Laura Padalino
Lab 10
Question 9. b.1
The most dramatic shift in total population between 1950 and 2030 are in South and North America, and
Africa. By 2030, most of Europe and Asia are at the same population levels that they were at in 1950
(although their populations were highly variable throughout the time gap. I found this method to be very
useful. By changing the break levels relative to 1950, we could ensure that the population in Brazil, for
example, was growing in real numbers rather than relative to the rest of the world.
Question 9.b.2
The countries that have a lower population in 2030 than in 1950 include Estonia, Latvia, Hungary, and
Bulgaria. These countries may have a lower population in 2030 due to emigration and population shifts
following the fall of the Soviet Union.
Question 9.b.3
The trend that is quickly apparent from this JPEG image is that our urban populations are increasing in all
countries, regardless of whether or not the country is developed or developing. Almost the entire western
hemisphere, along with Europe and Russia, have between 60 and 99 percent of its’ people living in urban
areas. Although parts of eastern Africa, India, and China do not seem to have rates as high as the rest of the
world, it can be inferred through the trends in the data, that they will soon catch up.
Question 9.b.4
Country
Belgium
United Kingdom
Netherlands
% Urbanization 1950
92
84
83
Country
Kuwait
Western Sahara
Belgium
% Urbanization 2030
99
98
98
All of these countries are relatively small and therefore, any given city in one of these small countries
would take up a high percentage of the total area and make it more likely that people would live in these
urban areas.
Question 9.b.5
Two benefits of urbanization include better access to health care and sanitation. However, the harmful
affects of urbanization far outweigh the benefits. Some of the harms include increased levels of
homelessness and unemployment, and increasing levels of pollution and congestion.
Question 9.b.6
In general, the higher a country’s GDP, the higher its’ percent urbanization. However, this is not a perfect
correlation and there are some countries that completely go against this pattern. One would expect, if these
were perfectly correlated (GDP and percent urbanization), that the US would have the highest rates of
urbanization, when in fact the Middle East, South America, and Australia are where the countries with the
highest levels of urbanization are located. Brazil sticks out as an anomaly with one of the highest
urbanization rates and a GDP around the 50th percentile.
Question 9.b.7
-0.2 no y axis label on chart
-0.2 no units on per capita GDP
Question 9.b.7.
My maps clearly illustrate the correlation between per Capita GDP and urbanization rates
in Central America. I also included a chart that gave the percent of the urban population
that had improved sanitation. I chose this field value because I was interested in seeing
whether the correlation between high GDP levels in a country corresponded to higher
levels of affluence in the cities as well. After viewing Professor Abreu’s pictures in
lecture last Friday, I was curious as to what percent of the population in cities was
actually taken care of by the local city government. The chart shows that, except for
Belize, most urban residents in fact do have improved sanitation resources. It is
important to note that this may be misleading: those individuals living on the outskirts of
the city may not be counted in the urban population.
Nice connection to class!
9.6/10