Rethinking Urban-Rural
and the Barriers Between
Statistical and Programmatic Uses
Michael Ratcliffe, Census Bureau
John Cromartie, Economic Research Service
Introduction
• The Census Bureau does not take programmatic uses
into account when developing statistical geographic
area concepts or when delineating areas.
• It is important to maintain this separation; we cannot
allow concepts to be degraded by program-specific
needs, desires, and local biases.
• But, recent experience has suggested that we should
start a conversation about the interplay between
statistical geography for data tabulation/presentation
and uses related to policy making and program
implementation.
2
What we heard in response to the 2010
proposed urban area criteria
• Local planning agencies/transportation planners expressed
concerns about changes to boundaries and criteria and
impacts on long range planning
• Questions raised about the Census Bureau's urban area
definitions and the way in which local and state planning
groups define and perceive urban areas
• Desire for a closer relationship between the urban area
concept and criteria and uses in programs and planning
• More outreach and discussion with groups using urban/rural
definitions for long range planning and policy analysis
Urban and Rural in the United States
How do we define “urban” and “rural?”
• Classifications tend to be dichotomous:
– Urban and Rural;
– Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan
– Rural/nonmetropolitan are residual categories
• Classifications tend to describe:
– Form (settlement patterns); or
– Function (economic and social relationships)
4
Census Bureau’s Urban-Rural Classification
• The Census Bureau identifies and classifies urban and rural areas after
each decennial census.
• Urban areas of at least 2,500 people have been identified since 1906.
• Urbanized areas of 50,000 or more people were first defined for the
1950 Census. Urban places of at least 2,500 people were identified
outside urbanized areas. Urban clusters of 2,500 - 49,999 were first
defined after Census 2000.
• The Census Bureau identifies
urban and rural areas solely
for the purpose of tabulating
and presenting statistical
data.
5
Questions for consideration
• Do we define urban and rural areas solely for tabulation and
dissemination of data about urban and rural populations?
• Or, to provide baseline definitions for use in policy analysis and
planning?
• Are the categories and entities we define, and the criteria used to
define them, adequate for planning and policy needs?
• How do we manage situations in which program-specific definitions
create contradictory goals, comments on proposed criteria, and
desired outcomes among local organizations in the same area?
Considerations for the Future
• Develop an urban-rural continuum identifying the
variety of urban, suburban, exurban, and rural
landscapes.
– Rather than creating a new classification, is there a way to
leverage existing classifications to create a continuum?
• Identify functional relationships between urban areas.
– Combined Urban Areas
• Identify urban sub-regions or subdivisions within
larger agglomerations.
7
Exurban development: rural Howard County, Maryland,
Baltimore-Towson Metropolitan Statistical Area
8
Functional ties
between urban
areas:
33% of workers
residing in the
Hartselle urban
cluster worked within
the Decatur
urbanized area,
according to Census
2000 data.
9
Decatur, AL
Daily
commuting
flow
Hartselle, AL
Large Urban
Agglomerations:
Northeastern
Megalopolis
10
Defining rural is a challenge
for USDA
• We share a common image of rural—open countryside and
small towns at some distance from major urban centers—but
lack a common definition.
• Establishing a common definition is difficult…
– drawing a line through a continuum
– suburbs combine urban and rural elements
– gentle gradations are a U.S. hallmark
• …and needlessly limiting
– research on rural issues requires different perspectives
– federal programs need to target different populations
Defining rural is a challenge
for USDA
• Dozens of definitions exist
–
–
–
–
Census Bureau
Office of Management and Budget
USDA
HUD, HHS, States, ngo’s, researchers
• BUT: All of the differences boil down to two
questions:
1. For any given urban entity, where is the
boundary?
2. What is the minimum population size for
an entity to be considered urban?
Question 1: For any given urban
entity, where is the boundary?
Three concepts of urban lead to different boundaries:
• Administrative: cities are legal entities defined
along municipal or other jurisdictional boundaries
– Census Places
• Land-use: cities are densely-settled territory—the
picture of settlement you get from an airplane
– Census Urban Areas
• Economic: cities are labor markets—commuting
areas extend well beyond densely settled cores
– OMB Metro Areas
Question 1: For any given urban
entity, where is the boundary?
Question 2: What is the minimum population size
for an entity to be considered urban?
• Any rural definition includes some
set of towns and villages below a
chosen population threshold:
–
–
–
–
Census Bureau: 2,500
USDA Rural Utilities Program: 10,000
USDA Rural Housing: 25,000
OMB: 50,000
Question 2: What is the minimum population size
for an entity to be considered urban?
• Massive urbanization in the 20th Century dramatically
increased the average size of cities and concentrated
services into larger regional centers.
• Most rural areas are no longer economically organized
around towns of 2,500, but are more typically centered
around Micropolitan Areas
• This argues for higher urban-size thresholds compared with
100 years ago, when higher levels of central-place services
were available in smaller towns.
Question 2: What is the minimum population size
for an entity to be considered urban?
• Research offers limited guidance on
choosing an appropriate threshold—
not enough work applying central
place theory
• USDA has adjusted eligibility
thresholds upward over the years
• Census urban-size threshold (2,500)
unchanged from horse-and-buggy
days
Question 2: What is the minimum population
size for an entity to be considered urban?
Conclusions
• Potential to improve efficiency of federal
programs
• Multiple definitions serve multiple purposes
• Choices should be driven by goals:
– Tracking sprawl
– Studying economic impacts
– Providing rural housing subsidies
– Making rural business loans