What are the estimated global population percentages by broad racial or ancestral groups (e.g., East Asian, South Asian, African, European)?

1. Why the simple pie-chart people want does not exist

International population authorities (United Nations’ World Population Prospects, World Bank summaries and national censuses) report population by country, age, sex and region, not by globally consistent “race” or ancestral labels; the UN’s 2024/2025 work underpins population totals and projections but does not deliver a universal racial breakdown ^{[3] [4]}. Researchers and media sometimes map “people living in Asia/Africa/Europe” which approximates ancestry for many, but country‑based counts are what the UN and World Bank produce, not race categories ^{[3] [5]}.

2. What the authoritative totals do tell us (regions, not races)

Authoritative compilations put the world population above 8.2 billion in 2025: Worldometer references UN-based estimates and lists a global total of roughly 8.26 billion ^[1], while other aggregators cite ~8.23–8.26 billion and project growth toward 9–10 billion later this century ^{[2] [4]}. These sources emphasise that “nearly 60%” of humanity lives in Asia — a regional fact that is the closest standard statistic to an “East/South Asian” concentration without invoking contested racial categories ^{[6] [2]}.

3. How analysts typically approximate ancestry from regional population data

Because global demographic authorities give country- and region-level counts, analysts often create ancestry estimates by grouping countries (for example: India + Pakistan + Bangladesh + Sri Lanka → “South Asian”; China + Japan + Korea + Mongolia → “East Asian”; Africa by continent → “African”; Europe → “European”). That method depends on choices about borders, migration, mixed ancestry and diaspora populations; those methodological choices produce widely varying percentages and are not standardized in UN reporting (available sources do not mention a single standardized grouping by race) ^{[3] [6]}.

4. Typical rough-order expectations (based on regional population shares)

Using region-as-proxy gives a plausible, nonauthoritative sense: Asia contains the majority of the world’s people (about 59–60%), Africa is the fastest-growing region and contains a substantial share (over 15% and rising under UN scenarios), Europe comprises a much smaller share (single digits to low teens depending on definition), and the Americas and Oceania make up the remainder ^{[6] [3]}. Exact percentages for “East Asian vs South Asian vs African vs European” depend on how you partition Asia and whether you count diasporas — authoritative sources here list only the underlying country/region totals, not those racial categories ^{[6] [3]}.

5. Why different public charts diverge and what to watch for

Third‑party charts or articles that present a neat global “by race” pie often mix disparate sources, use different definitions of race/ancestry, or conflate region of residence with ancestral origin; these methodological differences explain widely divergent charts you’ll find online ^{[7] [8]}. Use caution: unless a chart cites a clear methodology tied to UN country totals or national censuses, its percentages are not authoritative ^{[2] [3]}.

6. How to produce a defensible estimate yourself

If you need numerical percentages, start from UN country population totals (World Population Prospects) or the World Bank country data, decide and document a grouping rule (which countries count as “South Asia” vs “East Asia,” how to treat Central Asia and the Middle East, and whether to include diasporas), then sum and divide by the global total; that yields a reproducible, transparent approximation grounded in the available demographic data ^{[3] [5]}.

7. Bottom line and recommended next steps

There is no single authoritative global breakdown by “race/ancestry” in the provided sources; the best available path is to rely on UN/World Bank country and regional totals and make transparent grouping choices if you must create ancestry categories ^{[3] [5]}. If you want, I can produce a clear, reproducible approximation using UN country totals and a specified grouping scheme (for example: East Asia = China, Japan, Koreas, Mongolia; South Asia = India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives), citing the exact country sums used ^{[3] [2]}.