Do Ethnic diversity and Population 65+ go together across countries?

Across 148 countries the link before adjusting for anything is r = -0.48, on a scale from -1 (opposite) to +1 (in step). A version that uses only each country's rank gives -0.52.

Does the link hold within countries over time, not just across countries?

Comparing each country only with itself across 1990-2013, and setting aside what happened worldwide in each year, the link is +0.003 (152 countries, 3,606 country-years). Using year-to-year changes, it is +0.012.

Does Ethnic diversity cause Population 65+?

This analysis cannot answer that. It shows only that the two go together. A link between two country measures, adjusted or not, does not show that either one changes the other. Country figures also say nothing about individual people.

Ethnic diversity vs. Population 65+

Holds up after adjusting for income

Across 148 countries, Ethnic diversity and Population 65+ rise and fall together at r = -0.48 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). It holds up almost unchanged when only countries with similar income (GDP per person) are compared (r = -0.34, q = 0.021, allowing for the many pairs tested).

Comparing countries across the middle half of ethnic diversity, 0.239 to 0.701 points, population 65+ is 6.53% of population lower at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 3.43% of population.

Link before adjusting (r)-0.479p = 7.1e-10 · 148 countries

After adjusting for national income-0.337p = 3.0e-5 · likely range [-0.47, -0.19]

p, allowing for regions0.001standard error 0.058 · 7 regions

Check for luck (q)0.021across 13,797 pairs

How to read these.r runs from −1 (one goes up as the other goes down) to +1 (they rise together), and 0 means no link. Adjusting for national income means comparing countries with the same GDP per person, so differences in wealth can’t explain the link. Income is used in percentage terms, since an extra $1,000 means more to a poor country than to a rich one. p is how likely a link this strong would be if there were really none. Below 0.05 means it is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 1.1e-32 means a decimal point followed by 31 zeros and then 11, so very close to zero. The likely range is where the true figure probably lies, and a range that crosses zero means the link could easily be chance. Countries in the same region tend to resemble each other, so the third figure allows for that, which gives a fairer p. The standard error is the typical size of the error in r. Finally, testing this many pairs means some will look strong by luck alone. A q below 0.05 means this link is unlikely to be one of those.

Ethnic diversity · index, 0 to 1link with income -0.37 · moderate

Population 65+ · % of populationlink with income +0.76 · high

“Link with income” is how closely each measure tracks GDP per person across countries, from −1 to +1.

Every country as a dot

best-fit line line after adjusting

Four ways to measure the link

Method	r	p	Countries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted	-0.479	7.1e-10	148
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted	-0.521	1.1e-11	148
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income	-0.337	3.0e-5	148
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income	-0.397	6.3e-7	148

The rank version uses only each country’s place in line, from lowest to highest, so a few extreme countries count for less. The adjusted and unadjusted versions use the same 148 countries: those that report both measures and GDP per person. So the gap between them comes from the adjustment, not from a change in which countries are counted. Drop in the size of r after adjusting: +0.142 (a minus sign means it grew).

How solid is it?

Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from -0.357 (without BIH) to -0.312 (without QAT). The bar above shows that range on a scale from −1 to +1, with the solid line at the full result. The single country that moves r most: QAT (+0.025).

Within each region

Countries are not separate, unrelated cases, and neighbors share a lot. A link that holds inside each region is far more believable than one that shows up only when comparing regions.

	n	r
East Asia & Pacific	17	-0.54
Europe & Central Asia	43	+0.01
Latin America & Caribbean	21	-0.36
Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan & Pakistan	20	-0.39
Sub-Saharan Africa	41	-0.33

By income third

If the link shows up only in the richest third of countries, it is a feature of rich countries, not a general pattern.

	n	r
Poorest third	50	-0.47
Middle third	49	-0.08
Richest third	49	-0.65

By largest religious group

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

	n	r
Christians	84	-0.38
Muslims	46	-0.27

By last european coloniser

	n	r
France	23	-0.78
Never a European colony	21	-0.37
Spain	18	-0.30
United Kingdom	44	-0.23

Without outliers (countries far outside the middle half of countries on either measure, by more than one and a half times the width of that middle half): r = -0.337 after dropping 0 countries.

Two series, one country

Both measures over the years for one country you pick. The two charts are stacked so they share only the years along the bottom.

Loading…

Over time, within countries

Everything above compares countries with each other at one moment. This section compares each country only with itself over 24years. So a link here can’t come from anything about a country that stays the same, such as its history, geography, institutions or culture.

Within countries over time, there is no link that is clearly more than chance (r = +0.003, comparing each country only with itself over the years, and each year only with the same year elsewhere). Whatever the cross-country picture shows, countries whose ethnic diversity moved did not tend to see their population 65+ move with it.

Across countries (adjusted)-0.337for comparison

Within countries+0.082each country vs itself

…and vs the same year elsewhere+0.003q = 0.987 · 152 countries

Year-on-year changes+0.012q = 0.945

Read with care.

Almost all of this indicator's variation is between countries, not within them, so the within-country estimate rests on a small part of the data.

3,606 country-years (one country in one year), 152 countries, 1990–2013, about 24 years each on average. Share of the variation that happens within countries over time: 1% for Ethnic diversity, 4% for Population 65+. The margins of error allow for each country appearing many times, and for each year’s value being close to the year before.

Year-to-year changes are a cautious test, not a final answer. Looking only at changes from one year to the next removes each country’s own trends. But it also makes measurement mistakes louder, which pulls the results toward zero. A near-zero result here is weak evidence of no link, not proof.

With one measure years behind the other

Same year (lag 0): +0.003. A peak away from zero does not show which comes first. These series change slowly — this year’s value is close to last year’s. That makes the curve smooth and nearly symmetric, whatever produced the data. Even a sharp peak at one lag (a gap of some years) would not prove that one measure changes the other.

This curve peaks at the edge of the window (lag +10), so it is still drifting where the search stops. That pattern usually reflects a slow trend left over in the data, not a link with real timing. The peak value should not be read as the “true” link at the right lag.

The data

	index, 0 to 1	% of population	Years
Liberia LBR	0.889	3.33%	2013, 2025
Uganda UGA	0.883	2.23%	2013, 2025
Togo TGO	0.88	3.48%	2013, 2025
Nepal NPL	0.86	6.62%	2013, 2025
South Africa ZAF	0.856	6.89%	2013, 2025
Chad TCD	0.855	2.12%	2013, 2025
Kenya KEN	0.855	3.02%	2013, 2025
Mali MLI	0.852	2.36%	2013, 2025
Nigeria NGA	0.85	3.07%	2013, 2025
Guinea-Bissau GNB	0.808	3.24%	2013, 2025
Philippines PHL	0.807	5.72%	2013, 2025
Indonesia IDN	0.803	7.54%	2013, 2025
Timor-Leste TLS	0.802	5.23%	2013, 2025
Sierra Leone SLE	0.801	3.28%	2013, 2025
Malawi MWI	0.791	2.59%	2013, 2025

Drazanova, L. (2019), Historical Index of Ethnic Fractionalization Dataset (HIEF), Harvard Dataverse, doi:10.7910/DVN/4JQRCL
World Bank, World Development Indicators

Sources

Ethnic diversity

Ethnic fractionalization index

Lenka Drazanova · CC0 1.0 · updated one edition (2019), annual values 1945-2013

The chance that two people picked at random in a country belong to different ethnic groups, from 0 (everyone in one group) to close to 1 (many small groups). It measures how mixed a country is, not which groups live there. The groups are those each country's own sources use, so where the lines are drawn differs from country to country. Yearly from 1945 to 2013, so the latest value is from 2013. No "better" direction is set.

Population 65+

Population ages 65 and above (% of total)

World Bank · CC BY 4.0 · updated quarterly

How this was computed

Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2013–2025. To adjust for income, each measure is first predicted from GDP per person (in percentage terms, on a log scale) with a straight-line fit. Only what is left over is then compared. This is called a partial correlation. The line is drawn the standard way (ordinary least squares), which picks the line that comes closest to all the countries at once. The error margins allow for countries in the same region resembling each other, using 7 World Bank regions. The q-value corrects for testing all 13,797 pairs at once, using the Benjamini–Hochberg method. Underlying data last updated DYB 2024. How the country data works · explore Ethnic diversity and Population 65+

This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Ethnic diversity changes Population 65+, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.