includes only records that contain labour relations, leaving out all population data. This update also involved (depending on the dataset in question, substantial) data cleaning, separating male and female individuals, and removing any duplicate records. Hence, the aggregated number of people mentioned in these updated datasets should equal the total population.

In 1500, the largest city was Paris, with an estimated 225 thousand inhabitants, almost double the population of the second-largest city, Naples. As in 1330, Venice and Milan remain the third and fourth largest cities in Western Europe, however Genoa's population almost halved from 1330 until 1500, as it was struck heavily by the bubonic plague in the mid-1300s. In lists prior to this, the largest cities were generally in Spain and Italy, however, as time progressed, the largest populations could be found more often in Italy and France. The year 1500 is around the beginning of what we now consider modern history, a time that saw the birth of many European empires and inter-continental globalization.

Labour Relations in Brazil: 1650, 1800

An abridged data format, created by Daan Jansen (IISH) and continuing on earlier work by Joris Kok (IISH), is being offered as an alternative in October 2020. This new version of the dataset includes only records that contain labour relations, leaving out all population data. This update also involved (depending on the dataset in question, substantial) data cleaning, separating male and female individuals, and removing any duplicate records. Hence, the aggregated number of people mentioned in these updated datasets should equal the total population.

Labour Relations in Argentina: 1900, 2000An abridged data format, created by Daan Jansen (IISH) and continuing on earlier work by Joris Kok (IISH), is being offered as an alternative in October 2020. This new version of the dataset includes only records that contain labour relations, leaving out all population data. This update also involved (depending on the dataset in question, substantial) data cleaning, separating male and female individuals, and removing any duplicate records. Hence, the aggregated number of people mentioned in these updated datasets should equal the total population. (2020-11-09)

Labour Relations in the United States: 1800An abridged data format, created by Daan Jansen (IISH) and continuing on earlier work by Joris Kok (IISH), is being offered as an alternative in October 2020. This new version of the dataset includes only records that contain labour relations, leaving out all population data. This update also involved (depending on the dataset in question, substantial) data cleaning, separating male and female individuals, and removing any duplicate records. Hence, the aggregated number of people mentioned in these updated datasets should equal the total population.

Labour Relations in Japan: 1800, 2000

An abridged data format, created by Daan Jansen (IISH) and continuing on earlier work by Joris Kok (IISH), is being offered as an alternative in October 2020. This new version of the dataset includes only records that contain labour relations, leaving out all population data. This update also involved (depending on the dataset in question, substantial) data cleaning, separating male and female individuals, and removing any duplicate records. Hence, the aggregated number of people mentioned in these updated datasets should equal the total population.

Labour Relations in the Netherlands: 1900, 2000An abridged data format, created by Daan Jansen (IISH) and continuing on earlier work by Joris Kok (IISH), is being offered as an alternative in October 2020. This new version of the dataset includes only records that contain labour relations, leaving out all population data. This update also involved (depending on the dataset in question, substantial) data cleaning, separating male and female individuals, and removing any duplicate records. Hence, the aggregated number of people mentioned in these updated datasets should equal the total population.

Abstract

The World Values Survey (www.worldvaluessurvey.org) is a global network of social scientists studying changing values and their impact on social and political life, led by an international team of scholars, with the WVS association and secretariat headquartered in Stockholm, Sweden. The survey, which started in 1981, seeks to use the most rigorous, high-quality research designs in each country. The WVS consists of nationally representative surveys conducted in almost 100 countries which contain almost 90 percent of the world’s population, using a common questionnaire. The WVS is the largest non-commercial, cross-national, time series investigation of human beliefs and values ever executed, currently including interviews with almost 400,000 respondents. Moreover the WVS is the only academic study covering the full range of global variations, from very poor to very rich countries, in all of the world’s major cultural zones. The WVS seeks to help scientists and policy makers understand changes in the beliefs, values and motivations of people throughout the world. Thousands of political scientists, sociologists, social psychologists, anthropologists and economists have used these data to analyze such topics as economic development, democratization, religion, gender equality, social capital, and subjective well-being. These data have also been widely used by government officials, journalists and students, and groups at the World Bank have analyzed the linkages between cultural factors and economic development.

Geographic coverage

The survey covers Georgia.

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual

Universe

The WVS for Georgia covers national population aged 18 years and over, for both sexes.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling universe included the adult population of Georgia residing in both rural and urban areas, excluding the conflict zones of Abkhazia and Ossetia. Military bases and prisons were also not included. In addition, some villages near the regional city of Gori and Zugdidi that are still under occupation by Russian troops were not included in the sampling. The sample design involved a fivestage random cluster sampling. The sampling frame design is based on the 2002 census information.

In this sampling design the sampling units were:

1) Regions and individual cities (Tbilisi and other principal cities) 2) Towns and villages (primary sampling units, PSUs) 3) Districts in cities, towns, and villages in rural areas (sampling points, SPs) 4) Household (by household we mean a group of individuals who live under the same roof and use the same kitchen for cooking) 5) Randomly selected adult members of households At the first stage, the number of respondents was allocated by probability-proportional-to-size (PPS) method. Likewise, at the second and third stages PSUs and SPs were selected by the probability proportional to the unit size (PPS) method. Households were selected via a random route technique and respondents at the household level were selected via the next-birthday technique:

Stage 1 - Primary sampling units At the first stage of the sampling design Georgia was divided into 11 regions; the division being based on the official administrative and geographic regions of the country.

 1 Tbilisi 
 2 Kakheti 
 3 Shida Kartli 
 4 Kvemo Kartli 
 5 Samtskhe Javakheti 
 6 Ajara 
 7 Guria 
 8 Samegrelo 
 9 Imereti & Svaneti 
10 Mtskheta Mtianeti 
11 Racha 

Each region was stratified according to three criteria:

 a) Large cities over 45,000 individuals - There are seven large cities in Georgia including the capital. All of them will be included in the sampling frame and are regarded as having been selfrepresentative cities or PSUs. 
 b) Other cities and towns with populations of less than 45,000 
 c) Rural settlements The number of interviews in all 10 regions was allocated proportional to the size of the adult population in each region. 

Stage 2 - Selection of PSUs In this stage the PSUs are equivalent to rayons- there are a total of 59 rayons (PSUs) in Georgia (excluding Abkhazia and Ossetia). The final sample covered 24 PSUs; this included seven self-representative PSUs were also included in this number. Due to the security reasons, areas close to Ossetian (town of Akhalgori, which was and continues to be under by Russian troops and the buffer zone areas), as well as the town Zugdidi (villages and small towns surrounding town of Zugdidi) were excluded from the sampling framework. Stage 3 - Selection of sampling points (SPs) In urban areas the SPs were census districts whereas in rural areas an entire village was considered as an SP. There are total of 16,582 registered census districts in Georgia and for each one, information existed as to its location/address and the size of the adult population. In the pre-selected PSUs (according to PPS), the number of SPs were determined and per each selected SP around 10 interviews were completed. Rural areas villages are considered as a separate SP and from the list of villages, (this list contains information on the number of adult population per village), and the SPs was selected by PPS. The achieved sampling framework consisted of 188 randomly selected (via PPS) SPs Stage 4 - Selection of households Selection of households was conducted by the application of a random route technique. For each one, SP starting points were identified and given to supervisors who then instructed interviewers as to how sampling mechanism was to be completed. Interviewers were then instructed to make up to two call backs if the original respondent was not available at the time of the initial contact.

Remarks about sampling:

The interviewer was given a route map in which a starting point for each sample point was accurately indicated. Every interviewer was then expected to have conducted no less than 10 interviews for urban SP and 5 among rural sampling points. The choice of starting points for all SP was made by the project manager or supervisor and was not left to the interviewers discretion. The STARTING POINT may be any point along the route, including day care establishments, schools, hospitals, administration buildings, or the beginning or end of a street (the starting point was indicated on the route map beforehand). If the starting point was the beginning of a street, it is necessary to keep to one side of the street (right or left). If a crossroad is met during the route, it is necessary to turn at this juncture and stay to the same side of the route until an appropriate respondent was chosen (i.e. if the left side is chosen, it was necessary to keep to the left side of the crossroad). If the required number of appropriate respondents was not found and the street ended, the interviewer should than have turned to the other side of the street and continued to the left handed side of the street. If the starting point had been a multi-storied building, the interviewer should have proceeded to the top floor and knocked at the door of the apartment on the side of which he followed during the route. It was not possible skipped any apartment until the appropriate respondent was found. After the interview with the appropriate respondent was completed the interviewer was to have followed the route and selected every fifth apartment. The interviewer followed this method after a successful interview was completed. In other cases s/he should have visited the next apartment until an interview was completed. If the interviewer were meeting private houses/plots on the sampling route, he should follow the instructions as indicated above and to have visited every fifth household. Interviews were held only in buildings that contained residences. Exceptions were those buildings (private hospitals, shops, restaurants, etc.), where one or more families permanently resided. The interviewer must allowed the supervisor to have been informed of and coordinated with him any changes that were concerned with the route that occurred during the fieldwork.

The sample size for Georgia is N=1500 and includes the national population aged 18 years and over for both sexes.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Length of interviews - Report each instrument separately - Report quartiles and interquartile range as well as median and mean Issues with survey instrument - Problems with particular questions - -for each question why was this problematic - Problems with length No serious problem that could cause the quality of the interviewing process was encountered either during the interviewing or due to the length of the surveys.

Response rate

Reason Cases No one at home 2146 Refusal from the family member 343 Refusal from the respondent 243 Respondents could not communicate (health related problems, language related problems, etc) 31 Respondent was not at home 311 Respondent is out of home during duration of the fieldwork 48 Termination of interview 0 Completed interview 1500

Sampling error estimates

+/- 2,6%

Abstract

The Financial Literacy survey is part of a World Bank Financial Governance/Consumer Protection in Financial Services Program in ECCU5 Countries. The Program aims to improve the levels of consumer protection and financial literacy in these countries—and thereby strengthen consumer confidence in the financial sectors. To this end the World Bank commissioned to the Alpha Research a baseline national representative survey. The objective of the study is to assess the level of financial literacy and consumer confidence of households and to outline the peculiarities in different target groups prior to the implementation of the action plan for increasing the financial literacy of the general population and in particular of the lowincome groups.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Household, Individual

Universe

A total of 1432 respondents from a general population (18+) were interviewed in their homes. Additional booster sample of 186 youth aged 16-17 was implemented.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Definition of sample size and sample frame

Sample size: based on statistical calculations in order to obtain max. standard deviation +/- 2.5% . - Main sample - 1500 respondents general population - Booster – 300 respondents 16-17 years old

Sample frame: random, two-staged stratified sample with probability, proportional to the size of the location. The sample include both urban and rural areas and is based on two stratification criteria: - NUTS region (6 regions – North-West, North-Central, North-East, South-West, South-Central, South-East) - Type of location (5 groups – Capital; Regional center with more than 100000 citizens, Regional center with less than 100000 citizens, Small town, Village)

Implementation of the sampling procedure

• All NUTS regions in Bulgaria have been ranged in descending order according to the size of the population.
• At the first stage the sample was distributed proportionally on the size of population in each of the 30 (6 NUTS X 5 type of location groups) strata different from zero.
• A cumulative column with the number of locations in each region was prepared. This cumulative column is used for defining the number of the sample points at the second stage of the sample and respectively – the number of the respondents in each location (proportionally to its’ size).
• The sample step was calculated according to the following formula: Sample step = Number of population in the region (N) divided on the number of respondents in the sample.
• A random starting number was defined.
• A number of 10 respondents in each sample nest have been set in order to minimize the influence of correlation error within the sample nest. The largest locations include a higher number of sample nests.
• The number of sample nests and the number of respondents in each location have been defined, proportionally to their size.
• At a second-stage, using the random selection based on the “last birthday in the household”, the respondents were selected within each sample point.
• The sample is representative for the adult population (18+).
• Additional sample booster of young people (16-17 years old) was prepared according to the same criteria.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

• The questionnaire is based on the model Financial Literacy Survey questionnaire used in Romania in order to achieve comparison of the results between the countries.
• Questions from previous surveys on financial literacy issues conducted in Bulgaria have been included in the questionnaire as well. This allows comparison of the survey results with those of previous studies.
• The questionnaire was reviewed with the relevant institutions – Bulgarian National Bank, Ministry of Economy, Energy and Tourism, World Bank.

Response rate

A total number of 1800 respondents were reached and 1618 interviews were conducted:

• Main sample: total number of 1500 respondents were reached and 1432 were conducted:

  • Response rate – 95%
  • Refusal rate - 5%
  • Main reason for refusals: the length of interview

• Booster sample of young citizens aged 16 – 17 y.o.: total number of 300 respondents were reached and 186 interviews were conducted:

  • Response rate – 62%
  • Refusal rate – 38%
  • Main reason for refusals: the subject of the survey