Using
the 2003 Urban Influence Codes To Understand
Rural America |
|
County-level data analysis adds depth to research on
rural America. The size of the largest city or town
in a county determines the variety of goods and services
available and the adequacy of the labor supply to meet
business needs. Proximity to larger economies also has
a significant effect on county development, as easy
access to larger centers of information, trade, health
care, and finance may connect the county to national
and international marketplaces. These basic concepts
underpin ERS's new 2003 urban influence codes,
which were developed to help researchers and policymakers
understand geographic differences in economic opportunities
at the county level. The importance of city size and
adjacency to larger places is reflected in various county-level
measures, such as population change, educational attainment,
managerial/professional employment, and earnings.
ERS's 2003 urban influence codes divide counties,
county equivalents, and independent cities in the United
States into 12 groups—2 metropolitan (metro) and
10 nonmetropolitan (nonmetro) (see Behind
the Data). Metro counties are either large (those
with populations of 1 million or more) or small (those
with less than a million residents). Nonmetro counties
are first classified as either micropolitan (with an
urban core of at least 10,000 residents) or noncore
(without an urban core that large). The micropolitan
(micro) counties are further classified by adjacency
to a large metro area, a small metro area, or no metro
area. The noncore counties are further classified by
adjacency to metro or micro areas and by whether or
not they have a town of at least 2,500 residents. The
2003 urban influence codes are based on the
June 2003 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) definitions
of metro and nonmetro areas.
Education, occupation, and
earnings by urban influence |
|
|
Share
of
residents 25
and older with at least a bachelor's degree, 2000
|
Share
of employed
civilians 16
and older with managerial or professional jobs, 2000
|
|
|
|
|
|
United
States
|
|
|
|
|
Metro:
|
Large
|
|
|
|
|
Small
|
|
|
|
|
Micro:
|
Adjacent
to large metro
|
|
|
|
|
Adjacent
to small metro
|
|
|
|
|
Not
adjacent to a metro area
|
|
|
|
|
Noncore:
|
Adjacent
to large metro
|
|
|
|
|
Adjacent
to small metro with own town
|
|
|
|
|
Adjacent
to small metro no town
|
|
|
|
|
Adjacent
to micro with own town
|
|
|
|
|
Adjacent
to micro no town
|
|
|
|
|
Not
adjacent to metro/micro with own town
|
|
|
|
|
Not
adjacent to metro/micro no town
|
|
|
|
|
Sources:
Education and occupation calculated using data
from the 2000 Census of Population; earnings
calculated using data from the Bureau of Economic
Analysis' Regional Economic Information System.
|
Population change
Between 1990 and 2000, population grew fastest in large
metro counties and in nonmetro counties adjacent to
them. Nonmetro counties adjacent to large metro areas
grew faster than small metro areas did. This
contrasts with population change in the 1980s, when
all types of nonmetro counties grew more slowly than
both large and small metro counties. Much of the growth
in adjacent nonmetro counties is due to spillover effects
as residents of large metro areas moved to such counties
for rural amenities or lower housing costs. Nonmetro
micro counties had higher population growth than noncore
counties. And, within noncore counties, those with towns
grew more than those without towns. Small towns often
serve as regional service centers for surrounding counties
without such towns.
Educational attainment
The highest shares of persons with college degrees are
found in large (28 percent) and small (23 percent) metro
areas. These areas also have large numbers of professional
and managerial jobs (employing about one-third of civilian
workers) that generally require a college degree. Micro
counties adjacent to large and small metro areas have
lower proportions of persons with college degrees (16
percent) than nonadjacent micro counties (18 percent).
The college-educated are more likely to find jobs and
live in metro areas, partially explaining the lower
proportion of college graduates in adjacent micro counties.
Nonadjacent micro counties have more college-educated
residents because they are often home to small colleges
and universities and serve as regional centers of specialized
services.
Among noncore counties, those adjacent to metro or
micro areas have lower shares of college graduates (12-13
percent) than nonadjacent noncore counties (15-16 percent).
Lacking direct competition from larger communities in
professional and managerial services, nonadjacent noncore
counties have slightly higher shares of residents employed
in such jobs (28-30 percent) than adjacent counties
(24-25 percent) .
Earnings
Earnings per job are far higher in metro areas (both
large and small) than in any of the nonmetro county
groups. Large metro areas averaged $43,102 per job and
small metro areas $32,417 per job, compared with $20,431
to $27,200 per job in nonmetro counties. Among micro
counties, those adjacent to large metro areas had the
highest earnings per job—$27,200. Competition
for workers from large metro areas may push employers
in adjacent micro counties to offer higher wages. Micro
counties adjacent to small metro areas had earnings
per job ($26,847) only slightly higher than nonadjacent
micro areas ($26,403). Because average earnings in small
metro areas are much lower than in large metro areas,
small metro areas apparently provide less competitive
pressure on wages than large metro areas.
Noncore counties with towns average higher earnings
than those without towns. Adjacency to either metro
or micro areas does not seem to boost earnings in noncore
counties. Just as higher percentages of college graduates
and workers in professional and managerial jobs are
found in nonadjacent-noncore counties, earnings per
job are higher in noncore counties with towns than in
adjacent-noncore counties with towns.
|
|
|
This article is drawn from...
|
|
Urban Influence
Codes data page
Measuring Rurality
briefing room
|