Archive:Regional typologies overview

Authors: Lewis Dijkstra and Hugo Poelman, European Commission, DG Regio

This paper provides an overview of six regional typologies used in the 5th Cohesion Report1. The goal of each of these regional typologies is to provide an analytical and descriptive lens on these types of territories through the use of NUTS 3 data.

Not all these territories, however, can be easily identified at the NUTS 3 level, depending on the type of territory and the size and shape of the NUTS 3 region. As a result, classifications on a lower geographical level remain necessary and may capture these territories better. However, annual data availability below NUTS 3 for all of Europe is extremely limited and does not allow for regular monitoring. These typologies are not intended for direct policy use.

For each typology a short overview of the evolution of the definition, the methodology and a map are provided. Where possible, EFTA and candidate countries have been included in this paper to facilitate a wider use of these typologies. These typologies will be updated after each round of NUTS modifications.

Map 1: Urban-rural typology of NUTS3 regions including remoteness

Urban-rural typology including remoteness

Evolution

This is a new classification that combines elements from the OECD classification with the new urban-rural typology developed by the Commission2.

The OECD classification was developed in the early 1990s with a three-way classification (predominantly urban; intermediate; predominantly rural) based on the population density of districts (Local Administrative Unit Level 2 or LAU2). In 2009, the OECD3 extended its classification to include the remoteness dimension. It followed the approach developed by Dijkstra and Poelman4 who tested such an approach for the EU and found significant socio-economic differences between rural regions close to a city and remote rural regions.

The new urban-rural typology developed by the Commission takes the OECD approach based on districts and TL3 regions and applies it to population grid cells and to NUTS 3 regions. The OECD’s TL3 regions differ from NUTS 3 regions in Belgium, the Netherlands and Greece, where they are NUTS 2 regions, and in Germany, where they are spatial planning regions. The new urban-rural typology developed by the Commission does not include the remoteness dimension.

Changes and updates

This remoteness dimension has been adopted by the OECD and is not expected to change. Modifications of the road network, data about the road network, population distribution within the regions, or population size and the definition of cities, may have an impact on the classification. The new urban-rural typology as developed by the Commission has already been presented to many stakeholders for information and comments. The Commission will assess the comments and may adapt the methodology if necessary and feasible. This typology will be updated when a new population grid becomes available for the entire EU.

Methodology

The urban-rural including remoteness typology classifies all NUTS 3 regions according to criteria based on population density and population distribution (urban-rural). This classification is combined with a distinction between areas located close to city centres and areas that are remote. It creates five categories of NUTS 3 regions: 1. predominantly urban regions; 2. intermediate regions, close to a city; 3. intermediate, remote regions; 4. predominantly rural regions, close to a city; 5. predominantly rural, remote regions. Urban-rural typology The classification is completed in three steps: identify rural area population, classify NUTS 3 regions and adjust classification based on the presence of cities. Population in rural areas This typology uses a simple two-step approach to identify population in rural areas: 1. Rural areas are all areas outside urban clusters 2. Urban clusters are clusters of contiguous5 grid cells of 1 km2 with a density of at least 300 inhabitants per km2 and a minimum population of 5 000 Regional classification NUTS 3 region are classified on the basis of the share of population in rural areas: • Predominantly Rural if the share of population living in rural areas is higher than 50 %; • Intermediate, if the share of population living in rural areas is between 20 % and 50 %; • Predominantly Urban, if the share of population living in rural areas is below 20 %. To resolve the distortion created by extremely small NUTS 3 regions, regions smaller than 500 km2 are combined for classification purposes with one or more of their neighbours. Presence of cities In a third step, the size of the urban centres in the region is considered: • A predominantly rural region which contains an urban centre of more than 200 000 inhabitants representing at least 25 % of the regional population it becomes intermediate. • An intermediate region which contains an urban centre of more than 500 000 inhabitants representing at least 25 % of the regional population becomes predominantly urban. For more details consult the Chapter in the Eurostat regional yearbook 20106. Remoteness dimension All predominantly urban regions are considered close to a city. A predominantly rural or intermediate regions is considered remote if less than half of its residents can drive to the centre of a city of at least 50 000 inhabitants within 45 minutes. If more than half of the regions population can reach a city of at least 50 000, it is considered close to a city. For more details on the methodology please consult Regional Focus 01/2008.

Metro regions

Evolution

This typology was first presented in the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion7 and subsequently in a Regional Focus by Dijkstra8. They are approximations of the Larger Urban Zones (LUZs) as used in the Urban Audit. Subsequently, the EU metro regions were compared with the OECD metro regions. This led to a harmonisation of the definitions of the metro regions used by both organisations. The OECD metro regions cover only OECD member countries and focus exclusively on larger metro regions. The EU metro regions cover all metro regions with at least 250 000 inhabitants.

Changes and updates

A significant modification to a LUZ may result in a modification of its metro region. The Commission is currently undertaking a review of the Urban Audit cities and their Larger Urban Zones with the goal of making them more comparable. This will be done on the basis of joint work with the OECD on a new metro area definition based on population grids and commuting data. This may result in some modifications to the LUZ and, subsequently perhaps, to its metro region as well.

Methodology

The NUTS 3-based typology of metro regions contains groupings of NUTS 3 regions used as approximations of the main metropolitan areas. The initial methodology for the selection of the NUTS 3 components of the metro regions is based on the Urban Audit definition of Larger Urban Zones (LUZ). These LUZs contain the major cities and their surrounding travel-to-work areas. LUZs are defined as groupings of existing administrative areas (often LAU2 units). Their boundaries do not necessarily coincide with those of NUTS 3 regions. Consequently, NUTS 3 regions in which at least 50% of the regional population lives inside a given LUZ were considered to be the components of the metro region related to that LUZ. Hence, the quality of the territorial approximation depends on the average size of the NUTS 3 regions concerned. In cooperation with the OECD, refined versions of the methodology are being tested, using population distribution at a fine level of disaggregation (1 km²) to identify the cores of the metro regions. Census-based local commuting data are then used to define contiguous areas around the cores, where substantial levels of commuting to these cores occur. This approach has resulted in revised definitions of the extent of several metro regions. The typology distinguishes three types of metro regions: 1. capital city regions; 2. second-tier metro regions; 3. smaller metro regions. The capital city region is the metro region which includes the national capital. Second-tier metro regions are the group of largest cities in the country excluding the capital. For this purpose, a fixed population threshold could not be used. As a result, a natural break served the purpose of distinguishing the second tier from the smaller metro regions. The distinction between second tier and smaller metro regions may be adapted in future to provide a closer match with the distinctions used in, especially national, policy debates.

Further Eurostat information

Publications

• Regional typologies: a compilation

Dedicated section

• Regions and cities, see:

City statistics - Urban Audit

External links

• European Commission - Joint Research Centre
• European Environment Agency - Population density disaggregated with Corine land cover 2000
• European Forum for GeoStatistics
• OECD REGIONAL TYPOLOGY (pdf file, 1.93 Mb)

See also

• European cities
• European cities - demographic challenges
• European cities - spatial dimension (Background article)
• Urban rankings
• Urban-rural typology (Background article)