What if there are one billion more people in the world than we think. A recent study published in Nature Communications has raised questions about the accuracy of global population figures, suggesting that the world’s population—currently estimated at 8.3 billion—may actually be undercounted by more than one billion people. The discrepancy is largely attributed to the chronic underrepresentation of rural and remote communities in major global datasets. While the official United Nations estimate remains at around 8.3 billion, the study urges policymakers and demographers to revisit assumptions and invest in better rural data infrastructure.
Researchers from Aalto University in Finland analyzed data from 307 dam resettlement projects across 35 countries, focusing on how rural and remote communities were accounted for during displacement. As reported by New Scientist, they compared these local population figures—gathered as a part of compensation efforts—to five widely used global population databases. The finds revealed a significant gap: populations in rural and remote areas were undercounted by as much as 53% to 84% between 1975 and 2010, highlighting a persistent failure to accurately represent these communities in global data systems.
So how did this discrepancy occur? The study points to several long-standing challenges in census and data collection: remote and rural regions are often hard to access, lack digital infrastructure, or face language barriers that hinder survey participation. According to Unilad Tech, conflict zones and areas with little government presence are especially prone to being overlooked. In many cases, people in these regions are “technically counted as ‘not existing.’”
This gap in data matters. As highlighted by Popular Mechanics, population figures are essential for decisions related to healthcare, infrastructure, education, disaster planning, and more. Undercounting entire regions could mean that communities are left without adequate resources, funding, or services.
Still, the study’s conclusions are not without controversy. Some experts are skeptical of the scale of the alleged miscount. Stuart Gitel-Basten of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology told New Scientist that the claim of a billion-person discrepancy is “not realistic.” Andrew Tatem, who oversees one of the datasets analyzed, acknowledged that older methods had limitations, but emphasized that data collection has significantly improved in recent years.
Even so, the authors of the study argue that improved satellite resolution and machine learning alone cannot fix the deeper issue of rural invisibility in data systems.
As the global community continues to rely on population statistics to guide policy and planning, the question remains: who is being counted—and who is being left behind?
Image source: Indian Reference Review