Looking at the population greater then the age of 65 years, the country with the highest percentage is Sweden at 17.5% and second to that is the UK at 15.5%. The countries with the lowest percentage of 2.4% are Niger, Uganda and Yemen. This seems to follow a general trend as well that more developed countries have a higher percentage over 65 years old than the lesser developed countries. For the more developed countries there becomes an issue of an ageing population which is worsened by the fact that population growth for these countries seems lowest. Looking at less developed countries their may be less of a percentage and a lower life expectancy because they don’t have the health resources that countries like us do today.
Looking at GNP the country with the highest is the USA $7100007 million and lowest being the Soloman Islands. GNP greatly differs throughout the world and averages help to see where bout’s a particular country lies for example the UK’S is $1094734 which is above the average of $371503.3. Though this doesn’t reflect GpC Germany has the highest and Zaire the lowest as I said earlier.
I have produced I frequency graph showing how many countries out of the 39 have GpC lying in these groups, as you can see the majority of countries have GpC only between 0-5000 which may be due to the fact
that there are a larger number of poorer countries in the data and fewer richer countries. The three countries with GpC between $25000-$30000 are France, Germany and the USA. These are some of the largest trading countries in the world. Though from $10000 upwards looking at the histogram below it shows that the countries in each bar start to average out and there is not any fluctuations.
Looking at this the group widths are large due to such a varied GpC or the fact that there are a few countries in the group with a high GpC which give such a large deviation and therefore the mean has to include these.
Looking at the population growth like this the groups widths are in percentage points and the table is more spread across the countries the majority being between 3-4% .
This is a little higher than the average again
indicating that there may be a larger number of poorer countries in the data. Though the average is at 2.3% there are about half below so this may not be the case. The two countries with the highest population growth are Jordan and Yemen, which lie in the lower half of GpC and GNP. It depends on the country in hand and its size. Looking at the histogram below it shows how the data has been displayed.
As I have said the numbers in each group are closer together except for group 4%-5% showing that across the countries there is both high growth and low growth. Looking at both these graphs it is hard to make any assumptions about the relationship between the two therefore I am going to use scatter graphs to show the relationship between GpC and the rate of population growth and GpC and the age structure of the population. Scatter graphs show the relationship between two variables well and from this I can derive there correlation.
Firstly the scatter graph on the next page shows that there is negative correlation between the two variables, as GpC increases the population growth tends to decrease. The R2 shows how strong the correlation is, 0.674 shows that is neither that strong nor that weak and sticks to the trend line. The chosen trend line best fitted the data. Between $0-5000 GpC there are the most countries in the graph and it is more concentrated where most of the population growth range is between 2-4%. After this the trend line becomes less steeper with about 12 countries in the £5000-30000 range all with growth between 0-1.5%. There are no major anomalies to be seen on the graph and they tend to stick to the trend line however with not that strong correlation there may be a few countries that could have a slightly low GpC alongside a low population growth for example Uruguay the only country with a population
growth below 1% and GpC being in the lowest group of $0-5000. I have ringed this one on the graph.
I have looked at factors at why this could be before such as poorer countries may not have adequate access to resources like contraception or children needed to work.
The second scatter graph shows the relationship between GpC and the population over the age of 65. The R2 value in this case is bigger and therefore a lot stronger at 0.8297 (highest being 1), it shows positive correlation that as GpC increases the population above 65 tends to as well. Like I said Sweden is one of the richest countries but has a high percentage over the age of 65 years. Again the majority of the poorer countries with GpC between $0-5000 have a low population of over 65 between 2-6%.This is another more concentrated area as you can see. Though as GpC
increases above $5000 countries don’t fit the trend line so well with some countries having the second to lowest GpC group with a high population over 65. This is because there is such a variation of GpC dependant on the country across the world that it can be hard to graph. Poorer countries in both cases tend to follow the same pattern but as countries develop they do it in their own ways and all experience different reactions from the people and looking at different sizes of the population things can be done in different ways. Therefore there doesn’t seem to be such strong trends with either of the variables as countries become more developed. Though the factors that cause this trend, as I have said can be due to poorer countries not having as good health facilities to look after elderly people.
To conclude, though there shows a relationship between two factors in each of the graphs these are not the only factors that cause one thing to do another and many other considerations have to be take on board maybe not only quantative ones but qualitative ones as well like the culture of different countries.