4.7 Review

The spatial allocation of population: a review of large-scale gridded population data products and their fitness for use

Journal

EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCE DATA
Volume 11, Issue 3, Pages 1385-1409

Publisher

COPERNICUS GESELLSCHAFT MBH
DOI: 10.5194/essd-11-1385-2019

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [P2CHD066613]
  2. National Science Foundation, Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences [1416860]
  3. the Bill AMP
  4. Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1134076, OPP1177328]
  5. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1177328] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Population data represent an essential component in studies focusing on human-nature interrelationships, disaster risk assessment and environmental health. Several recent efforts have produced global-and continental-extent gridded population data which are becoming increasingly popular among various research communities. However, these data products, which are of very different characteristics and based on different modeling assumptions, have never been systematically reviewed and compared, which may impede their appropriate use. This article fills this gap and presents, compares and discusses a set of large-scale (global and continental) gridded datasets representing population counts or densities. It focuses on data properties, methodological approaches and relative quality aspects that are important to fully understand the characteristics of the data with regard to the intended uses. Written by the data producers and members of the user community, through the lens of the fitness for use concept, the aim of this paper is to provide potential data users with the knowledge base needed to make informed decisions about the appropriateness of the data products available in relation to the target application and for critical analysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available