Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity
I scoured both the US Census site and StatsCan and came up empty so could you provide a link to that info please?
|
First link (for the USA):
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/def...s-Complete.pdf
From pg. 37248:
"OMB’s Decisions Regarding
Recommendations From the
Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Area Standards Review
Committee Concerning Changes to the
Standards for Defining Metropolitan
and Micropolitan Statistical Areas .... Adjacent core based statistical areas
(CBSAs) should automatically qualify
for combination if they possess an
employment interchange measure of 15
or higher."
Further down:" Section 8. Combining Adjacent Core
Based Statistical Areas
(a) Any two adjacent CBSAs will form
a Combined Statistical Area if the
employment interchange measure
between the two areas is at least 15. "
For Canada:
http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recen...eo009a-eng.cfm
The definitions are more complex, but:
"Merging adjacent CMAs and CAs: A CA adjacent to a CMA can be merged with the CMA if the total percentage commuting interchange between the CA and CMA is equal to at least 35% of the employed labour force living in the CA, based on place of work data from the decennial census. The total percentage commuting interchange is the sum of the commuting flow in both directions between the CMA and the CA as a percentage of the labour force living in the CA (i.e., resident employed labour force)."
Therefore, when comparing USA MSAs with Canadian CMAs, it would appear that Canadian figures maybe much more conservative, and explain why places like Okotoks are not part of Calgary's CMA, or why Hamilton, Barrie and Oshawa are not part of Toronto's CMA.