placestats

Protected land vs. Unintended pregnancies ending in abortion

Holds up after adjusting for income

Across 142 countries, Protected land and Unintended pregnancies ending in abortion rise and fall together at r = -0.12 (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 = -0.14, q = 0.048, allowing for the many pairs tested). Caution: direction is not consistent across regions.

Comparing countries across the middle half of unintended pregnancies ending in abortion, 31.4% to 58.5% of unintended pregnancies, protected land is worse by 2.14% of land area at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 2.53% of land area.

Link before adjusting (r)-0.119p = 0.158 · 142 countries
After adjusting for national income-0.142p = 0.094 · likely range [-0.30, +0.02]
p, allowing for regions0.087standard error 0.069 · 7 regions
Check for luck (q)0.048across 14,952 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.

Protected land · % of land arealink with income +0.20 · independent
Unintended pregnancies ending in abortion · % of unintended pregnancieslink with income +0.12 · independent

Neither of these is closely tied to national income, so adjusting for income is a real test here, not a formality.

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

Every country as a dot

Protected land · % of land area →Unintended pregnancies ending in abortion · % of unintended pregnancies →0%51.6%19.7%86.1%Angola: 10.8% of land area, 28.1% of unintended pregnanciesAlbania: 23.6% of land area, 59.2% of unintended pregnanciesArgentina: 8.8% of land area, 48.4% of unintended pregnanciesArmenia: 38.9% of land area, 81.8% of unintended pregnanciesAustralia: 22% of land area, 43.1% of unintended pregnanciesAzerbaijan: 22.1% of land area, 77.6% of unintended pregnanciesBurundi: 7.6% of land area, 26.2% of unintended pregnanciesBelgium: 16.4% of land area, 37.1% of unintended pregnanciesBenin: 36.1% of land area, 36.9% of unintended pregnanciesBurkina Faso: 16.8% of land area, 40.6% of unintended pregnanciesBangladesh: 4.2% of land area, 60.1% of unintended pregnanciesBulgaria: 44.3% of land area, 35.7% of unintended pregnanciesBosnia and Herzegovina: 9.5% of land area, 57.3% of unintended pregnanciesBelarus: 9.2% of land area, 56% of unintended pregnanciesBelize: 37.3% of land area, 45.2% of unintended pregnanciesBolivia: 30.9% of land area, 36.3% of unintended pregnanciesBrazil: 30.6% of land area, 48.4% of unintended pregnanciesBarbados: 1.1% of land area, 58% of unintended pregnanciesBhutan: 51.6% of land area, 67.9% of unintended pregnanciesBotswana: 27.6% of land area, 32.2% of unintended pregnanciesCentral African Republic: 14.8% of land area, 30% of unintended pregnanciesCanada: 12.9% of land area, 36.8% of unintended pregnanciesSwitzerland: 12.5% of land area, 25.5% of unintended pregnanciesChile: 21.6% of land area, 52.5% of unintended pregnanciesChina: 15.6% of land area, 77.9% of unintended pregnanciesCote d'Ivoire: 22.9% of land area, 36.7% of unintended pregnanciesCameroon: 11% of land area, 40.7% of unintended pregnanciesCongo, Dem. Rep.: 14.9% of land area, 27.9% of unintended pregnanciesCongo, Rep.: 36.6% of land area, 42.6% of unintended pregnanciesColombia: 17.2% of land area, 43.2% of unintended pregnanciesComoros: 33.7% of land area, 32.4% of unintended pregnanciesCabo Verde: 17.6% of land area, 48.6% of unintended pregnanciesCosta Rica: 26.6% of land area, 41% of unintended pregnanciesCzechia: 21.9% of land area, 19.7% of unintended pregnanciesGermany: 39.2% of land area, 27.1% of unintended pregnanciesDjibouti: 1.6% of land area, 41.4% of unintended pregnanciesDenmark: 16.4% of land area, 38.9% of unintended pregnanciesDominican Republic: 26.3% of land area, 44% of unintended pregnanciesEcuador: 23.8% of land area, 35.1% of unintended pregnanciesSpain: 28.1% of land area, 43.1% of unintended pregnanciesEstonia: 21.6% of land area, 41.7% of unintended pregnanciesEthiopia: 17% of land area, 31% of unintended pregnanciesFinland: 13.9% of land area, 24.8% of unintended pregnanciesFrance: 28.8% of land area, 49.5% of unintended pregnanciesGabon: 22.6% of land area, 36.8% of unintended pregnanciesUnited Kingdom: 28.4% of land area, 36.2% of unintended pregnanciesGeorgia: 22.8% of land area, 86.1% of unintended pregnanciesGhana: 15.3% of land area, 35.9% of unintended pregnanciesGuinea: 42.6% of land area, 38.1% of unintended pregnanciesGambia, The: 7.7% of land area, 31.1% of unintended pregnanciesGuinea-Bissau: 26.2% of land area, 58.5% of unintended pregnanciesGreece: 35% of land area, 45.8% of unintended pregnanciesGuatemala: 20.1% of land area, 30.1% of unintended pregnanciesGuyana: 8.4% of land area, 47.5% of unintended pregnanciesHong Kong SAR, China: 42% of land area, 46.1% of unintended pregnanciesHonduras: 23% of land area, 30.6% of unintended pregnanciesCroatia: 38.4% of land area, 49.9% of unintended pregnanciesHaiti: 8.6% of land area, 35.5% of unintended pregnanciesHungary: 22.3% of land area, 49.4% of unintended pregnanciesIndonesia: 12% of land area, 63% of unintended pregnanciesIndia: 7.7% of land area, 77.1% of unintended pregnanciesIceland: 20.9% of land area, 39.1% of unintended pregnanciesItaly: 21.5% of land area, 67.1% of unintended pregnanciesJamaica: 19.9% of land area, 43.9% of unintended pregnanciesJapan: 29.7% of land area, 30.1% of unintended pregnanciesKazakhstan: 10.1% of land area, 82.1% of unintended pregnanciesKenya: 13.9% of land area, 38% of unintended pregnanciesKyrgyz Republic: 6.8% of land area, 79.2% of unintended pregnanciesCambodia: 39.8% of land area, 65.3% of unintended pregnanciesKorea, Rep.: 17.7% of land area, 61.9% of unintended pregnanciesLao PDR: 18.8% of land area, 68.3% of unintended pregnanciesLiberia: 4% of land area, 40.4% of unintended pregnanciesSt. Lucia: 18.2% of land area, 54.6% of unintended pregnanciesSri Lanka: 30.8% of land area, 72.3% of unintended pregnanciesLesotho: 23.4% of land area, 23.9% of unintended pregnanciesLithuania: 18% of land area, 27.7% of unintended pregnanciesLatvia: 18.8% of land area, 30.2% of unintended pregnanciesMoldova: 11.5% of land area, 70.6% of unintended pregnanciesMadagascar: 12.8% of land area, 62.8% of unintended pregnanciesMaldives: 3% of land area, 70.5% of unintended pregnanciesMexico: 15.3% of land area, 50.9% of unintended pregnanciesNorth Macedonia: 29% of land area, 63.4% of unintended pregnanciesMali: 7.5% of land area, 33.5% of unintended pregnanciesMyanmar: 6.7% of land area, 74.2% of unintended pregnanciesMontenegro: 22.2% of land area, 54.2% of unintended pregnanciesMongolia: 19.8% of land area, 65.7% of unintended pregnanciesMozambique: 29.5% of land area, 46.7% of unintended pregnanciesMauritania: 0.6% of land area, 25.4% of unintended pregnanciesMalawi: 23.1% of land area, 27.4% of unintended pregnanciesNamibia: 39.9% of land area, 27.9% of unintended pregnanciesNiger: 21% of land area, 31.3% of unintended pregnanciesNigeria: 13.9% of land area, 48.2% of unintended pregnanciesNicaragua: 21.2% of land area, 27.5% of unintended pregnanciesNetherlands: 22.9% of land area, 40.8% of unintended pregnanciesNorway: 17.8% of land area, 31.7% of unintended pregnanciesNepal: 23.6% of land area, 69.4% of unintended pregnanciesNew Zealand: 33.4% of land area, 29.3% of unintended pregnanciesPakistan: 19.1% of land area, 60.9% of unintended pregnanciesPanama: 31.4% of land area, 41.3% of unintended pregnanciesPeru: 22.1% of land area, 47.5% of unintended pregnanciesPhilippines: 16% of land area, 50.5% of unintended pregnanciesPapua New Guinea: 3.7% of land area, 46.3% of unintended pregnanciesPoland: 39.6% of land area, 36.6% of unintended pregnanciesPuerto Rico (US): 6.6% of land area, 58.3% of unintended pregnanciesPortugal: 23% of land area, 32.4% of unintended pregnanciesParaguay: 14.9% of land area, 51% of unintended pregnanciesRomania: 24.6% of land area, 71.2% of unintended pregnanciesRussian Federation: 11.5% of land area, 71.8% of unintended pregnanciesRwanda: 9.1% of land area, 28.7% of unintended pregnanciesSenegal: 27.5% of land area, 25.1% of unintended pregnanciesSingapore: 4.6% of land area, 27.5% of unintended pregnanciesSolomon Islands: 2.4% of land area, 28% of unintended pregnanciesSierra Leone: 12.6% of land area, 51.5% of unintended pregnanciesEl Salvador: 8.3% of land area, 41.5% of unintended pregnanciesSomalia, Fed. Rep.: 0% of land area, 29.2% of unintended pregnanciesSerbia: 14% of land area, 60.8% of unintended pregnanciesSao Tome and Principe: 31.7% of land area, 29.6% of unintended pregnanciesSuriname: 14.8% of land area, 46.5% of unintended pregnanciesSlovak Republic: 37.5% of land area, 26.2% of unintended pregnanciesSlovenia: 40.4% of land area, 24.4% of unintended pregnanciesSweden: 15.8% of land area, 48.3% of unintended pregnanciesEswatini: 4.2% of land area, 26.5% of unintended pregnanciesChad: 21% of land area, 29.5% of unintended pregnanciesTogo: 27.9% of land area, 32.2% of unintended pregnanciesThailand: 18.4% of land area, 64.4% of unintended pregnanciesTajikistan: 22.6% of land area, 71% of unintended pregnanciesTurkmenistan: 4.3% of land area, 83.4% of unintended pregnanciesTimor-Leste: 16.1% of land area, 67.8% of unintended pregnanciesTonga: 13.3% of land area, 52% of unintended pregnanciesTrinidad and Tobago: 30.6% of land area, 58% of unintended pregnanciesTanzania: 39.9% of land area, 35.9% of unintended pregnanciesUganda: 16.1% of land area, 29.7% of unintended pregnanciesUkraine: 17.1% of land area, 75.9% of unintended pregnanciesUruguay: 3.1% of land area, 27.6% of unintended pregnanciesUnited States: 12.9% of land area, 34.2% of unintended pregnanciesUzbekistan: 14.1% of land area, 80.2% of unintended pregnanciesViet Nam: 7.6% of land area, 74.5% of unintended pregnanciesVanuatu: 4.8% of land area, 45.4% of unintended pregnanciesSamoa: 7.9% of land area, 64.5% of unintended pregnanciesSouth Africa: 9.6% of land area, 36.6% of unintended pregnanciesZambia: 41.3% of land area, 28.2% of unintended pregnanciesZimbabwe: 28.3% of land area, 24.8% of unintended pregnanciesARMBTNKAZKGZKHMMRTNAMSLBSOMSVNTKMZMB

best-fit line line after adjusting

Four ways to measure the link

MethodrpCountries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted-0.1190.158142
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted-0.1100.191142
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income-0.1420.094142
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income-0.1320.120142

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 142 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: -0.023 (a minus sign means it grew).

How solid is it?

Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from -0.174 (without BTN) to -0.122 (without TKM). 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: BTN (-0.033).

Fragile: this link may not hold up.
  • direction is not consistent across regions

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.

nr
East Asia & Pacific21+0.06
Europe & Central Asia43-0.28
Latin America & Caribbean26-0.06
Sub-Saharan Africa42+0.02

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.

nr
Poorest third48-0.11
Middle third47-0.16
Richest third47-0.27

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.

nr
Christians96-0.15
Muslims27-0.03

By last european coloniser

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.

nr
France21-0.03
Never a European colony16-0.16
Spain17-0.03
United Kingdom38-0.11

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 = -0.174 after dropping 1 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 0years. So a link here can’t come from anything about a country that stays the same, such as its history, geography, institutions or culture.

Not enough history inside each country to look at this over time. That needs countries measured for several years in a row, and at least one of these measures is measured too rarely.

The data


% of land area
% of unintended pregnancies		Years
Bhutan BTN51.6%67.9%2025, 2019
Bulgaria BGR44.3%35.7%2025, 2019
Guinea GIN42.6%38.1%2025, 2019
Hong Kong SAR, China HKG42%46.1%2025, 2019
Zambia ZMB41.3%28.2%2025, 2019
Slovenia SVN40.4%24.4%2025, 2019
Tanzania TZA39.9%35.9%2025, 2019
Namibia NAM39.9%27.9%2025, 2019
Cambodia KHM39.8%65.3%2025, 2019
Poland POL39.6%36.6%2025, 2019
Germany DEU39.2%27.1%2025, 2019
Armenia ARM38.9%81.8%2025, 2019
Croatia HRV38.4%49.9%2025, 2019
Slovak Republic SVK37.5%26.2%2025, 2019
Belize BLZ37.3%45.2%2025, 2019

World Bank, World Development Indicators
Bearak, J. M., Popinchalk, A., Beavin, C. et al. (2022), 'Country-specific estimates of unintended pregnancy and abortion incidence: a global comparative analysis of levels in 2015-2019', BMJ Global Health 7(3), e007151. Guttmacher Institute. Supplementary appendix, tables A3-A5.

Sources

Protected land

Terrestrial protected areas (% of total land area)

UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre and IUCN · CC BY 4.0 · updated quarterly

From 2013 only.

Unintended pregnancies ending in abortion

Share of unintended pregnancies ending in abortion (model estimate, 2015-2019)

Guttmacher Institute (Bearak et al. 2022, BMJ Global Health) · CC BY-NC 4.0 · updated one edition (2015-2019 estimates, published 2022)

Of the unintended pregnancies in the abortion rate's model, the share that ended in abortion, averaged over 2015-2019 (Guttmacher Institute). The rest ended in a birth or a miscarriage. Like the other two, it is an estimate with a range. No "better" direction is set.

How this was computed

Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2019–2025. 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 14,952 pairs at once, using the Benjamini–Hochberg method. Underlying data last updated DYB 2024. How the country data works · explore Protected land and Unintended pregnancies ending in abortion

This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Protected land changes Unintended pregnancies ending in abortion, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.

More links with Protected land or Unintended pregnancies ending in abortion