|



 |
| 
 

 
   


|
| 
 

| 

  
Several sources were checked to determine the
average world population density was around 92
people per square mile. An atlas and a world
almanac were consulted to locate landlocked states
and their population densities. The mean population
density for the landlocked states was calculated,
and this figure compared to the mean world
population density. No statistical tests of significance
were undertaken. The mean population density of
landlocked states was found to be 205.8 people per
square mile. Thus, the hypothesis was rejected.
 


`emography, the study of population, is an important
subfield of geography. Examination of the population
distribution and reasons for this distribution are often
considered geographic themes. While population density
varies dramatically within many political units, this is an
often used figure to examine the relationship between
population and area. Many states contain coastal areas,
and only a few are considered landlocked. These
landlocked states might, thus be expected to have lower
than average population densities. The population
density of landlocked states was compared to the
average population density of the world.
  !  ! !" !#
The world population density was obtained, first, from two
different world regional geography textbooks, Jackson
and Hudman (1) and Wheeler and Kostbade.(2) This
figure was checked with figures from a world almanac
edited by Hoffman (3) and Haub, Kent, and
Yanagishita.(4) A Nystrom atlas (5) was used to locate
the states and determine which category; landlocked or
coastal, best described each. The mean population
densities of each landlocked state were obtained from
the average population density figures given in the
"Nations of the World" listing of The World Almanac.(6)
 !$


A list of landlocked states and their

population densities was compiled. After
completion of this list, the world political
map(7) was reexamined to locate all
landlocked states and check that each
was included on the list.
    !%!
The average population densities of each of the
states were added, this sum was recorded, and
the sum was divided by the number of
landlocked states to obtain a mean population
density for landlocked states. Finally, a
comparison was made between the mean
population density of landlocked states and the
mean population density of the world. If the
former figure were the higher, the hypothesis
would have been rejected; but if it were the
lower, the hypothesis would have failed to be
rejected.
 ! 

&$!|
! !
Two sources for the average world population
density and its computation from source data
were used to determine the mean world
population density.(8) A data base provided a
list of states and their population densities from
an almanac.(9) With the combined assistance of
an atlas,(10) a list of landlocked states and their
population densities was compiled. The total
numbers of landlocked states were counted, the
sum of the densities was determined, and by
division of these figures, the mean population
density of landlocked states was calculated. The
two means were compared, and the hypothesis
tested.
 '
  (
The world population density was
determined to be between 89 and 93
people per square mile while the 29
landlocked states had a mean population
density of 205.8 people per square mile, or
more than twice the mean world
population density. Therefore, the
hypothesis that landlocked states have a
lower mean population density than the
mean population density of the world was
rejected.
 



ilose examination of the data indicates that

almost half of the landlocked states do have
population densities below the average. Thus,
while no direct relationship exists to support the
simplistic statement, closer examination may
help strengthen it and build toward an improved
understanding of these population distributions.
 || )
 
     |
| 

  *++,
! |

! -  !$!!  540
&($  ./ :!%
 ( 0.9

 012 # +7.
  200 
(
  0
3$ 45 ! 005
3
# /  (! +/
3 6 
72 | (- 24
3  5.4 # 7+/
!  &  #8  ++2
+2
! 
# 8!  51.
$ ++
( +41
8!$

"6  0+7
;%  2.
( - 290
; %#! ..

 52
!
$
+50
 !&! !!

1. Richard H. Jackson and Lloyd E. Hudman, World Regional

Geography: Issues for Today, 3rd. ed., (New York: John Wiley &
Sons, 1990), pp. 77.
2. Jesse H. Wheeler, Jr. and J. Trenton Kostbade, World Regional
Geography (Philadelphia: Saunders iollege Publishing, 1990), p.
49.
3. Mark S. Hoffman, ed., the World Almanac and Book of Facts 1990
(New York: World Almanac, An Imprint of Pharos Books, 1989), p.
539.
4. iarl Haub, Mary Mederios Kent, and Machiko Yanagishita, 1991
World Population `ata Sheet (Washington, `.i.: Population
Reference Bureau, 1991)
5. Matthew V. Kania, Project `irector, World Atlas: A Resource for
Students (ihicago: Nystrom, 1990).
6. "Nations of the World," pp. 685-772, in Mark S. Hoffman, ed., the
World Almanac and Book of Facts 1990 (New York: World Almanac,
An Imprint of Pharos Books, 1989).
7. Matthew V. Kania, Project `irector, World Atlas: A
Resource for Students (ihicago: Nystrom, 1990).
8. See Richard H. Jackson and Lloyd E. Hudman, World
Regional Geography: Issues for Today, 3rd ed., (New
York: John Wiley & Sons, 1990), pp. 77, and Jesse H.
Wheeler, Jr. and J. Trenton

9.Haub, iarl, Kent, Mary Mederios, and Yanagishita,

Machiko.1991 World Population `ata Sheer.
Washington, `.i.: Population Reference Bureau, 1991.
10."Nations of the World´ In The World Almanac and Book
of Facts 1990, pp. 685-772.Edited by Mark S. Hoffman
New York: World Almanac, an Imprint of Pharos Books,
1989.
11.Hoffman, Mark S., Ed. The World Almanac and Book of
Facts 1990.New York: World Almanac, An Imprint of
Pharos Books, 1989.

Jackson, Richard H., and Hudman, Lloyd E. World

Regional Geography: Issues for Today. 3rd ed. New
York: John Wiley & Sons, 1990.

Kania, Matthew V., Project `irector. World Atlas: A

Resource for Students. ihicago: Nystrom, 1990.

Wheeler, Jr., Jesse H., and Kostbade, J. Trenton World

Regional Geography Philadelphia: Saunders iollege
Publishing, 1990.