Search

The release of global gridded population datasets, including the Gridded Population of the World (GPW), Global Human Settlement Population Grid (GHS-POP), WorldPop, and LandScan, have greatly facilitated cross-comparison for ongoing research related to anthropogenic impacts. However, little attention is paid to the consistency and discrepancy of these gridded products in the regions with rapid changes in local population, e.g., Mainland Southeast Asia (MSEA), where the countries have experienced fast population growth since the 1950s. This awkward situation is unsurprisingly aggravated because of national scarce demographics and incomplete census counts, which further limits their appropriate usage. Thus, comparative analyses of them become the priority of their better application. Here, the consistency and discrepancy of the four common global gridded population datasets were cross-compared by combing the 2015 provincial population statistics (census and yearbooks) via error-comparison based statistical methods. The results showed that: (1) the LandScan performs the best both in spatial accuracy and estimated errors, then followed by the WorldPop, GHS-POP, and GPW in MSEA. (2) Provincial differences in estimated errors indicated that the LandScan better reveals the spatial pattern of population density in Thailand and Vietnam, while the WorldPop performs slightly better in Myanmar and Laos, and both fit well in Cambodia. (3) Substantial errors among the four gridded datasets normally occur in the provincial units with larger population density (over 610 persons/km2) and a rapid population growth rate (greater than 1.54%), respectively. The new findings in MSEA indicated that future usage of these datasets should pay attention to the estimated population in the areas characterized by high population density and rapid population growth.

Spatial data of regional populations are indispensable in studying the impact of human activities on resource utilization and the ecological environment. Because the differences between datasets and their spatial distribution are still unclear, this has become a puzzle in data selection and application. This study is based on four mainstream spatialized population datasets: the History Database of the Global Environment version 3.2.000 (HYDE), Gridded Population of the World version 4 (GPWv4), Global Human Settlement Layer (GHSL), and WorldPop. In view of possible influences of geographical factors, this study analyzes the differences in accuracy of population estimation by computing relative errors and population spatial distribution consistency in different regions by comparing datasets pixel by pixel. The results demonstrate the following: (1) Source data, spatialization methods, and case area features affect the precision of datasets. As the main data source is statistical data and the spatialization method maintains the population in the administrative region, the populations of GPWv4 and GHSL are closest to the statistical data value. (2) The application of remote sensing, mobile communication, and other geospatial data makes the datasets more accurate in the United Kingdom, with rich information, and the absolute value of relative errors is less than 4%. In the Tibet Autonomous Region of China, where data are hard to obtain, the four datasets have larger relative errors. However, the area where the four datasets are completely consistent is as high as 84.73% in Tibet, while in the UK it is only 66.76%. (3) The areas where the spatial patterns of the four datasets are completely consistent are mainly distributed in areas with low population density, or with developed urbanization and concentrated population distribution. Areas where the datasets have poor consistency are mainly distributed in medium population density areas with high urbanization levels. Therefore, in such areas, a more careful assessment should be made during the data application process, and more emphasis should be placed on improving data accuracy when using spatialization methods.