Iceland vs Sao Tome and Principe: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 05 - Demographic estimates

Iceland
408.78 Persons
in 2050
Sao Tome and Principe
366.66 Persons
in 2050
Iceland rank
150th
Sao Tome and Principe rank
151st

Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 05 - Demographic estimates over time

  • Iceland
  • Sao Tome and Principe
100200300400199020202050

How they compare

Iceland currently reports 408.78 Persons against 366.66 Persons in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 42.12 Persons.

That makes Iceland's figure about 1.1 times Sao Tome and Principe's.

Across all 43 years both countries report, Iceland has been ahead every year.

Iceland ranks 150th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 151st of 170 countries.

Iceland has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Iceland Sao Tome and Principe Difference Ahead
1990s 266.45 Persons 131.57 Persons 134.88 Persons Iceland
2000s 298.61 Persons 160.07 Persons 138.55 Persons Iceland
2010s 333.44 Persons 198.91 Persons 134.53 Persons Iceland
2020s 378.46 Persons 238.97 Persons 139.48 Persons Iceland
2030s 390.34 Persons 265.04 Persons 125.3 Persons Iceland
2040s 403.74 Persons 316.69 Persons 87.05 Persons Iceland
2050s 408.78 Persons 366.66 Persons 42.12 Persons Iceland

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 05 - demographic estimates, Iceland or Sao Tome and Principe?
Iceland, at 408.78 Persons against 366.66 Persons in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2050.
What is the difference in africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 05 - demographic estimates between Iceland and Sao Tome and Principe?
42.12 Persons, with Iceland ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Iceland and Sao Tome and Principe?
43 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2050.
How do Iceland and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 05 - demographic estimates?
Iceland ranks 150th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 151st of 170 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, published as Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 05 - Demographic estimates — Population. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Iceland vs Sao Tome and Principe: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 05 - Demographic estimates. Statizoid, drawing on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved 01 September 2026, from https://population.statizoid.com/compare/africa-s-development-dynamics-afdd-table-05-demographic-estimates-population/iceland/sao-tome-and-principe/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://population.statizoid.com/compare/africa-s-development-dynamics-afdd-table-05-demographic-estimates-population/iceland/sao-tome-and-principe/">Iceland vs Sao Tome and Principe: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 05 - Demographic estimates</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 05 - Demographic estimates — Population
Unit
Persons
Source
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Licence
OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required)
Coverage
246 places, 10,557 data points, 1990–2050
Last refreshed

The Statistical Annex to the annual Africa's Development Dynamics (AFDD) report is a collection of development indicators that were gathered and analysed while conducting the research that went into the report. These data are also available online for free viewing or download at https://oe.cd/AFDD-2024, a bilingual website which links to the electronic version of the Africa's Development Dynamics book in both English and French. Table 5 shows figures on population, broken down by rural and urban population, as well as old-age and child-dependency ratios.