Population Distribution, Settlement Patterns and Accessibility across Africa in 2010

The spatial distribution of populations and settlements across a country and their interconnectivity and accessibility from urban areas are important for delivering healthcare, distributing resources and economic development. However, existing spatially explicit population data across Africa are generally based on outdated, low resolution input demographic data, and provide insufficient detail to quantify rural settlement patterns and, thus, accurately measure population concentration and accessibility. Here we outline approaches to developing a new high resolution population distribution dataset for Africa and analyse rural accessibility to population centers. Contemporary population count data were combined with detailed satellite-derived settlement extents to map population distributions across Africa at a finer spatial resolution than ever before. Substantial heterogeneity in settlement patterns, population concentration and spatial accessibility to major population centres is exhibited across the continent. In Africa, 90% of the population is concentrated in less than 21% of the land surface and the average per-person travel time to settlements of more than 50,000 inhabitants is around 3.5 hours, with Central and East Africa displaying the longest average travel times. The analyses highlight large inequities in access, the isolation of many rural populations and the challenges that exist between countries and regions in providing access to services. The datasets presented are freely available as part of the AfriPop project, providing an evidence base for guiding strategic decisions

Spatiotemporal patterns of population in mainland China, 1990 to 2010

According to UN forecasts, global population will increase to over 8 billion by 2025, with much of this anticipated population growth expected in urban areas. In China, the scale of urbanization has, and continues to be, unprecedented in terms of magnitude and rate of change. Since the late 1970s, the percentage of Chinese living in urban areas increased from ~18% to over 50%. To quantify these patterns spatially we use time-invariant or temporally-explicit data, including census data for 1990, 2000, and 2010 in an ensemble prediction model. Resulting multi-temporal, gridded population datasets are unique in terms of granularity and extent, providing fine-scale (~100 m) patterns of population distribution for mainland China. For consistency purposes, the Tibet Autonomous Region, Taiwan, and the islands in the South China Sea were excluded. The statistical model and considerations for temporally comparable maps are described, along with the resulting datasets. Final, mainland China population maps for 1990, 2000, and 2010 are freely available as products from the WorldPop Project website and the WorldPop Dataverse Repository

The effects of spatial population dataset choice on estimates of population at risk of disease

Background: The spatial modeling of infectious disease distributions and dynamics is increasingly being undertaken for health services planning and disease control monitoring, implementation, and evaluation. Where risks are heterogeneous in space or dependent on person-to-person transmission, spatial data on human population distributions are required to estimate infectious disease risks, burdens, and dynamics. Several different modeled human population distribution datasets are available and widely used, but the disparities among them and the implications for enumerating disease burdens and populations at risk have not been considered systematically. Here, we quantify some of these effects using global estimates of populations at risk (PAR) of P. falciparum malaria as an example.Methods: The recent construction of a global map of P. falciparum malaria endemicity enabled the testing of different gridded population datasets for providing estimates of PAR by endemicity class. The estimated population numbers within each class were calculated for each country using four different global gridded human population datasets: GRUMP (~1 km spatial resolution), LandScan (~1 km), UNEP Global Population Databases (~5 km), and GPW3 (~5 km). More detailed assessments of PAR variation and accuracy were conducted for three African countries where census data were available at a higher administrative-unit level than used by any of the four gridded population datasets.Results: The estimates of PAR based on the datasets varied by more than 10 million people for some countries, even accounting for the fact that estimates of population totals made by different agencies are used to correct national totals in these datasets and can vary by more than 5% for many low-income countries. In many cases, these variations in PAR estimates comprised more than 10% of the total national population. The detailed country-level assessments suggested that none of the datasets was consistently more accurate than the others in estimating PAR. The sizes of such differences among modeled human populations were related to variations in the methods, input resolution, and date of the census data underlying each dataset. Data quality varied from country to country within the spatial population datasets.Conclusions: Detailed, highly spatially resolved human population data are an essential resource for planning health service delivery for disease control, for the spatial modeling of epidemics, and for decision-making processes related to public health. However, our results highlight that for the low-income regions of the world where disease burden is greatest, existing datasets display substantial variations in estimated population distributions, resulting in uncertainty in disease assessments that utilize them. Increased efforts are required to gather contemporary and spatially detailed demographic data to reduce this uncertainty, particularly in Africa, and to develop population distribution modeling methods that match the rigor, sophistication, and ability to handle uncertainty of contemporary disease mapping and spread modeling. In the meantime, studies that utilize a particular spatial population dataset need to acknowledge the uncertainties inherent within them and consider how the methods and data that comprise each will affect conclusions. © 2011 Tatem et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Examining the correlates and drivers of human population distributions across low-and middle-income countries

Geographical factors have influenced the distributions and densities of global human population distributions for centuries. Climatic regimes have made some regions more habitable than others, harsh topography has discouraged human settlement, and transport links have encouraged population growth. A better understanding of these types of relationships enables both improved mapping of population distributions today and modelling of future scenarios. However, few comprehensive studies of the relationships between population spatial distributions and the range of drivers and correlates that exist have been undertaken at all, much less at high spatial resolutions, and particularly across the low-and middle-income countries. Here, we quantify the relative importance of multiple types of drivers and covariates in explaining observed population densities across 32 low-and middle-income countries over four continents using machine-learning approaches. We find that, while relationships between population densities and geographical factors show some variation between regions, theyare generally remarkably consistent,pointing to universal drivers of human population distribution. Here,we find that a set of geographical features relating to the built environment, ecology and topography consistently explain the majority of variability in population distributions at fine spatial scales across the low-and middle-income regions of the world.</p

The dominant Anopheles vectors of human malaria in Africa, Europe and the Middle East: occurrence data, distribution maps and bionomic précis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This is the second in a series of three articles documenting the geographical distribution of 41 dominant vector species (DVS) of human malaria. The first paper addressed the DVS of the Americas and the third will consider those of the Asian Pacific Region. Here, the DVS of Africa, Europe and the Middle East are discussed. The continent of Africa experiences the bulk of the global malaria burden due in part to the presence of the <it>An. gambiae </it>complex. <it>Anopheles gambiae </it>is one of four DVS within the <it>An. gambiae </it>complex, the others being <it>An. arabiensis </it>and the coastal <it>An. merus </it>and <it>An. melas</it>. There are a further three, highly anthropophilic DVS in Africa, <it>An. funestus</it>, <it>An. moucheti </it>and <it>An. nili</it>. Conversely, across Europe and the Middle East, malaria transmission is low and frequently absent, despite the presence of six DVS. To help control malaria in Africa and the Middle East, or to identify the risk of its re-emergence in Europe, the contemporary distribution and bionomics of the relevant DVS are needed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A contemporary database of occurrence data, compiled from the formal literature and other relevant resources, resulted in the collation of information for seven DVS from 44 countries in Africa containing 4234 geo-referenced, independent sites. In Europe and the Middle East, six DVS were identified from 2784 geo-referenced sites across 49 countries. These occurrence data were combined with expert opinion ranges and a suite of environmental and climatic variables of relevance to anopheline ecology to produce predictive distribution maps using the Boosted Regression Tree (BRT) method.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The predicted geographic extent for the following DVS (or species/suspected species complex*) is provided for Africa: <it>Anopheles </it>(<it>Cellia</it>) <it>arabiensis</it>, <it>An. </it>(<it>Cel.</it>) <it>funestus*</it>, <it>An. </it>(<it>Cel.</it>) <it>gambiae</it>, <it>An. </it>(<it>Cel.</it>) <it>melas</it>, <it>An. </it>(<it>Cel.</it>) <it>merus</it>, <it>An. </it>(<it>Cel.</it>) <it>moucheti </it>and <it>An. </it>(<it>Cel.</it>) <it>nili*</it>, and in the European and Middle Eastern Region: <it>An. </it>(<it>Anopheles</it>) <it>atroparvus</it>, <it>An. </it>(<it>Ano.</it>) <it>labranchiae</it>, <it>An. </it>(<it>Ano.</it>) <it>messeae</it>, <it>An. </it>(<it>Ano.</it>) <it>sacharovi</it>, <it>An. </it>(<it>Cel.</it>) <it>sergentii </it>and <it>An. </it>(<it>Cel.</it>) <it>superpictus*</it>. These maps are presented alongside a bionomics summary for each species relevant to its control.</p