Greenland is the size of Saudi Arabia and home to fewer people than a single mid-sized shopping mall district, about 57,000 in total, spread so thinly across its 2.17 million square kilometers that its population density works out to roughly 0.14 people per square kilometer, or one person for every seven square kilometers of territory. At the opposite end of this list sits Mongolia, a fully sovereign nation of nearly 3.5 million people occupying a landmass four times the size of Germany, where population density runs to about 2.2 people per square kilometer, still empty by any conventional standard, but organized around a functioning modern state rather than a scattering of isolated coastal settlements. Low density, it turns out, comes in at least two very different flavors, and knowing which one you are looking at changes what the number actually tells you.
What Does Low Population Density Mean?
Low population density describes a country where population is small relative to land area, but this single figure conflates two genuinely distinct situations that deserve separate treatment. A country can have low density because its total population is genuinely small, in which case density and population size move together and the country is simply lightly inhabited on both counts. Or a country can have a substantial total population, tens of millions of people in some cases, that happens to be spread across an unusually enormous land area, producing a low density figure despite hosting a population that would seem entirely ordinary by world standards if it were geographically concentrated instead of dispersed.
The Least Densely Populated Countries
Least Densely Populated Countries and Territories, 2025
| Rank | Country/Territory | Density (people/km²) | Approx. Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Greenland | ~0.136-0.14 | ~57,000 |
| 2 | Falkland Islands | ~0.285-0.31 | ~3,800 |
| 3 | Western Sahara | ~2.22 | ~587,000 |
| 4 | Mongolia | ~2.23-2.26 | ~3.5 million |
| 5 | Australia | ~3.48-3.51 | ~26.9 million |
| 6 | Namibia | ~3.68 | ~2.6 million |
| 7 | French Guiana | ~3.75 | — |
| 8 | Iceland | ~3.92 | ~360,000 |
| 9 | Suriname | ~4.07 | — |
| 10 | Guyana | ~4.22 | — |
Source: Academic Block, “Top 10 Countries with Least Population Density,” 2025; StatisticsTimes.com; Visual Nerd, 2026.
Greenland is recorded by UN DESA and the World Bank as the least densely populated territory on Earth, and among fully sovereign nations rather than territories, Mongolia holds that distinction, at roughly 2.2 to 2.3 people per square kilometer.
Why Some Countries Are So Sparsely Populated
Physical geography drives nearly every entry on this list, though the specific mechanism varies by country. Extreme cold and ice cover define Greenland, whose interior is buried under an ice sheet up to several kilometers thick, leaving habitable land confined to a narrow fringe of coastal settlements. Desert terrain defines Western Sahara, Namibia and much of Mongolia’s southern Gobi region, where limited freshwater access and extreme temperature swings have historically supported only sparse, often semi-nomadic populations. Remote island geography defines the Falkland Islands, a windswept South Atlantic archipelago roughly 480 kilometers from South America’s southern tip, whose harsh climate and isolation have kept its population, currently around 3,800 permanent residents, exceptionally small regardless of its habitable land area. Dense tropical rainforest defines French Guiana, Suriname and Guyana, where the Amazon and Guiana Shield forest cover has historically limited large-scale agricultural settlement outside a narrow coastal strip.
Huge Countries With Very Few People
Several entries on this list combine an enormous total land area with a population that, in absolute terms, is not necessarily tiny, producing low density through territorial scale rather than a genuinely small population.
Australia is the clearest example: a country of nearly 27 million people, comparable in size to several mid-sized European nations, spread across a continent-sized landmass of roughly 7.7 million square kilometers, the overwhelming majority of which is arid or semi-arid interior largely unsuitable for dense settlement. Mongolia follows a similar pattern at a smaller absolute scale: its population of approximately 3.5 million occupies a territory of 1.6 million square kilometers, four times the size of Germany, dominated by steppe, desert and mountainous terrain historically suited to pastoral nomadism rather than dense agricultural or urban settlement.
Selected Large-Territory, Low-Density Countries
| Country | Population | Land Area | Density |
|---|---|---|---|
| Australia | ~26.9 million | ~7.7 million km² | ~3.5/km² |
| Mongolia | ~3.5 million | ~1.6 million km² | ~2.2/km² |
| Namibia | ~2.6 million | ~825,600 km² | ~3.7/km² |
| Canada | ~40 million | ~9.98 million km² | ~4.4/km² |
| Kazakhstan | ~20 million | ~2.7 million km² | ~7.7/km² |
Source: StatisticsTimes.com; Nomad Capitalist, “The 13 Least Densely Populated Countries.”
Small Countries With Low Density
At the opposite end of this category, several entries owe their low density purely to a genuinely small total population rather than any exceptional territorial scale. The Falkland Islands, with roughly 3,800 residents, and Greenland, with roughly 57,000, are both cases where population size, not land area, is the primary driver of the low density figure; neither territory is unusually large by the standards of, say, Australia or Canada, but both have populations small enough that even a comparatively modest land area produces an extreme density reading.
Where People Actually Live Within Low Density Countries
National density averages conceal a critical reality: population within low-density countries is almost never evenly spread across the territory. Nearly half of Mongolia’s entire population lives in a single city, the capital Ulaanbaatar, meaning the vast majority of the country’s steppe and desert interior holds population densities far below even the already-low national average. Greenland’s roughly 57,000 residents live almost entirely in a scattering of coastal settlements, since the ice-covered interior is essentially uninhabitable; the country’s largest settlement, Nuuk, alone houses a substantial share of the total population. Australia follows the same pattern at a larger scale: the overwhelming majority of its nearly 27 million residents live in a handful of coastal cities, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide chief among them, while its vast arid interior, sometimes called the “outback,” remains sparsely populated even by the standards of the country’s already-low national average.
Low Density Versus Uninhabited Land
It is worth stating clearly: a low national density figure does not mean a country is uniformly empty. It means population is concentrated into a comparatively small share of the country’s total land area, with the remainder holding population densities close to zero. This distinction matters because a casual reading of a national density statistic can suggest a country is evenly, thinly populated across its entire territory, when the reality in nearly every low-density country on this list is closer to the opposite: a handful of population clusters, typically coastal cities or historically favorable agricultural or trade locations, surrounded by vast stretches of land holding next to nobody at all.
How Low Density Has Changed Over Time
Most countries on this list have seen their national density figures rise only modestly over recent decades, since their land area is fixed while their populations, though growing in absolute terms in most cases, remain small enough that even substantial percentage growth translates into only a small change in the underlying density ratio. Australia offers a partial exception: sustained immigration-driven population growth has pushed its total population from around 17 million in 1990 to nearly 27 million today, a roughly 60% increase, though this growth has been absorbed almost entirely by its already-dense coastal cities rather than meaningfully changing the density of its vast, sparsely populated interior.
Future Population Prospects
Population trajectories vary considerably across this group of countries. Australia and Canada, both immigration-driven, high-income economies, are projected to continue growing steadily over coming decades, likely nudging their national density figures modestly upward even as their vast, sparsely populated interiors remain largely unaffected by that growth. Greenland, by contrast, has a population that has remained roughly stable or grown only slightly for years, and its extreme climate and limited economic base make substantial future population growth unlikely absent a major shift in its resource-extraction or strategic economic role, a topic that has drawn increasing international attention given the territory’s mineral resources and the Arctic shipping routes climate change is gradually opening. Mongolia and Namibia, both resource-dependent economies, face population trajectories tied closely to their mining and extraction sectors, with modest but steady population growth projected in both cases.
Key Findings
- Greenland is the least densely populated territory on Earth, at roughly 0.14 people per square kilometer, while Mongolia is the least densely populated fully sovereign nation, at roughly 2.2 to 2.3 people per square kilometer.
- Low density comes from two genuinely different situations: a small total population (Greenland, the Falkland Islands) or a substantial population spread across an enormous land area (Australia, Mongolia, Canada).
- Nearly half of Mongolia’s entire population lives in its capital, Ulaanbaatar, meaning most of the country’s steppe and desert interior is essentially empty even by the standards of its already-low national average.
- Australia, despite having a population of nearly 27 million, ranks among the world’s least densely populated large countries because the overwhelming majority of its residents are concentrated in a handful of coastal cities.
- Desert terrain, extreme cold, dense rainforest and remote island geography are the primary physical drivers behind most of the world’s least densely populated countries and territories.
- Low national density does not mean a country is uniformly empty; it typically reflects a small number of population clusters surrounded by vast stretches of land holding close to no population at all.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Which country has the lowest population density?
Greenland has the lowest population density of any territory in the world, at roughly 0.14 people per square kilometer. Among fully sovereign nations, Mongolia holds that distinction, at roughly 2.2 to 2.3 people per square kilometer.
2. Why are some countries so sparsely populated?
Extreme climate and terrain, Arctic ice cover in Greenland, desert conditions in Mongolia, Namibia and Western Sahara, and dense rainforest in Guyana, Suriname and French Guiana, have historically limited large-scale settlement in these countries.
3. Is low population density the same as low population?
Not necessarily. Some low-density countries, like Greenland and the Falkland Islands, do have genuinely small total populations, but others, like Australia and Mongolia, have populations in the millions that simply occupy an unusually large land area.
4. Which large countries have very low population density?
Australia (roughly 27 million people across 7.7 million square kilometers) and Canada (roughly 40 million people across nearly 10 million square kilometers) are the clearest examples of substantial populations spread across enormous territories.
5. Does everyone in a low-density country live far apart?
No. Population within low-density countries is typically concentrated into a small number of cities or settlements, with the remaining territory holding population densities far below even the already-low national average.
6. Where do most Mongolians live?
Nearly half of Mongolia’s entire population of about 3.5 million lives in the capital, Ulaanbaatar, with the remainder spread thinly across the country’s vast steppe and desert regions.
7. Why is Greenland so sparsely populated?
Greenland’s interior is covered by a massive ice sheet up to several kilometers thick, confining its roughly 57,000 residents to a narrow fringe of coastal settlements around the island’s edges.
8. Are sparsely populated countries growing or shrinking?
It varies. Australia and Canada, both immigration-driven economies, are projected to continue growing steadily, while Greenland’s population has remained roughly stable, and Mongolia and Namibia face more modest, resource-sector-dependent growth trajectories.
9. What is the least densely populated country in Europe?
Iceland has the lowest population density in Europe, at roughly 3.9 people per square kilometer, a result of its rugged, largely uninhabitable volcanic interior combined with a population of only around 360,000.
10. How is low population density measured?
The same way as any density figure: total population divided by total land area, expressed as people per square kilometer, meaning the result depends heavily on how much of a country’s land area, including deserts, ice sheets or mountains, is included in the calculation.
Sources
- Academic Block, “Top 10 Countries with Least Population Density,” 2025
- StatisticsTimes.com, “Countries by population density 2025”
- Visual Nerd, “Least Densely Populated Countries Around the World,” April 2026, citing UN World Population Prospects 2024
- Nomad Capitalist, “The 13 Least Densely Populated Countries in the World,” July 2026
- Global Citizen Solutions, “The Ten Least Densely Populated Countries in the World”
- TravelBook, “The World’s Least Densely Populated Countries,” citing UN DESA and World Bank data, December 2025
