Changes in Metropolitan Area Definition, 1910-2010
February 2021
Working Paper Number:
CES-21-04
Abstract
The Census Bureau was established as a permanent agency in 1902, as industrialization and urbanization were bringing about rapid changes in American society. The years following the establishment of a permanent Census Bureau saw the first attempts at devising statistical geography for tabulating statistics for large cities and their environs. These efforts faced several challenges owing to the variation in settlement patterns, political organization, and rates of growth across the United States. The 1910 census proved to be a watershed, as the Census Bureau offered a definition of urban places, established the first census tract boundaries for tabulating data within cities, and introduced the first standardized metropolitan area definition. It was not until the middle of the twentieth century, however, the Census Bureau in association with other statistical agencies had established a flexible standard metropolitan definition and a more consistent means of tabulating urban data. Since 1950, the rules for determining the cores and extent of metropolitan areas have been largely regarded as comparable. In the decades that followed, however, a number of rule changes were put into place that accounted for metropolitan complexity in differing ways, and these have been the cause of some confusion. Changes put into effect with the 2000 census represent a consensus of sorts for how to handle these issues.
Document Tags and Keywords
Keywords
Keywords are automatically generated using KeyBERT, a powerful and innovative
keyword extraction tool that utilizes BERT embeddings to ensure high-quality and contextually relevant
keywords.
By analyzing the content of working papers, KeyBERT identifies terms and phrases that capture the essence of the
text, highlighting the most significant topics and trends. This approach not only enhances searchability but
provides connections that go beyond potentially domain-specific author-defined keywords.
:
census data,
metropolitan,
measure,
geographically,
population,
urban,
town,
urbanization,
city,
geography,
district,
neighborhood,
suburb,
research census,
resident,
geographic
Tags
Tags are automatically generated using a pretrained language model from spaCy, which excels at
several tasks, including entity tagging.
The model is able to label words and phrases by part-of-speech,
including "organizations." By filtering for frequent words and phrases labeled as "organizations", papers are
identified to contain references to specific institutions, datasets, and other organizations.
:
Metropolitan Statistical Area,
Office of Management and Budget,
New England County Metropolitan,
Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Areas,
American Community Survey,
Core Based Statistical Area,
2010 Census
Similar Working Papers
Similarity between working papers are determined by an unsupervised neural
network model
know as Doc2Vec.
Doc2Vec is a model that represents entire documents as fixed-length vectors, allowing for the
capture of semantic meaning in a way that relates to the context of words within the document. The model learns to
associate a unique vector with each document while simultaneously learning word vectors, enabling tasks such as
document classification, clustering, and similarity detection by preserving the order and structure of words. The
document vectors are compared using cosine similarity/distance to determine the most similar working papers.
Papers identified with 🔥 are in the top 20% of similarity.
The 10 most similar working papers to the working paper 'Changes in Metropolitan Area Definition, 1910-2010' are listed below in order of similarity.
-
Working PaperApplying Current Core Based Statistical Area Standards to Historical Census Data, 1940-2020🔥
January 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-10
In the middle of the twentieth century, the Bureau of the Budget, in conjunction with the Census Bureau and other federal statistical agencies, introduced a widely used unit of statistical geography, the county-based Standard Metropolitan Area. Metropolitan definitions since then have been generally regarded as comparable, but methodological changes have resulted in comparability issues, particularly among the largest and most complex metro areas. With the 2000 census came an effort to simplify the rules for defining metro areas. This study attempts to gather all available historical geographic and commuting data to apply the current rules for defining metro areas to create comparable statistical geography covering the period from 1940 to 2020. The changes that accompanied the 2000 census also brought a new category, "Micropolitan Statistical Areas," which established a metro hierarchy. This research expands on this approach, using a more elaborate hierarchy based on the size of urban cores. The areas as delineated in this paper provide a consistent set of statistical geography that can be used in a wide variety of applications.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperMetropolitan Segregation: No Breakthrough in Sight🔥
May 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-14
The 2020 Census offers new information on changes in residential segregation in metropolitan regions across the country as they continue to become more diverse. We take a long view, assessing trends since 1980 and extrapolating to the future. These new data mostly reinforce patterns that were observed a decade ago: high but slowly declining black-white segregation, and less intense but hardly changing segregation of Hispanics and Asians from whites. Enough time has passed since the civil rights era of the 1960s and 1970s to draw this conclusion: segregation will continue to divide Americans well into the 21st Century.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperUrban-Suburban Migration in the United States, 1955-2000
February 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-08
This study uses census microdata from 1960 to 2010 to look at the rates of suburbanization in the 100 largest metro areas. Looking at the racial and ethnic composition of the population, and then further breaking down these groups by income, it's clear that more affluent people were more likely to move to the suburbs. Also, the White non-Hispanic population has long been the most suburbanized group. A majority of the White population lived in suburbs by 1960 in the 100 largest metro areas, while most of the Black non-Hispanic population lived in urban core areas as late as 2000. The Hispanic and Asian populations went from majority urban to majority suburban during this period.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperPoverty Estimates for Places in the United States
September 2005
Working Paper Number:
CES-05-12
This paper first describes some historical poverty trends, overall and for demographic groups and broad locations within the U.S. from an ongoing household survey, and then presents some specific information on poverty for localities by size, from the most recent decennial census (2000). Rural poverty exceeded urban poverty in 1969 and 1979, but urban poverty in 1999 was higher than rural poverty. Non-metropolitan area poverty exceeded metropolitan area poverty in each of the four censuses, but within each of those areas, rural poverty is now less than urban poverty. Within metropolitan areas, poverty is highest for those in central cities. For urbanized areas (50,000 or more population), the poverty rate is lower as the area gets larger, with the exception of the very largest-sized areas. This higher poverty for the largest places is accounted for entirely by the higher poverty rate for the central city or cities in those urban agglomerations, as the poverty rates for the parts of the urbanized areas not in the central place continue to fall as the area itself gets larger. Some of the critical relationships affecting the poverty rate of places appear to be the location of certain types of people - female householders, non-citizens, people of color, and college graduates.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperStructural versus Ethnic Dimensions of Housing Segregation
March 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-22
Racial residential segregation is still very high in many American cities. Some portion of segregation is attributable to socioeconomic differences across racial lines; some portion is caused by purely racial factors, such as preferences about the racial composition of one's neighborhood or discrimination in the housing market. Social scientists have had great difficulty disaggregating segregation into a portion that can be explained by interracial differences in socioeconomic characteristics (what we call structural factors) versus a portion attributable to racial and ethnic factors. What would such a measure look like? In this paper, we draw on a new source of data to develop an innovative structural segregation measure that shows the amount of segregation that would remain if we could assign households to housing units based only on non-racial socioeconomic characteristics. This inquiry provides vital building blocks for the broader enterprise of understanding and remedying housing segregation.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Racial and Ethnic Composition of Local Government Employees in Large Metro Areas, 1960-2010
August 2013
Working Paper Number:
CES-13-38
This study uses census microdata from 1960 to 2010 to look at how the racial and ethnic composition of local government employees has reflected the diversity of the general population in the 100 largest metro areas over the last half century. Historically, one route to upward social mobility has been employment in local government. This study uses microdata that predates key immigration and civil rights legislation of the 1960s through to the present to examine changes in the racial and ethnic composition of local government employees and in the general population. For this study, local government employees have been divided into high- and low-wage occupations. These data indicate that local workforces have grown more diverse over time, though representation across different racial and ethnic groups and geographic areas is uneven. African-Americans were underrepresented in high-wage local government employment and overrepresented in low-wage jobs in the early years of this study, particularly in the South, but have since become proportionally represented in high-wage jobs on a national level. In contrast, the most recent data indicate that Hispanic and other races are underrepresented in this employment group, particularly in the West. Though the numbers of Hispanic and Asian high-wage local government employees are increasing, it appears that it will take several years for those groups to achieve proportional representation throughout the United States.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperForeign-Born Out-Migration from New Destinations: The Effects of Economic Conditions and Nativity Concentration
April 2010
Working Paper Number:
CES-10-09
Immigrants living in new destinations in 1995 were 2.5 times more likely to undertake a labor market migration by 2000 as those living in traditional places. This paper looks at two competing explanations for immigrants' differential secondary migration, namely nativity concentration versus labor market context. Utilizing confidential Census data for 1990 and 2000, we examine out-migration from 741 labor markets that cover the entire country and develop new destination classifications specific to the growth and composition patterns of foreign-born from the largest Asian, Latin American and Caribbean foreign-born groups, and Canadians. The hypothesis guiding the analysis was that immigrants would be less likely to leave labor markets that have both robust economic conditions and high levels of compatriot affinity as measured by nativity concentration. The combined and group models provide strong support for the argument that immigrant's out-migration decisions respond both to local labor market economic conditions and compatriot availability, net of human capital and national origin.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperBlack Pioneers, Intermetropolitan Movers, and Housing Desegregation
March 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-23
In this project, we examine the mobility choices of black households between 1960 and 2000. We use household-level Decennial Census data geocoded down to the census tract level. Our results indicate that, for black households, one's status as an intermetropolitan migrant ' especially from an urban area outside the South ' is a powerful predictor of pioneering into a white neighborhood. Moreover, and perhaps even more importantly, the ratio of these intermetropolitan black arrivals to the incumbent metropolitan black population is a powerful predictor of whether a metropolitan area experiences substantial declines in housing segregation.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperChanges in Neighborhood Inequality, 2000-2010
March 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-18
Recent work has suggested that higher income inequality may be a desirable attribute of a neighborhood in that it represents diversity, even though high (and rising) inequality appears to be detrimental to the nation as a whole. The research reported here has determined the key characteristics of a census tract that are associated with the level of inequality in 2000 or 2010, and those associated with changes in income inequality between 2000 and 2010. For the change, the strongest influence is a negative effect for the level of income inequality in 2000; that is, higher income inequality in 2000 leads to a decline over the decade, ceteris paribus. Neighborhoods with higher proportions or levels of the following population and housing characteristics tend to have both higher income inequality and a larger increase in income inequality between 2000 and 2010: individuals in poverty, those with a bachelor's degree, older individuals, householders living alone, and median rent, and lower median housing value and household income. Among these, perhaps the most important determinant is the percent in poverty in 2000. Furthermore, as the baseline level of demographic and economic diversity increases, the better the baseline and change characteristics explain the change in the Gini index from 2000 to 2010.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperMore than a Million New American Indians in 2000: Who are They?
March 2013
Working Paper Number:
CES-13-02
Over a million people reported their race as American Indian in the 2000 U.S. Census but did not report that race in the 1990 Census. We investigate three questions related to this extraordinary population change: (1) Which subgroups of American Indians had the greatest numerical growth? (2) Which subgroups had the greatest proportional increase? And (3) is it plausible that all 'new' American Indians reported multiple races in 2000? We use full-count and high-density decennial U.S. census data; adjust for birth, death, and immigration; decompose on age, gender, Latino origin, education, and birth state; and compare the observed American Indian subgroup sizes in 2000 to the sizes expected based on 1990 counts. The largest numerical increases were among non-Latino youth (ages 10-19), non-Latino adult women, and adults with no college degree. Latinos, highly-educated adults, and women have the largest proportionate gains, perhaps indicating that 'American Indian' has special appeal in these groups. We also find evidence that a substantial number of new American Indians reported only American Indian race in 2000, rather than a multiple-race response. This research is relevant to social theorists, race scholars, community members, program evaluators, and the Census Bureau.View Full Paper PDF
