On the ‘Urbanness’ of Metropolitan Areas: Testing the Homogeneity Assumption, 1970–2000



In recent decades, population dynamics, have made definitions of what localities are rural or urban somewhat unclear. The vast majority of demographic work has simply used metropolitan classifications with various forms of a non-metropolitan residual (e.g., adjacent to metro versus non-adjacent). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) periodically redefines metropolitan areas, which makes temporal comparisons difficult. In fact, some demographers have offered the idea that, due to these shifting reclassifications, the so-called “rural rebound” is a misnomer, in that non-metropolitan counties that transitioned to metropolitan status were, in fact, already more ‘urban’ than those that did not become reclassified as metropolitan (Johnson et al 2005). This argument depends largely on the assumption of homogeneity in rural or urban ‘character’ in those counties. Following arguments by others (Wilkinson 1991; Isserman 2001; Bogue 1950), we take population and land use into account to examine whether these transitional counties were more or less urban than comparable others, all at the county level for the contiguous 48 states for 1970–2000. Our results show that adjacent non-metropolitan counties that were later reclassified as metropolitan were indeed characterized by a larger population and heavier urban land cover than those not making this transition. However, the results also show that metropolitan areas were also quite heterogeneous in terms of traditionally rural activities. A discussion of the homogeneity assumption in demographers’ conceptualization of metropolitan areas is included.


Metropolitan classification Urban GIS LULC Remote sensing Population trends 1970–2000 


  1. Anselin, L. (1995). Local indicators of spatial association—LISA. Geographical Analysis, 27, 93–115.Google Scholar
  2. Bailey, K. (1994). “Typologies and taxonomies: An introduction to classification techniques”. #102: Quantitative applications in the social sciences series. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Bogue, D. J. (1950). Changes in population distribution since 1940. American Journal of Sociology, 56(1), 43–57. doi:10.1086/220642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, D. L., & Zuiches, J. J. (1993). Rural-urban population redistribution in the united states at the end of the twentieth century. In D. L. Brown, D. Field, & J. J. Zuiches (Eds.), The demography of rural life (pp. 1–18). University Park, PA: Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development.Google Scholar
  5. Frey, W. H. (1987). Migration and depopulation of the metropolis: Regional restructuring or rural renaissance? American Sociological Review, 52(2), 240–257. doi:10.2307/2095452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Frey, W. H., & Spear, A., Jr. (1992). The revival of the metropolitan population growth in the United States: An assessment of findings from the 1990 census. Population and Development Review, 18(1), 129–146. doi:10.2307/1971864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fuguitt, G. V., Heaton, T. B., & Lichter, D. T. (1988). Monitoring the metropolitanization process. Demography, 25(1), 115–128. doi:10.2307/2061481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. GARM. (1994). “Geographical Areas Reference Manual”. U.S. Department of Commerce: Bureau of the Census. Issued November 1994.Google Scholar
  9. Gaspar, J., & Glaeser, E. (1997). Information technology and the future of cities. Journal of Urban Economics, 43, 136–156. doi:10.1006/juec.1996.2031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Glaeser, E., & Kahn, M. (2004). Sprawl and urban growth. In J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (Eds.), Handbook of regional and urban economics (Vol. 4, Chapter 56, pp. 2482–2525). NY, USA: North Holland Press.Google Scholar
  11. Glaeser, E., Scheinkman, J., & Shleifer, A. (1995). Economic growth in a cross-section of cities. Journal of Monetary Economics, 36, 117–143. doi:10.1016/0304-3932(95)01206-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Halfacree, K. (2004). Rethinking rurality. In T. Chapman & G. Hugo (Eds.), New forms of urbanization: Beyond the urban-rural dichotomy. Bodmin, Cornwall: MPG Books Ltd.Google Scholar
  13. Hawley, A. (1950). (Reprinted in 1986). Human ecology: A theoretical essay. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Homer, C., & Gallant, A. (2000). Partitioning the conterminous United States into mapping zones for Landsat TM land cover mapping. USGS, Chapter 1, National Mapping Division.Google Scholar
  15. Isserman, A. M. (2001). Competitive advantages of rural america in the next century. International Regional Science Review, 24(1), 38–58. doi:10.1177/016001701761013006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnson, K. M., Nucci, A., & Long, L. (2005). Population trends in metropolitan America: Selective deconcentration and the rural rebound. Population Research and Policy Review, 24, 527–542. doi:10.1007/s11113-005-4479-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Luloff, A. E., & Befort, W. A. (1989). Land use change and aerial photography: Lessons for applied sociology. Rural Sociology, 54(1), 92–105.Google Scholar
  18. Lichter, D. T., & Fuguitt, G. V. (1982). The transition of nonmetropolitan population deconcentration. Demography, 19(2), 211–221. doi:10.2307/2061191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lichter, D. T., Fuguitt, G. V., & Heaton, T. B. (1985). Components of nonmetropolitan population change: The contribution of rural areas. Rural Sociology, 50(1), 88–98.Google Scholar
  20. Massey, D. S., & Denton, N. A. (1993). Segregation and the making of the underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. McCarthy, K. F., & Morrison, P. A. (1977). The changing demographic and economic structure of nonmetropolitan areas in the United States. Interregional Science Review, 2, 123–142. doi:10.1177/016001767700200202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Menard, S. (2001). Applied logistic regression analysis, Sage University paper series on quantitative applications in the social sciences, 07–106. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Nelson, A. C., & Sanchez, T. W. (1999). Debunking the exurban myth: A comparison of suburban households. Housing Policy Debate, 10(3), 689–709.Google Scholar
  24. Ormsby, T., Napoleon, E., Burke, R., Groessl, C., & Feaster, L. (2001). Getting to Know ArcGIS Desktop: Basics of ArcView, ArcEditor, and ArcInfo. Redlands, CA: ESRI Press.Google Scholar
  25. Schnore, L. F. (1957). The growth of metropolitan suburbs. American Sociological Review, 22(2), 165–173. doi:10.2307/2088853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schnore, L. F. (1961). Geography and human ecology. Economic Geography, 37(3), 207–217. doi:10.2307/142087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Theobald, D. M. (2001). Quantifying urban and rural sprawl using the sprawl index. Annual Association of American Geographers Conference, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  28. Thomas, J. K., & Howell, F. M. (2003). Metropolitan proximity and U.S. Agricultural Productivity, 1978–1997. Rural Sociology, 68(3), 366–386.Google Scholar
  29. Waldinger, R. (1996). Still the promised city? African Americans and new immigrants in postindustrial New York. London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Waldinger, R., & Bozorgmehr, M. (Eds.). (1996). Ethnic Los Angeles New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  31. Whatmore, S. (1993). On doing rural research (or breaking the boundaries). Environment & Planning A, 32, 695–714.Google Scholar
  32. Wilkinson, K. P. (1991). The rural-urban variable in community research. In The community in rural America (pp. 37–59). Middleton, WS: Social Ecology Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sociology-MS28Rice UniversityHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Emory UniversityAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations