MTT Research Package

8/9/2019 MTT Research Package

1/405

CATEGORIESOFPEOPLEPages 1 30CausesofDeathsinChildrenYoungerthan5YearsinChinain2008

TheGreatIndianDivide

LebanonIlliteracyReportShowsAlarmingUrbanRuralDivide

RuralLifeinCrisisasYoungPeopleForcedOut

PopulationofIndia

60%ofHIVPositivePeopleinIndiaLiveinRuralAreas

AnAnalysisoftheRuralPovertyfromPeoplesPerspectivesCULTURALADVANTAGES.Pages 31 199

DifferencesinUrbanandRuralBritain

RuralandSmallTownCanadaAnalysisBulletin,Vol.3,No.3

AReviewofUrbanandRuralAreaDefinitions,ProjectReport

CURRENTPOLICIES.Pages 200 214ReinventingRuralPolicy

FarmProgramPays$1.3BilliontoPeopleWhoDontFarmECONOMICADVANTAGES.Pages 215 239

RuralDisadvantage

RuralRealities:HomegrownResponsestoEconomicUncertaintyinRuralAmerica

AgricultureHoldsKeytoFutureGrowth,Employment,andPoverty:President

EDUCATIONALADVANTAGES.Pages 240 263

100VillagePrimarySchoolMusicClassroomsProgram

AustralianRuralStudentsFaceSevereDisadvantage

ItTakesaVillage:CommunitybasedEducationinRuralCambodia

ImprovingQualityinRuralSchools

WorldBankHelpsImproveRuralEducationinRomaniaSchoolImprovementPrograms

LowEducationLevelsChallengeMuchofRuralAmerica

EmergentIssuesforRuralEducation

StudentEngagementandAchievementINDIGENOUSPEOPLE...Pages 264 281

IndigenousPeopleandClimateChangeTheKimberlyDeclarationSustainableDevelopmentandIndigenousPeoplesGoodUrbanGovernanceandInclusiveCitiesIndigenousPeoplesUrbanIndigenousPeoplesandMigration:ChallengesandOpportunities

PARTICULARCOUNTRIESPages 282 365ChinasRuralMillionLeftBehind

FranceFearsDeathofVillageLifeasCafsCallLastOrders

ThreattoRuralLifeasMoreYoungPeopleQuittheCountryside

RuralLifeinCrisisasYoungPeopleForcedOut

AmishCommunitiesFacingHealthCrisis

Without'BarefootDoctors,'China'sRuralFamiliesSuffer

TECHNOLOGICALADVANTAGES.Pages 366 395

TheRoleandValueofLocalKnowledgeinJamaicanAgriculture

Motion:ThisHouseBelievesifthePromiseofTechnologyistoSimplifyourLives,ithasFailed

VerticalFarming


2/405

CATEGORIESOFPEOPLE

Articles

CausesofDeathsinChildrenYoungerthan5YearsinChinain2008 Page1

TheGreatIndianDivide Page9

LebanonIlliteracyReportShowsAlarmingUrbanRuralDivide Page15

RuralLifeinCrisisasYoungPeopleForcedOut Page18

Populationof

India

Page

20

60%ofHIVPositivePeopleinIndiaLiveinRuralAreas Page24

AnAnalysisoftheRuralPovertyfromPeoplesPerspectives Page25


3/405

Title: Causesofdeathsinchildrenyoungerthan5yearsinChinain2008

Published: March27,2010

TheLancet,Volume375,Number9720,pp10831089By: IgorRudan*,KitYeeChan*, JianSFZhang,EvropiTheodoratou,Xing LinFeng, JoshuaA

Salomon,JoyELawn,SimonCousens,RobertEBlack,YanGuo,HarryCampbell,onbehalf

ofWHO/UNICEFs

Child

Health

Epidemiology

Reference

Group

(CHERG)

Source: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS01406736(10)600608/fulltext

Summary

Therearesignificantdiscrepancies inchildhealthacrossdifferentregionsofChina.Accordingtothisarticle,

[c]hildrenborninpoorruralareaswerethreetosixtimesmorelikelytodiebeforetheirfifthbirthdaythan

werethoseborninurbanorbetteroffruralareas.Therearedifferencesinothermeasuresofhealthaswell.

Peopleinurbanareasspendthreetimesasmuchaspeopleinruralareasonhealthcare.Inurbanareasthere

arealso

significantly

more

healthcare

workers

and

hospital

beds

per

person.

Page 1


4/405

Articles

www.thelancet.com Vol 375 March 27, 2010 1083

Lancet 2010; 375: 108389

See Commentpage 1055

and 1058

*Joint first authors. Joint

corresponding authors.

Centre for Population Health

Sciences, University of

Edinburgh Medical School,

Edinburgh, UK

(Prof I Rudan MD,

E Theodoratou PhD,

Prof H Campbell MD); Croatian

Centre for Global Health,

University of Split Medical

School, Split, Croatia

(Prof I Rudan); Nossal Institute

for Global Health, University of

Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC,

Australia (K Y Chan PhD,

J S F Zhang MSc); School of

Public Health, Peking

University, Beijing, China

(K Y Chan, X L Feng PhD,

Prof Y Guo PhD); Harvard School

of Public Health, Boston, MA,

USA (J A Salomon PhD); Saving

Newborn Lives/Save the

Children, Cape Town, South

Africa (J E Lawn PhD); London

School of Hygiene and Tropical

Medicine, London, UK

(Prof S Cousens MA); and Johns

Hopkins Bloomberg School of

Public Health, Baltimore, MD,

USA (Prof R E Black MD)

Correspondence to:

Prof Harry Campbell, Centre for

Population Health Sciences,

University of Edinburgh Medical

School, Teviot Place,Edinburgh EH8 9AG, UK

[email protected]

Prof Yan Guo, School of Public

Health, Institute of Global

Health, Peking University Health

Science Centre, 38 Xueyuan

Road, Hai Dian District, Beijing

100083, China

[email protected]

Causes of deaths in children younger than 5 years in Chinain 2008

Igor Rudan*, Kit Yee Chan*, Jian S F Zhang, Evropi Theodoratou, Xing Lin Feng, Joshua A Salomon, Joy E Lawn, Simon Cousens, Robert E Black,

Yan Guo, Harry Campbell, on behalf of WHO/UNICEFs Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group (CHERG)

SummaryBackground Previous estimates of the global burden of disease for children have not included much information fromChina, leading to a large gap in data. We identified the main causes of deaths in neonates (


5/405

Articles

1084 www.thelancet.com Vol 375 March 27, 2010

children (


6/405

Articles


number of deaths in children (


7/405

Articles


the report; or decision to submit the paper for publication.The corresponding authors had full access to all the datain the study and had final responsibility for the decisionto submit for publication.

ResultsIn China, during 19902008, mortality rates in neonates,

postneonatal infants, and children (


8/405

Articles


fewer than five in Shanghai (ie, better than in manywestern countries) to more than 38 in Sichuan andGuizhoueight times higher. Although congenitalabnormalities are now the leading cause of child deathsin the six wealthiest provinces (Shanghai, Tianjin,Beijing, Jilin, Jiangsu, and Guangdong), the poorestprovinces still have a large burden of deaths frompneumonia, birth asphyxia, and accidents.

DiscussionIn China, during 2008, the most frequent causes of

deaths in children (


9/405

Articles


Although the association between Chinas one childfamily policy, and its implications for reporting andabortion practices1921 is worth investigation, we do notbelieve that it has a direct relevance to the estimates of

livebirths that are presented in this report because of theway in which we derived them. The reported rate ofprogress in reduction of child mortality rate is likely to bereal. It becomes particularly relevant when comparedwith many other countries that have similar overallmortality rates and gross domestic products, and muchsmaller population sizes, but where the progress has notbeen nearly as impressive as that in China.2

Diarrhoea was not a common cause of child deaths inChina (only 3% in 2008), which might be partly attributedto the common cultural practice of boiling water (eg, fortea and food preparation) and other hygiene practices.2224Additionally, our findings strongly suggest that accidentsare a major cause of mortality in children older than

11 months. Accidents as a cause of child deaths globallymerit and require more attention, and have beenneglected.25 Preterm birth complications will become the

most frequent cause of death in the short term becauseincreasing numbers of people are gaining access toprimary health care, and the number of deaths causedby pneumonia therefore is steadily decreasing. However,

in the long term, the numbers of people who will startgaining access to secondary health care will also increase.Birth asphyxia will then decrease in importance as acause of death and will be replaced with congenitalabnormalities. Accidents and sudden infant deathsyndrome will probably continue to increase inimportance (figure 5).

Our findings have provided new and potentially importantinsights that might be relevant to the international childhealth community outside China. Publically availableChinese databases contain much important informationthat is relevant to international health policy, and thereforeshould not be overlooked in the future. Although CHERGhas been working for many years with the experts from

WHO and UNICEF, trying to obtain useful informationfrom low-income and middle-income countries to produceepidemiological estimates that are relevant to children

Figure : Proportional contribution of most common causes of child deaths in 31 provinces in China to total number of deaths recorded in each province in

2008

Provinces are ranked according to mortality rates in children (


10/405

Articles


worldwide, the high quantity and quality of methods usedin the studies from within China were impressive. Nowthat academic information in China is available to thepublic through searchable databases, there can be nofurther justification for omitting Chinese studies fromglobal estimates of any disease burden, especially with thepopulation size of China. We learned through this exercisethat China has larger size and higher quality of the studiesthan many of those that were done in other low-incomeand middle-income countries.

Although the focus of the international healthcommunity with respect to child survival is on provisionof vaccines, case management, and nutritional and other

novel health interventions, substantial reductionsoccurred in child mortality rates in western countries inthe first three decades of the 20th century without theavailability of any of those interventions.26 Social andeconomic determinants of health are therefore veryimportant for improvement of child survival, but they arenot well understood. The progress achieved in Chinaduring the past two decades in reduction of the childmortality rate with data for many useful indicatorsgathered at the province level, such as those related to theemergence of infrastructure, development of healthsystems, progress in education of the population,increased personal and household wealth, introductionof the one-child policy, and increased intervention

coverage will enable us to study the role of thosedeterminants in parallel with vaccination and theintroduction of other health interventions. Chinaprovides a model with potential for future studies ofsocial, economic, demographic policy, and determinantsof child survival related to health systems, and forcomparison of their importance during a period ofprogress in reduction of its child mortality rate.

Contributors

IR, KYC, YG, and HC designed the study and wrote the report. JSFZ andXLF led the systematic review of the literature and data extraction fromChinese databases. ET and SC designed the models and did the statisticalanalyses. JEL and REB provided important intellectual input at differentstages of the work and commented on the drafts of the report. JAS

contributed to interpretation of data and critical revision of the report.Conflicts of interests

We declare that we have no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by grants from the Bill & Melinda GatesFoundation to the US Fund for UNICEF (number 50140, strengtheningthe evidence for maternal and child health, REB principal investigator),and to the University of Edinburgh (number 51285, modelling theimpact of emerging interventions against pneumonia, IR and HCprincipal investigators). We sincerely thank Bickhar Yeung (BallieuLibrary, University of Melbourne) whose help was invaluable to ourunderstanding of the Chinese databases.

References1 UN. The Millennium Development Goals report 2009. New York:

United Nations, 2009.

2 Countdown to 2015 for maternal, newborn, and child survival: the2008 report on tracking coverage of interventions. CountdownCoverage Writing Group, on behalf of the Countdown to 2015 CoreGroup. Lancet2008; 371: 124758.

3 Ministry of Health of the Peoples Republic of China. China HealthStatistics Yearbook 2008. Beijing: Ministry of Health of the PeoplesRepublic of China, 2009.

4 Rudan I, Lawn J, Cousens S, et al. Gaps in policy-relevantinformation on burden of disease in children: a systematic review.Lancet2005; 365: 203140.

5 Fung ICH. Chinese journals: a guide for epidemiologists.Emerg Themes Epidemiol2008; 5: 20.

6 Xia J, Wright J, Adams CE. Five large Chinese biomedicalbibliographic databases: accessibility and coverage.

Health Info Libr J2008; 25: 5561.7 Fung ICH. Seek, and ye shall find: accessing the global

epidemiological literature in different languages.Emerg Themes Epidemiol2008; 5: 21.

8 China National Knowledge Infrastructure. http://www.global.cnki.net (accessed Oct 1, 2009).

9 Wanfang Data. http://www.wanfangdata.com (accessed Oct 1, 2009).

10 Chinese Medical Current Content. http://www.cmcc.org.cn(accessed Oct 1, 2009).

11 Institute of Medical Information/Medical Library, CAMS andPUMC. http://www.imicams.ac.cn (accessed Oct 1, 2009) (inChinese).

12 Wei Pu database. http://www.cqvip.com (accessed Oct 1, 2009)(in Chinese).

13 iLibrary. http://scholar.ilib.cn (accessed Oct 1, 2009) (in Chinese).

14 Ministry of Health. http://www.moh.gov.cn/publicfiles (accessedOct 1, 2009).

15 National Bureau of Statistics China. http://www.stats.gov.cn(accessed Oct 1, 2009) (in Chinese).

16 Gapminder. http://www.gapminder.org (accessed Oct 1, 2009).

17 Lanata F, Rudan I, Boschi-Pinto C, et al. Methodological and qualityissues in epidemiological studies of acute lower respiratoryinfections in children in developing countries. Int J Epidemiol2004;33: 136272.

18 China Institute for Reform and Development. China HumanDevelopment Report 2007/08. Access for al l: basic public servicesfor 13 billion people. Beijing: China Translation and PublishingCorporation, 2008: 1221.

19 Goodkind DM. Chinas missing children: the 2000 censusunderreporting surprise. Popul Stud (Camb) 2004; 58: 28195.

20 Miller BD. Female-selective abortion in Asia: patterns, policies, anddebates. Am Anthropol2001; 103: 108395.

21 Hesketh T, Zhu WX. The one child family policy: the good, the bad,and the ugly. BMJ1997; 314: 168587.

22 Shang Q, Zhou H. Survey on the current status of drinking watersupply, latrines and the health knowledge of residents in the remoterural areas of several provinces of China. Wei Sheng Yan Jiu 1999;28: 33940 (in Chinese).

23 Zhang DQ. An analysis of the contradictions between Chinasdrinking water quality assessment and actual drinking habits.Ground Water2003; 25: 7182.

24 Liu Z. Boiled water saved Chinese people. Hebei Farm Machinery2008; 6: 35.

25 Ameratunga SN, Peden M. World report on child injury prevention:a wake-up call. Injury2009; 40: 46970.

26 Mulholland K. Childhood pneumonia mortalitya permanent globalemergency. Lancet2007; 370: 28589.

Page 8


11/405

Title: ThegreatIndiandividePublished: July316,2004

Frontline,IndiasNationalMagazineVolume21,Issue14

By: PrabhatDattaSource: http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2114/stories/20040716002009000.htm

SummaryNearlythreequartersofIndiaspopulationliveinruralareas.Relativetoruralareas,inurbanareasadultsaremorelikelytobeabletoreadandkidsaremorelikelytobeenrolledinschool.Accesstoamenitiesalsodiffersquiteabit.70%ofurbandwellersbutonly19%ofruraldwellershaveaccesstopipedwater.64%ofurbanhouseholdsbutonly 9%of ruralhouseholdshave toilets.76%ofurbanhouseholdsbutonly31%of ruralhouseholdshaveelectricity.Thereisasignificantlyhigherlifeexpectancyinurbanareas.Peopleinruralareasarepoorer thanpeople inurbanareas,and lately this trendhasbeenexacerbatedbyweakgrowth in theagriculturalsector.

Page 9
http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2114/stories/20040716002009000.htmhttp://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2114/stories/20040716002009000.htmhttp://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2114/stories/20040716002009000.htm


12/405

hp://www.hinduonnet.com/fine/f2114/stories/20040716002009000.htm

Page 10


13/405

Page 11


14/405

Page 12


15/405

Page 13


16/405

Page 14


17/405

Title: Lebanonilliteracyreportshowsalarmingurbanruraldivide:

Developmentstudyshows10percenthigherreadingrateinBeirutthanBekaa

Published: Saturday,July4,2009,DailyStar

By: PatrickGaley

Source:

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=103810#axzz

0tmKfs1ng

Summary

AccordingtotheLebaneseNationalHumanDevelopmentReport,adultliteracyratesaresignificantlylowerinruralthanurbanareas.Twopossiblecausesaresuggested.First,accesstoservices is limited inruralareas.Second,poorfamiliesaremorelikelytopullkidsfromschool,decreasingeducationalattainmentinpoorruralareas.Recenteffortstoimproveliteracyhavealsobeencomplicatedbysecurityconcerns.

Page 15
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=103810#axzz0tmKfs1nghttp://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=103810#axzz0tmKfs1nghttp://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=103810#axzz0tmKfs1nghttp://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=103810#axzz0tmKfs1nghttp://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=103810#axzz0tmKfs1ng


18/405

hp://www.dailystar.com.lb/arcle.asp?edion_id=1&categ_id=1&arcle_id=103810#axzz0tmKfs1ng

Page 16


19/405

Page 17


20/405

hp://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/Rural-life-in-crisis-as.6122641.jp

Page 18


21/405

Page 19


22/405

Title: PopulationofIndia,IndiaPopulationStudiesandResearchonIndiasPopulation

Source: www.indianchild.com

ThepopulationinIndiaasat0:00hourson1stMarch2001stoodat1,027,015,247persons.Withthis,IndiabecameonlythesecondcountryintheworldafterChinatocrosstheonebillionmark.(Indiaisthe2ndmost

populatedcountryintheworld)

India'sestimatedpopulationtobe1,129,866,154,inJuly2007.India'spopulationroseby21.34%between1991 2001.Thesexratio(i.e.,numberoffemalesperthousand

males)ofpopulationwas933,risingfrom927asatthe1991Census.TotalliteracyrateinIndiawasreturned

as65.38%.

Persons 1,027,015,247

Males 531,277,078

Females 495,738,169

Source:ProvisionalPopulationTotals:India.CensusofIndia2001,Paper1of2001StructureandDynamicsPopulationofIndia.AlthoughIndiaoccupiesonly2.4%oftheworld'slandarea,itsupportsover15%oftheworld'spopulation.OnlyChinahasa largerpopulation.Almost40%ofIndiansareyoungerthan15yearsof

age.About70%ofthepeopleliveinmorethan550,000villages,andtheremainderinmorethan200towns

andcities.Over thousandsofyearsof itshistory, Indiahasbeen invaded from the Iranianplateau,Central

Asia,

Arabia,

Afghanistan,

and

the

West;

Indian

people

and

culture

have

absorbed

and

changed

these

influencestoproducearemarkableracialandculturalsynthesis.

Religion,caste,and languagearemajordeterminantsofsocialandpoliticalorganization in Indiatoday.The

governmenthasrecognized18languagesasofficial;Hindiisthemostwidelyspoken.

Although83%ofthepeopleareHindu,Indiaalsoisthehomeofmorethan120millionMuslimsoneofthe

world'slargestMuslimpopulations.ThepopulationalsoincludesChristians,Sikhs,Jains,Buddhists,andParsis.

ThecastesystemreflectsIndianoccupationalandreligiouslydefinedhierarchies.Traditionally,therearefour

broadcategoriesofcastes(varnas),includingacategoryofoutcastes,earliercalled"untouchables"butnow

commonlyreferred

to

as

"dalits."

Within thesebroad categories thereare thousandsof castesand subcastes ,whose relative status varies

fromregiontoregion.

Despite economicmodernization and laws countering discrimination against the lower end of the class

structure,thecastesystemremainsanimportantsourceofsocialidentificationformost

Hindusandapotentfactorinthepoliticallifeofthecountry.

India Population : The 1991 final census count gave India a total population of 846,302,688. However,

estimatesof

India's

population

vary

widely.

According

to

the

Population

Division

of

the

United

Nations

Departmentof InternationalEconomicandSocialAffairs,thepopulationhadalreadyreached866million in

1991.ThePopulationDivisionoftheUnitedNationsEconomicandSocialCommissionforAsiaandthePacific

Page 20
http://www.indianchild.com/http://www.indianchild.com/http://www.indianchild.com/


23/405

(ESCAP)projected896.5millionbymid1993witha1.9percentannualgrowthrate.TheUnitedStatesBureau

oftheCensus,assuminganannualpopulationgrowthrateof1.8percent,putIndia'spopulationinJuly1995

at936,545,814.ThesehigherprojectionsmeritattentioninlightofthefactthatthePlanningCommissionhad

estimated a figure of 844 million for 1991 while preparing the Eighth FiveYear Plan (FY 199296; see

PopulationProjections,thisch.).

Indiaaccountsforsome2.4percentoftheworld's landmassbut ishometoabout16percentoftheglobal

population.The

magnitude

of

the

annual

increase

in

population

can

be

seen

in

the

fact

that

India

adds

almost

thetotalpopulationofAustraliaorSriLankaeveryyear.A1992studyof India'spopulationnotesthat India

hasmorepeoplethanallofAfricaandalsomorethanNorthAmericaandSouthAmericatogether.Between

1947and1991,India'spopulationmorethandoubled.

Throughoutthetwentiethcentury,Indiahasbeeninthemidstofademographictransition.Atthebeginning

ofthecentury,endemicdisease,periodicepidemics,andfamineskeptthedeathratehighenoughtobalance

outthehighbirthrate.Between1911and1920,thebirthanddeathrateswerevirtuallyequalaboutforty

eightbirthsand fortyeightdeathsper1,000population.The increasing impactof curativeandpreventive

medicine (especiallymass inoculations)broughta steadydecline in thedeath rate.By themid1990s, the

estimatedbirthratehadfallentotwentyeightper1,000,andtheestimateddeathratehadfallentotenper

1,000.Clearly,

the

future

configuration

of

India's

population

(indeed

the

future

of

India

itself)

depends

on

whathappenstothebirthrate(seefig.8).Eventhemostoptimisticprojectionsdonotsuggestthatthebirth

rate coulddropbelow twentyper1,000before theyear2000. India'spopulation is likely toexceed the1

billionmarkbeforethe2001census.

Theupwardpopulation inIndiaspiralbegan inthe1920sand isreflected in intercensalgrowth increments.

SouthAsia'spopulationincreasedroughly5percentbetween1901and1911andactuallydeclinedslightlyin

thenextdecade.Populationincreasedsome10percentintheperiodfrom1921to1931and13to14percent

inthe1930sand1940s.Between1951and1961,thepopulationrose21.5percent.Between1961and1971,

the country's population increased by 24.8 percent. Thereafter a slight slowing of the increase was

experienced:from1971to1981,thepopulation increasedby24.7percent,andfrom1981to1991,by23.9

percent(see

table

3,

Appendix).

Population in Indiadensityhas risenconcomitantlywith themassive increases inpopulation. In1901 India

counted some seventyseven persons per square kilometer; in 1981 therewere 216 persons per square

kilometer; by 1991 there were 267 persons per square kilometerup almost 25 percent from the 1981

populationdensity(seetable4,Appendix).India'saveragepopulationdensityishigherthanthatofanyother

nationofcomparablesize.Thehighestdensitiesarenotonly inheavilyurbanizedregionsbutalso inareas

thataremostlyagricultural.

PopulationofIndiagrowthintheyearsbetween1950and1970centeredonareasofnewirrigationprojects,

areas subject to refugee resettlement, and regions of urban expansion. Areaswhere population did not

increaseat

arate

approaching

the

national

average

were

those

facing

the

most

severe

economic

hardships,

overpopulatedruralareas,andregionswithlowlevelsofurbanization.

The 1991 census, which was carried out under the direction of the Registrar General and Census

CommissionerofIndia(partoftheMinistryofHomeAffairs),inkeepingwiththeprevioustwocensuses,used

thetermurbanagglomerations.Anurbanagglomerationformsacontinuousurbanspreadandconsistsofacityortownand itsurbanoutgrowthoutsidethestatutory limits.Or,anurbanagglomeratemaybetwoor

moreadjoining citiesor townsand theiroutgrowths.Auniversity campusormilitarybase locatedon the

outskirtsofacityortown,whichoftenincreasestheactualurbanareaofthatcityortown,isanexampleof

anurbanagglomeration. In Indiaurbanagglomerationswithapopulationof1millionormoretherewere

twentyfourin1991arereferredtoasmetropolitanareas.Placeswithapopulationof100,000ormoreare

termed"cities"

as

compared

with

"towns,"

which

have

apopulation

of

less

than

100,000.

Including

the

metropolitanareas,therewere299urbanagglomerationswithmorethan100,000populationin1991.These

largeurban agglomerations are designated as Class I urban units. Therewere five other classesofurban

Page 21


24/405

agglomerations,towns,andvillagesbasedonthesizeoftheirpopulations:ClassII(50,000to99,999),ClassIII

(20,000 to49,999),Class IV (10,000 to19,999),ClassV (5,000 to9,999),andClassVI (villagesof less than

5,000;seetable5,Appendix).

Theresultsofthe1991censusrevealedthataround221million,or26.1percent,ofIndian'spopulationlived

inurbanareas.Ofthistotal,about138millionpeople,or16percent,livedinthe299urbanagglomerations.

In1991thetwentyfourmetropolitancitiesaccountedfor51percentofIndia'stotalpopulationlivinginClass

Iurban

centers,

with

Bombay

and

Calcutta

the

largest

at

12.6

million

and

10.9

million,

respectively

(see

table

6,Appendix).

Intheearly1990s,growthwasthemostdramatic inthecitiesofcentralandsouthern India.About twenty

cities in those two regionsexperiencedagrowth rateofmore than100percentbetween1981and1991.

Areas subject to an influx of refugees also experienced noticeable demographic changes. Refugees from

Bangladesh,Burma,andSriLankacontributedsubstantiallytopopulationgrowthintheregionsinwhichthey

settled. Less dramatic population increases occurred in areas where Tibetan refugee settlements were

foundedaftertheChineseannexationofTibetinthe1950s.

Themajorityofdistrictshadurbanpopulationsrangingonaveragefrom15to40percentin1991.According

tothe

1991

census,

urban

clusters

predominated

in

the

upper

part

of

the

Indo

Gangetic

Plain;

in

the

Punjab

and Haryana plains, and in part ofwestern Uttar Pradesh. The lower part of the IndoGangetic Plain in

southeastern Bihar, southernWest Bengal, and northern Orissa also experienced increased urbanization.

SimilarincreasesoccurredinthewesterncoastalstateofGujaratandtheunionterritoryofDamanandDiu.In

theCentralHighlands inMadhyaPradeshandMaharashtra,urbanizationwasmostnoticeable in the river

basinsandadjacentplateauregionsoftheMahanadi,Narmada,andTaptirivers.Thecoastalplainsandriver

deltasoftheeastandwestcoastsalsoshowedincreasedlevelsofurbanization.

Thehilly, inaccessible regionsof thePeninsularPlateau, thenortheast,and theHimalayas remain sparsely

settled.Asageneralrule,thelowerthepopulationdensityandthemoreremotetheregion,themorelikelyit

is to count a substantial portion of tribal (seeGlossary) people among its population (see Tribes, ch. 4).

Urbanizationin

some

sparsely

settled

regions

is

more

developed

than

would

seem

warranted

at

first

glance

at

theirlimitednaturalresources.AreasofwesternIndiathatwereformerlyprincelystates(inGujaratandthe

desertregionsofRajasthan)havesubstantialurbancentersthatoriginatedaspoliticaladministrativecenters

andsinceindependencehavecontinuedtoexercisehegemonyovertheirhinterlands.

ThevastmajorityofIndians,nearly625million,or73.9percent,in1991livedinwhatarecalledvillagesofless

than5,000peopleorinscatteredhamletsandotherruralsettlements(seeTheVillageCommunity,ch.5).The

stateswithproportionatelythegreatestruralpopulations in1991werethestatesofAssam (88.9percent),

Sikkim(90.9percent)andHimachalPradesh(91.3percent),andthetinyunionterritoryofDadraandNagar

Haveli (91.5percent).Thosewith thesmallest ruralpopulationsproportionatelywere thestatesofGujarat

(65.5percent),Maharashtra (61.3percent),Goa (58.9percent),andMizoram (53.9percent).Mostof the

otherstates

and

the

union

territory

of

the

Andaman

and

Nicobar

Islands

were

near

the

national

average.

Two other categories of India's population that are closely scrutinized by the national census are the

Scheduled Castes (see Glossary) and Scheduled Tribes (see Glossary). The greatest concentrations of

ScheduledCastemembersin1991livedinthestatesofAndhraPradesh(10.5million,ornearly16percentof

the state'spopulation),TamilNadu (10.7million,or19percent),Bihar (12.5million,or14percent),West

Bengal(16million,or24percent),andUttarPradesh(29.3million,or21percent).Together,theseandother

Scheduled Caste members comprised about 139 million people, or more than 16 percent of the total

populationofIndia.ScheduledTribemembersrepresentedonly8percentofthetotalpopulation(about68

million).Theywere found in1991 in thegreatestnumbers inOrissa (7million,or23percentofthestate's

population),Maharashtra (7.3million,or9percent),andMadhyaPradesh (15.3million,or23percent). In

proportion,however,

the

populations

of

states

in

the

northeast

had

the

greatest

concentrations

of

Scheduled

Tribemembers.Forexample,31percentofthepopulationofTripura,34percentofManipur,64percentof

Arunachal Pradesh, 86 percent ofMeghalaya, 88 percent ofNagaland, and 95 percent ofMizoramwere

Page 22


25/405


26/405

Title: 60%ofHIVPositivePeopleinIndiaLiveInRuralAreas,WHOReportSays

Source: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles

Viewedon25/03/2010

About60%oftheapproximately5.2millionadultslivingwithHIV/AIDSinIndialiveinruralareas,accordingtoareportrecentlyreleasedbytheWorldHealthOrganization,PTI/FinancialExpressreports.Accordingtothereport,HIVprevalenceamongadults isabout1% in fiveof India's35statesand territories.HIVprevalenceamonginjectiondrugusersinthecountryhasincreasedfrom7%in2002to23%in2005,thereportsaid.Inaddition, the report found thatHIV prevalence among commercial sexworkers inMumbai has remainedbetween40%and50%duringthepastfiveyears.Thereportalsofoundthatin18of30districtsintheIndianstateMaharashtra,HIV prevalence amongwomen visiting government prenatal clinicswas 1% or higher.Similarfigureswererecordedin16of25districtsinKarnatakastate,accordingtothereport.ThereportalsofoundthatHIVprevalenceamongmenwhohavesexwithmenisbetween1%and40%across18areasthathavetargetedpreventionprograms.Accordingtothereport,86%ofreportedAIDScasesinthecountryweretransmittedthroughsexualcontact,PTI/FinancialExpressreports(PTI/FinancialExpress,4/26).

Page 24
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articleshttp://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articleshttp://www.who.int/en/http://www.who.int/en/http://www.who.int/en/http://www.who.int/en/http://www.who.int/en/http://www.financialexpress.com/latest_full_story.php?content_id=162332http://www.financialexpress.com/latest_full_story.php?content_id=162332http://www.financialexpress.com/latest_full_story.php?content_id=162332http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/17131.phphttp://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/17131.phphttp://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/17131.phphttp://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/17131.phphttp://www.financialexpress.com/latest_full_story.php?content_id=162332http://www.who.int/en/http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles


27/405

Page 25


28/405

Page 26


29/405

Page 27


30/405

Page 28


31/405

Page 29


32/405

Page 30


33/405

CULTURALADVANTAGES

Articles

DifferencesinUrbanandRuralBritain Page31

RuralandSmallTownCanadaAnalysisBulletin,Vol.3,No.3 Page43

AReviewofUrbanandRuralAreaDefinitions,ProjectReport Page60


34/405

O f f i c e f o r N a t i o n a l S t a t i s t i c s 23

9 1 | S p r i n g 1 9 9 8 P o p u l a t i o n T r e n d s9 1 | S p r i n g 1 9 9 8 P o p u l a t i o n T r e n d s

Chris Denham and Ian White

Census Division

ONS

Differences in urban and

rural Britain

I N T R O D U C T I O N

Statistics for urban areas have been prepared and published from

the last four censuses of population for two reasons. First, because

of the publics interest in places that are more readily recognisable

as traditional towns and cities than are administrative areas, such as

local authorities, most of which comprise a mixture of both urban

and rural land; the identification of such urban areas are also useful

in setting local planning policies. Second, they provide information

on the characteristics of urban populations as a whole compared

with the population living outside urban areas termed rural in

this article.

THE CONCEPTS OF TOWNS AND URBAN AREAS

In reports on urban areas from the 1991 Census1-6

the definition ofa town put forward is the traditional concept of a free-standing

built-up area with a service core and with a sufficient number and

variety of shops and services, including perhaps a market, to make

it recognisably urban in character. It would have administrative,

commercial, educational, entertainment and other social and civic

functions and, in many cases, evidence of being historically well

established. A local network of roads and other means of transport

would focus on the area, and it would be a place drawing people

for services and employment from surrounding areas.

Urban areas in Britain are, however, more complex, On one hand,

historically free-standing towns have, over the years, grown and

coalesced into continuously built-up areas, while subsidiary central

places have developed as suburbs and satellite towns. This was

recognised in the definition of conurbations in the 1951 Census.7

On the other hand, some historic towns have stagnated and have

lost central place functions.

Almost 90 per cent of people in Britain live in

urban areas and just over half the population

are resident in 66 urban areas with populations

of 100,000 or more. These and a wide range of

key results from the 1991 Census have been

published for all urban areas in Great Britain,

updating information that was prepared for the

first time after the 1981 Census.

This article summarises the socio-demographic

characteristics and distributions of urban and

rural populations in Great Britain and

describes how the distribution of urban

population has changed in the decade 1981-91.

Page 31

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/

population_trends/urbrurdif_pt91.pdf


35/405

O f f i c e f o r N a t i o n a l S t a t i s t i c s24

P o p u l a t i o n T r e n d s 9 1 | S p r i n g 1 9 9 8

DEFINITIONS OF TOWNS AND URBAN AREAS

There are several ways to define the concept of a town. It could be

defined:

(a) in terms of its administrative boundary, that is, the area

administered by a city, borough or town council. This is the method

that had been followed in censuses in Great Britain up to and

including 1971, but which, since local government re-organisation

in the mid-1970s, became almost entirely unsuited for the

definition of urban areas because many districts had been

deliberately drawn up to bring together towns and the surrounding

rural countryside into single administrative units;

(b) in terms of the built-up area (the bricks and mortarapproach);

(c) in terms of the areas for which it provides services and facilities -

the functional area, which may embrace not only the built-up

area but also free-standing settlements outside the urban area

together with tracts of surrounding countryside if the population

in these surrounding areas depend on the urban centre for servicesand employment;

(d) using density (either of population or of buildings) as an indicator

of urbanisation.

However, implementation of any of these approaches involves

some arbitrary decisions in drawing up boundaries because, in

practice, towns tend to merge physically and functionally with

neighbouring towns and their hinterlands.

Details of these possible approaches and their advantages and

disadvantages are described more fully in the published 1991

Census reports on urban and rural areas.

In England and Wales, two methods were considered: the first

based on a combination of population density and land use; and the

second on the extent of urban development indicated on Ordnance

Survey (OS) maps. The latter was selected as it met the needs of

both the then Office of Population Censuses and Survey (OPCS)

and Department of the Environment (DOE) and enabled

internationally comparable statistics to be produced for Eurostat

and the United Nations. Basically, the same criteria were adopted

for defining urban areas in the 1991 Census. In Scotland, the

method used was a mix of the bricks and mortar approach and the

population density methods. (See Box A for a summary definition

of urban areas identified in the 1991 Census.)

S U M M A R Y F I N D I N G S

U r b a n a r e a s b y s i z e o f r e s i d e n t p o p u l a t i o n

The table below shows the number of main urban areas (that is, not

including sub divisions of areas) in England and Wales and in

Scotland by size of resident population. The size categories have

been chosen to meet the requirements of Eurostat and other

international organisations.

Overall, nine out of ten people in Great Britain live in urban areas.

Over half of the population (53.4 per cent) live in areas with

populations of 100,000 or more, and almost half of these (24.9 per

cent of all people in Great Britain) live in the four urban

agglomerations in England with a population of over a million,

namely the Urban Areas of Greater London (7.6 million), WestMidlands (2.3 million), Greater Manchester (2.3 million) and West

Yorkshire (1.4 million). Although the table would appear to show

that there is no urban area in Scotland with a population of more

than a million (Glasgow, with 663 thousand population being the

largest single locality), the population of the largest continuously

urban area in Strathclyde7 (defined on a similar basis to such areas

in England and Wales see Box A) of which Glasgow is a part, is a

little over 1.3 million. On the basis of this definition some 14.0

million people (27.4 per cent of the total population of Great

Britain) were resident in these larger urban agglomerations in 1991.

Though the total number of urban areas has increased from 2,231

in 1981 to 2,307 in 1991, the proportion of the population living in

urban Britain has remained at much the same level, declining only

slightly from 89.8 per cent to 89.6 per cent (see Table 2). A small

decline in the number of urban areas in the population range 50-

200 thousand residents from 103 in 1981 to 98 in 1991, chiefly in

the more metropolitan parts of the country, has been more than

matched by increases in the numbers of smaller urban areas in the

shire counties, particularly in the population range of 5-10

thousand (379 to 407) and under 2,000 (409 to 460).

Table 1

Size of area Great Britain England and Wales Scotland(residents)

Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage

of areas* of total of areas* of total of areas of total

population population population

All urban areas 2,307 89.6 1,859 89.7 448 88.9

1,000,000 and over 4 24.9 4 27.4 - -500,000 - 999,999 6 7.6 5 7.0 1 13.3200,000 - 499,999 23 12.8 22 13.2 1 8.0100,000 - 199,999 33 8.1 31 8.2 2 7.0

50,000 - 99,999 65 8.4 61 8.7 4 5.0

20,000 - 49,999 167 9.5 141 8.7 26 17.710,000 - 19,999 264 6.8 213 6.0 51 14.5

5,000 - 9,999 407 5.2 323 4.6 84 11.62,000 - 4,999 878 5.0 756 4.8 122 7.5Under 2,000 460 1.3 303 1.0 157 4.4

* Does not include sub divisions of urban areas in England and Wales

Number of urban areas by size of resident population, 1991 Census

Page 32


36/405


9 1 | S p r i n g 1 9 9 8 P o p u l a t i o n T r e n d s

The 60 most populous urban areas are listed in Table 3 along with

their 1981 Census ranking. Population in the Greater London

Urban Area increased by 85 thousand during the intercensal decade

but declined in each of the other three main urban agglomerations

in England (by over 106 thousand in total). Many of the apparent

increases in the urban area population illustrated in the table reflect

the merger of one or more separate 1981 areas to form larger

aggregates. For example, Liverpool UA now includes as one of its

sub divisions, the former urban area of St Helens which had a 1981

population of almost 172 thousand residents. Similarly, the 1991

urban areas of Reading/Wokingham and Dearne Valley were both

formed from the mergers of substantially populated 1981 urban

areas.

Size of area 1981 1991

Number Cumulative population Number Cumulative population

of areas (thousands) (per cent) of areas (thousands) (per cent)

1,000,000 and over 4 13,692 25.6 4 13,671 24.9500,000 - 999,999 6 17,717 33.1 6 17,827 32.5200,000 - 499,999 22 24,302 45.4 23 24,835 45.2100,000 - 199,999 28 28,112 52.5 33 29,299 53.4

50,000 - 99,999 75 33,312 62.2 65 33,886 61.7

20,000 - 49,999 167 38,473 71.8 167 39,118 71.310,000 - 19,999 260 42,076 78.6 264 42,858 78.1

5,000 - 9,999 379 44,716 83.5 407 45,716 83.32,000 - 4,999 881 47,447 88.6 878 48,461 88.3

Under 2,000 409 48,086 89.8 460 49,190 89.6Total areas 2,231 2,307

Urban areas and cumulative resident population, by size of area, Great Britain, 1981 and 1991 CensusesTable 2

Box AThe 1991 Census definition of urban

areas

The starting point in the definition of urban areas in

England and Wales is the identification of areas with

land use which is irreversibly urban in character. Such

urban land use comprises:

(a) permanent structures and the land on which they

are situated (built-up site);

(b) transportation corridors (such as roads, railways,

rivers and canals) which have built-up sites on one

or both sides, or which link up built-up sites which

are less than 50 metres apart;

(c) transportation features such as airport and

operational airfields, railway yards, motorway

service areas and car parks;

(d) mine buildings (but mineral workings and quarriesare excluded); and

(e) any area completely surrounded by built-up sites.

Areas such as playing fields and golf courses are

excluded unless they are completely surrounded by

built-up sites as in (e).

The prerequisite for the recognition of an urban area is

that the area of urban land should extend for 20

hectares or more. Separate areas of urban land are

linked if less than 50 metres apart. The critical factor in

the recognition of an urban area is that it should have a

minimum population of approximately 1,000 persons.

However, as there was no prior information on the

1991 populations of areas of urban land, a proxy

threshold was applied by excluding areas with less than

four 1991 Census enumeration districts (EDs). This

resulted in the exclusion of some areas of urban land

with more than 1,000 population, but very few above

2,000. In a very few cases more than 1,000 people may

have been living in free-standing blocks of land of less

than 20 hectares.

In Scotland the method used to define urban areas

(often referred to as localities) was a mix ofbuilt-up

area and density approaches. In essence each area was

defined as a set of urban postcodes classified as such if

they had a population density of at least 5 residents/

hectare, and/or had been identified as in an locality in

the 1981 Census, and then groups of adjoining urban

postcodes were then identified and denoted as a locality

if the number of residents in all the postcodes in the

group was 500 or more.

Although the methods of identifying urban areas in

England and Wales and localities in Scotland are not

identical, the essential concept of urban land and the

use of built-up areas in definition is very similar. In

summary, the total urban (and thus, rural) population in

Scotland is defined by a specific area size threshold; this

is not strictly comparable with the basis of definition in

England and Wales, where an urban area contains four

or more EDs. However, the picture of urban and rural

populations north and south of the border is not

seriously affected by this difference in comparability

since urban areas in the 1,000 to 2,000 population range

account for a relatively small proportion of the total

urban population. Thus individual urban areas andlocalities may be compared and contrasted throughout

Great Britain.

Page 33


37/405



On the other hand the notable increase in the population of Milton

Keynes Urban Area reflects more the urbanisation of the

surrounding rural land particularly to the north west around Stony

Stratford and to the north east linking with Newport Pagnell.

Not all urban areas identified in the 1981 Census retained their

urban status in 1991. Villages such as Orsett (in Essex), Haxey

(Humberside) and Woodhall Spa (Lincolnshire) all had urban

populations over 2,000 in 1981 but failed to meet the criteria to be

defined as urban in 1991. In contrast, there were some 133 areas inEngland and Wales, newly classified as urban in 1991. Many of the

larger of these, such as Bentley Health (5,984 population in 1991,

south of Solihull), Ingleby (4,325, in Teesside), and Martlesham

Heath (3,113, east of Ipswich) are sub divisions of larger urban

areas (in these cases the Urban Areas of West Midlands, Teesside

and Ipswich respectively). But others have become significantly

large separate urban areas, such as North Darent (3,292 population,

south of Dartford) and Pannal (2,778, south of Harrogate). Figure 1

shows the distribution of all urban areas throughout Great Britain,

separately identifying the 60 with the largest resident populations

listed in Table 3.

T he c ha ng i ng f a c e o f u r b a n a nd r ur a l B r i t a i n

Some 21 of the counties in England and Wales and the former

Scottish Regions and Islands Areas have more than double the

national proportion of rural population (10.4 per cent) (see Table 4

and Figure 2). Of these, 11 counties are in England, 4 in Wales and

6 in Scotland (including each of the three Islands Areas). In total

these counties contain 2.5 million of a total of 5.7 million people in

rural areas (43.3 per cent). Ten have proportions of rural population

at least three times the national average, and all are remote from

the main urban agglomerations (five being in Scotland and a

further three in Wales). The highest proportions with a rural

population are found in the three Scottish Islands Areas (Western

Isles 66.9 per cent, Shetland 62.7 per cent and Orkney 57.4 per

cent) followed by the Welsh counties of Powys (57.1 per cent) and

Dyfed (43.1 per cent). Cornwall (with 36.1 per cent) and Somerset(31.4 per cent) are the English counties with the highest

proportions of people in rural areas, ranking seventh and tenth

respectively.

All but one of these counties/Scottish Regions (Devon) were in the

top 21 most rural parts of the country in 1981. Oxfordshire

(previously ranked 20th) dropped to 23rd in the 1991 rankings.

While, overall, the national proportion of the population resident in

rural areas has remained at just about the same level since the 1981

Census (10.38 per cent compared with 10.44 per cent), the

population in some of these more rural parts of the country has

become more concentrated in urban settlements. This was

particularly so in Scotland, where the proportions of urbanpopulations in each of the three Island Areas, Highland, Dumfries

and Galloway, and Borders all increased, as did the proportions in

East Anglia, much of the West Midlands region, and in the counties

bordering between the South East and South West regions.

1 Greater London UA 7,651.6 7,566.6 (1)

2 West Midlands UA 2,296.2 2,338.8 (2)3 Greater Manchester UA 2,277.3 2,319.6 (3)4 West Yorkshire UA 1,446.0 1,467.4 (4)5 Tyneside 886.0 776.4 (5)6 Liverpool UA+ 838.0 747.8 (7)7 Glasgow* 663.0 754.6 (6)8 Sheffield UA 633.4 634.6 (8)9 Nottingham UA 613.7 593.8 (9)

10 Bristol UA 522.8 517.4 (10)

11 Brighton/Worthing/Littlehampton 437.6 423.1 (11)12 Leicester UA 416.6 404.4 (14)13 Portsmouth UA 409.3 406.8 (13)14 Edinburgh* 401.9 408.8 (12)15 Teesside UA 369.6 381.5 (15)16 The Potteries 368.0 373.7 (16)17 Bournemouth UA 358.3 319.1 (18)

18 Reading/Wokingham 335.8 194.1 (33)19 Coventry/Bedworth 331.2 347.9 (17)20 Kingston upon Hull UA 310.6 322.1 (19)

21 Cardiff UA 308.4 279.8 (21)22 Southampton UA 276.8 269.9 (23)23 Swansea UA 273.1 279.2 (22)24 Birkenhead UA 270.2 280.6 (20)25 Southend UA 266.7 262.3 (24)26 Blackpool UA 261.4 258.9 (25)27 Preston UA 256.4 244.6 (26)28 Plymouth UA 245.3 238.6 (27)29 Aldershot UA 231.2 219.7 (28)30 Derby UA 223.8 218.0 (30)

Urban area (UA) Resident population (000s)

1991 Census 1981 Census

(and ranking)

+ The 1991 area includes St Helens, formerly a separate urban area in 1981

* On the basis of the definition of an urban area in England and Wales, the Greater Glasgow UA (see text) had a 1991 Census population of 1,323,089 and would have been ranked 5th. Edinburgh UA

(comprising the urban localities of Edinburgh and Musselburgh) had a 1991 Census population of 422,540 and would have been ranked 12th.

The 1981 figure refers to the former Reading UA. In 1981 Wokingham was a separate urban area.

The 1981 figure refers to the former Barnsley UA. In 1981 Dearne Valley was a separate urban area.

** The 1981 figures relates to the aggregate of the three former separate urban areas of Telford Dawley (28,645), Telford North (53012) and Telford South (23,318).

The 1981 figure relates to the aggregate of the two former separate urban areas of Southport (88,596) and Formby (26,852).

Table 3 Urban areas with populations of 100,000 or more in 1991

Urban area (UA) Resident population (000s)

1991 Census 1981 Census

(and ranking)

31 The Medway Towns 222.4 215.0 (29)

32 Luton/Dunstable 221.3 211.6 (31)33 Dearne Valley UA 211.4 127.2 (47)34 Aberdeen 189.7 186.8 (34)35 Sunderland UA 189.3 201.0 (32)36 Norwich UA 185.4 180.5 (35)37 Northampton UA 183.1 154.2 (39)38 Wigan UA 174.4 178.4 (36)39 Dundee 159.0 172.3 (37)40 Milton Keynes UA 155.5 93.3 (-)

41 Mansfield UA 155.0 154.5 (38)42 Warrington UA 152.5 129.1 (45)43 Burnley/Nelson 149.9 153.3 (40)44 Swindon 145.2 127.3 (46)45 Grimsby/Cleethorpes 136.5 136.6 (42)46 Blackburn/Darwen 135.9 140.4 (41)47 Peterborough UA 134.8 113.4 (53)

48 Ipswich UA 133.3 129.7 (44)49 Doncaster UA 128.9 131.6 (43)50 Slough UA 126.7 122.2 (49)

51 Gloucester UA 126.1 106.5 (57)52 York UA 124.6 123.1 (48)53 Hastings/Bexhill 120.0 109.6 (55)54 Telford** 119.3 105.9 (59)55 Oxford UA 118.8 113.8 (52)56 Thanet UA 116.7 111.4 (54)57 High Wycombe UA 116.4 107.2 (56)58 Southport/Formby 116.3 115.4 (51)58 Crawley UA 115.6 106.2 (58)60 Newport (Gwent) UA 115.5 115.9 (50)

Page 34


38/405

The 60 Urban Areas with the largestresident populations, listed in Table 3.

KEY

Figure 1 Urban areas in Great Britain, 1991 Census

27Office for National Statistics

9 1 | S p r i n g 1 9 9 8 P o p u l a t i o n Tr e n d s

Page 35


39/405



Figure 2 Proportion of the resident population in rural areas, counties and Scottish regions, 1991 Census

Under 5.2

5.3 - 10.4

10.5 - 20.8

20.9 - 31.2

31.3 and over

Cornwall

Devon

Somerset

Dorset

Wiltshire

Hampshire

Isle of Wight

WestSussex

EastSussex

KentSurrey

GreaterLondon

Essex

Notts

Suffolk

Norfolk

Cambs

Berks

OxonHerts

Beds

Avon

GlosGwent

S Glam.

M Glam.

W Glam.

Dyfed

Powys

GwyneddClwyd

Shropshire

Hereford &Worcester

Warws

WestMidlands

Staffs

Leics

LincolnCheshire

GreaterManchester South

YorkshireMerseyside

LancashireWest

Yorkshire

Humberside

North Yorkshire

ClevelandDurham

Tyne & Wear

Cumbria

Northumberland

Borders

Dumfries &Galloway

Strathclyde

Lothian

Central

Fife

Tayside

GrampianHighland

Western IslesShetland

Orkney

Buck

s

North

ants

Derby

shire

Percentage of resident

population in rural areas

National percentage = 10.4

Page 36


40/405



In much of the North of England, in the extreme South West and in

West and Central Wales, however, there was a move towards an

increasing proportion of the population living in rural areas.

In many of the home counties and in those counties in a band from

Severn to the Humber there was very little change in the urban and

rural split in the population. In parts of Central Scotland this was

also the case.

Greater London, not surprisingly, has the highest proportion of

population in urban areas (99.9 per cent), and the six of the next

seven most urban parts of Britain are the English metropolitan

counties. South Glamorgan (ranking sixth overall) is the most

urban county in Wales (96.8 per cent). Strathclyde Region, even

though it stretches over a large part of western Scotland, is

dominated by the Greater Glasgow area and ranks as the eleventh

most urban county/Region in Britain with 95.2 per cent of its

population concentrated in localities.

U r b a n a n d r u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s

Some census characteristics vary by size of urban area, and there

are also many differences between the characteristics of rural and

urban areas in general. However, the grouping of urban and rural

areas as aggregates often generalises many regional and local

variations. The following paragraphs in this article describe a

number of socio-demographic characteristics measured by the

1991 Census within urban and rural areas at either the national or

county/Scottish Region area level.

D e n s i t y o f p o p u l a t i o n

There is a marked difference between population density in urban

and rural areas as a whole. Urban areas occupy just 6.0 per cent ofthe total land area in Great Britain (8.3 per cent in England, 3.1 per

cent in Wales and 2.8 per cent in Scotland). Average density of the

urban population in Great Britain is 36.0 persons per hectare (39.1

persons/hectare in England, 36.9 in Wales and 20.6 in Scotland)

compared with a density of just 0.26 persons/hectare in rural

Britain. In England there tends to be a direct relationship between

population size and density of urban areas (see Table 5), such that

the highest densities overall occur in the main urban

agglomerations (almost 44 persons/hectare), while the urban areas

of under 2,000 residents have an average density of 27 persons/

hectare. A similar pattern is found in Scotland (though the level of

density is consistently lower than in England), but in Wales the

differential in density is far less marked, with the highest average

densities found among the medium-sized urban areas in the

population ranges 50-100 thousand and 10-20 thousand.

1 Western Isles 66.9 68.5 (2)2 Shetland 62.7 68.6 (1)3 Orkney 57.4 58.5 (3)4 Powys 57.1 55.7 (4)5 Dyfed 43.1 42.1 (6)

6 Gwynedd 41.1 43.9 (5)7 Cornwall 36.1 35.4 (9)8 Highland 35.7 39.5 (7)9 Dumfries and Galloway 34.8 36.4 (8)

10 Somerset 31.4 34.9 (10)

11 Borders 30.3 31.5 (11)12 Lincolnshire 30.2 29.5 (13)13 Norfolk 29.7 30.7 (12)14 Cumbria 29.1 27.7 (17)15 Suffolk 29.0 29.4 (14)

16 North Yorkshire 28.8 27.9 (16)

17 Shropshire 26.8 28.7 (15)18 Hereford and Worcester 26.2 27.4 (18)19 Clwyd 22.6 20.8 (21)20 Devon 22.1 20.4 (25)

21 Wiltshire 21.6 24.2 (19)22 Northumberland 20.8 20.3 (26)23 Oxfordshire 20.6 22.3 (20)24 Gloucestershire 20.4 20.5 (24)25 Grampian 20.0 20.6 (23)

26 Northamptonshire 17.6 17.8 (28)27 Isle of Wight 17.0 15.8 (29)28 Warwickshire 17.0 19.0 (27)29 Cambridgeshire 16.7 20.8 (22)30 Tayside 15.3 15.5 (30)

31 Durham 13.8 12.7 (35)32 Buckinghamshire 13.7 13.9 (32)33 Dorset 13.0 14.5 (31)34 Kent 13.0 13.3 (33)35 East Sussex 12.3 12.3 (37)

36 West Sussex 12.1 12.6 (36)37 Leicestershire 11.8 11.2 (40)38 Humberside 11.7 11.5 (38)39 Bedfordshire 11.5 12.9 (34)40 Gwent 10.9 9.9 (44)

41 Derbyshire 10.8 11.1 (41)42 Staffordshire 10.6 11.0 (42)43 Essex 10.5 10.8 (43)44 Cheshire 10.5 11.4 (39)45 Central 9.4 8.8 (47)

46 Hampshire 8.9 9.4 (46)47 Surrey 8.5 8.6 (49)48 Fife 8.4 9.4 (45)49 Lancashire 8.3 8.7 (48)50 Mid Glamorgan 8.0 6.6 (53)

51 Berkshire 7.8 7.5 (50)

52 West Glamorgan 7.4 6.1 (55)53 Nottinghamshire 7.0 7.3 (52)54 Avon 6.8 7.2 (51)55 Hertfordshire 6.4 6.6 (54)

56 Strathclyde 4.8 4.6 (56)57 Lothian 4.1 4.0 (57)58 Cleveland 3.9 3.0 60)59 West Yorkshire 3.9 3.4 (58)60 South Yorkshire 3.2 2.9 (61)

61 South Glamorgan 3.2 3.4 (59)62 Tyne and Wear 1.0 1.1 (62)63 Merseyside 0.9 0.6 (64)64 Greater Manchester 0.7 1.0 (63)65 West Midlands 0.4 0.4 (65)66 Greater London 0.1 0.1 (66)

County/Scottish Region Percentage of population resident in rural areas

1991 1981 and rank

Table 4 The most rural counties and Scottish Regions

County/Scottish Region Percentage of population resident in rural areas

1991 1981 and rank

Page 37


41/405



A g e s t r uc t ur e

The percentage distribution of population by broad age group

showed some clear differences between urban and rural

populations overall (see Table 6). In particular, the proportion of

very young children (aged 0-4) were higher in urban areas in both

England and Wales (6.8 per cent) than in rural areas (5.6 per cent

and 5.8 per cent respectively). A similar but less marked pattern

was exhibited in Scotland (6.4 per cent and 6.2 per cent

respectively).

Young adults (aged 18-29) also comprised a higher proportion of

the total population in urban areas than in rural parts of the country.

In urban areas in England, for example, 18.7 per cent of the

population were in this age group compared with 14.6 per cent inrural areas, but the percentage difference was again less marked in

Scotland (18.5 per cent and 15.5 per cent) and even less in Wales

(17.4 per cent and 14.8 per cent). In contrast, the proportion of the

population who were aged 45-pensionable age was greater in rural

areas (22.9 per cent in England) than in urban areas (18.8 per cent),

reflecting the tendency for people to move to more rural parts of

the country in their later working ages. Again this difference was

less marked in Scotland and Wales.

It was generally the case that proportionately more elderly men

(aged 75 and over) lived in rural areas than in urban parts of the

country (2.7 per cent in English urban areas for example, compared

with 2.4 per cent), but that the reverse was true for elderly women.

L i m i t i n g l o n g - t e r m i l l n e s s

Rural areas, generally, had lower proportions of residents in

households with a limiting long-term illness recorded in the 1991

Census. This was the case among all age groups, and particularly

so in Scotland where only 9.5 per cent of residents in households in

rural areas reported having a long-term illness compared with 13.3

per cent in localities (see Table 7). In Wales, where incidence of

long-term illness was generally higher than elsewhere in Great

Britain, the rural/urban difference was nevertheless still evident

(13.7 per cent compared with 17.0 per cent).

E t h n i c g r o u p

The higher proportions of the population in non-White ethnic

groups recorded in urban areas generally results from the

concentration of ethnic minority groups in the metropolitan areas,

particularly in Greater London (20.2 per cent) and West Midlands

(14.7 per cent) where there is very little rural land. Urban areas inLeicestershire and Bedfordshire also have particularly high

proportions of ethnic minority groups (12.4 per cent and 11.0 per

cent respectively. Generally it is the case that the larger the urban

area the higher is the proportion of non-White ethnic groups in the

population (see Table 8).

Among the main ethnic minority groups themselves there are

distinct differences in the patterns of settlement. Whereas there is

no significant difference overall between the proportions of the

ethnic minority groups in urban and rural areas in England and

Wales who are Black (30.0 per cent and 29.0 per cent respectively),

the proportion who are Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis in

urban areas (49.3 per cent) is almost double that in rural areas (25.0per cent). And for Chinese the situation is reversed, with just 4.9

per cent of the total ethnic minority population in urban areas

belonging to this group compared with 7.8 per cent of the

population in rural parts of the country.

Table 5

Population s iz e Density ( persons/hectare*)

(residents)

England Wales Scotland Great Britain

All urban areas 39.0 36.9 20.6 36.0

1,000,000 and over 43.9 - - 43.9500,000 - 999,999 42.1 - 33.1 40.4200,000 - 499,999 40.5 37.1 32.7 39.6100,000 - 199,999 38.1 37.2 29.3 37.250,000 - 99,999 37.6 44.9 28.6 37.320,000 - 49,999 36.6 36.2 25.9 34.210,000 - 19,999 34.5 37.3 24.2 32.0

5,000 - 9,999 33.4 36.6 16.3 27.72,000 - 4,999 30.5 36.2 11.8 25.3

Under 2,000 27.1 26.9 6.9 14.4

All rural areas 0.39 0.27 0.07 0.26

* For note on the hectare figures used to calculate density see Box B.

Population density by size of urban area, 1991 Census Table 6

Urban/rural area Percentage of resident population by age

04 1829 45pension- 75 and over

able age*

Males Females

England

Total 6.6 18.3 19.2 2.4 4.7Urban areas 6.8 18.7 18.8 2.4 4.7Rural areas 5.6 14.6 22.9 2.7 4.4

Wales

Total 6.6 16.9 19.7 2.5 4.8Urban areas 6.8 17.4 19.2 2.4 4.9Rural areas 5.8 14.8 21.9 2.6 4.5

Scotland

Total 6.4 18.1 19.5 2.1 4.4Localities 6.4 18.5 19.2 2.1 4.4Rural areas 6.2 15.5 21.4 2.4 4.1

Great Britain total 6.6 18.2 19.3 2.4 4.6

* 65 for men and 60 for women

Age structure, urban and rural areas, 1991 Census

Table 7

Urban/rural area Percentage of residents in households within each age group

with a long-term illness

All Under Pensionable 75 and

ages pensionable age* and over

age* over

England

Total 12.0 6.6 36.5 48.6Urban areas 12.2 6.8 37.1 49.1Rural areas 10.1 5.3 30.9 43.8

Wales


Scotland

Total 12.9 8.0 36.1 47.3Localities 13.3 8.3 36.8 47.9Rural areas 9.5 5.5 29.6 41.8

Great Britain total 12.4 6.9 36.8 48.7

* 65 for men and 60 for women

Long-term illness, urban and rural areas, 1991 Census

Page 38


42/405



The profile of different urban ethnic minority settlement is also

distinctive when looking at the size of area. The proportions of the

non-White ethnic population who are in the Black groups are

greatest in those areas of over 500,000 population (around a third)

and in the smallest urban areas (30.6 per cent), and are at the

lowest levels in the medium-sized urban areas ranging from 50 to

500 thousand population (around one in five) (see Figure 3). In

contrast, the proportions of Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis

are greatest in these medium-sized areas and then tend to decrease

with decreasing size of area. The proportions who are Chinese are

greatest in the smaller towns with a population range 2-20

thousand.

T y pe o f ho us e ho l d a c c o m m o d a t i o n

There was a marked difference between urban and rural areas in

the types of accommodation occupied by households. In England, a

half of all households in rural areas lived in detached houses

three times the proportion in urban areas (16.7 per cent) (see Table

9). In Wales and Scotland the proportions in rural areas were even

greater (54.1 per cent and 58.1 per cent respectively). Areas with

the highest proportions of detached housing tend to occur in the

more remoter rural parts of the country. They were highest in each

of the three Scottish Islands Areas Orkney (82.8 per cent),

Western Isles (76.7 per cent) and Shetland (71.8 per cent). On

mainland Britain the highest proportions occurred in the Highland

and Grampian Regions (66.8 per cent and 64.9 per cent

respectively), with the rural parts of South Glamorgan, Powys and

Dyfed each having more than 60 per cent of households living in

such housing. In England this proportion was highest in the rural

parts of Lincolnshire (60.6 per cent), Nottinghamshire (59.0 per

cent) and Shropshire (58.8 per cent).

In contrast, rural parts of the country contained about half the

proportion of terraced accommodation that occurred in urban areas.

In both England and Wales, terraced housing was the most

Population size Percentage Percentage of residents within

(residents) of of resident non-white groups who are:

urban area population

in non-white Black Indian Chinese

groups Pakistani

Bangladeshi

1,000,000 and over 14.8 33.7 47.6 3.8500,000 - 999,999 3.6 33.8 39.7 8.8200,000 - 499,999 4.8 17.2 63.6 5.1100,000 - 199,999 4.6 20.5 58.1 5.750,000 - 99,999 2.7 19.0 54.8 8.3

20,000 - 49,999 1.6 22.8 38.7 11.810,000 - 19,999 1.0 23.4 30.3 16.1

5,000 - 9,999 0.9 26.6 24.7 17.02,000 - 4,999 0.8 24.6 27.8 13.5

Under 2,000 0.7 30.6 21.2 9.5

All urban areas 6.5 30.0 49.3 4.9All rural areas 0.7 29.0 25.0 7.8

England and Wales total 5.9 30.0 49.0 5.0

Table 8 Ethnic group by size of urban area in England and Wales,1991 Census

Urban/rural Percentage of household accommodation Tenure

area

Detached Terraced Purpose Not main Owner occupied Public ly

- built residence rented

flat Owned Buying

outright

England

Total 20.0 29.2 15.3 1.2 24.3 43.3 19.8Urban areas 16.7 31.0 16.6 1.0 23.5 43.5 20.8Rural areas 50.0 15.6 2.7 3.2 31.9 41.9 10.3

Wales

Total 24.0 33.3 8.9 2.3 31.0 39.7 19.0Urban areas 16.8 37.3 10.4 1.3 29.2 40.3 20.6Rural areas 54.1 16.5 2.6 6.3 39.1 37.2 11.9

ScotlandTotal 17.3 23.2 37.0 1.7 16.4 35.7 37.9Localities 12.2 24.4 41.2 1.0 14.9 36.2 40.0Rural areas 58.1 13.2 3.5 7.8 30.2 31.0 15.8

Great Britain 19.9 28.8 17.0 1.3 23.9 42.4 21.4

Table 9 Housing, urban and rural areas, 1991 Census

Figure 3 Percentage of resident population within non-white ethnic groups in urban areas in England and Wales, 1991 Census

1,000,000

and over

500,000

999,999

200,000

499,999

100,000

199,999

50,000

99,999

20,000

49,999

10,000

19,999

5,000

9,999

2,000

4,999

Under 2,0000

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Percentage

Size of urban areas (resident population)

Black

Indian, Pakistaniand Bangladeshi

Chinese

Page 39


43/405



common type of accommodation in urban areas (31 per cent),

whereas in Scottish localities more households lived in purpose-

built flats (41.2 per cent).

Accommodation that were not being used as a main residence at

the time of the 1991 Census was three times more common in rural

areas in England (3.2 per cent) than they were in urban areas (1.0

per cent). Such accommodation (mainly holiday homes or second

residences) was even more common in Scottish and Welsh rural

areas (7.8 per cent and 6.3 per cent respectively) and particularly in

the Highland Region (14.4 per cent) and Gwynedd (13.8 per cent).

Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly also had more than one tenth of its

housing stock not used as a main residence.

The tenure profiles of households in urban and rural areas were

fairly consistent across Great Britain. Urban areas contained more

public sector housing than did rural areas in all parts of the country.

In both England and Wales one in five urban households lived in

publicly rented accommodation, but in urban Scotland this

proportion was doubled (see Table 9), reflecting generally the

higher levels of public housing in Scotland compared with the restof Great Britain.

In contrast, households owning their own homes outright were

generally more common in rural Britain than in urban areas,

reflecting the fact that many of these home owners were likely to

be older householders who had retired to the country. This pattern

was particularly evident in Scotland, where more than twice as

many outright owner-occupiers lived in rural areas (30.2 per cent)

than in urban areas (14.9 per cent). The pattern among households

still buying their homes, however, was a little different. Outside of

Greater London and the metropolitan counties urban areas tended

to have proportionately more such households than did rural areas,

though exceptions were found in half a dozen or more shire

counties in England and Wales, notably in Avon, Humberside,

Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, and Mid and South Glamorgan.

R o o m s a n d a m e n i t i e s

Incidence of overcrowding that is, where a household has more

than an average of 1.0 persons per room was twice as prevalent

in urban areas in England (2.2 per cent of all households) than in

rural areas (1.1 per cent), where, on average, households occupied

almost one room more than in urban areas (see Table 10). A similar

pattern was found in Scotland where 3.7 per cent of urban

households were overcrowded compared with 2.6 per cent of rural

households. There was a much less marked urban/rural differential

in Wales.

Proportionately more urban households in England lacked central

heating (18.8 per cent) than did rural households (16.3 per cent),

but the reverse was the case in Wales, where over a fifth (22.3 per

cent) of rural households lacked this amenity, and in Scotland,

where over a quarter (25.3 per cent) were lacking.

Households in rural areas have need of, and show, a much greater

degree of car availability. In England only 14.6 per cent of rural

households have no access to a car compared with almost a third

(32.4 per cent) of households in urban areas; and 42.2 per cent of

rural households have two or more cars available almost double

the proportion for urban households. A similar pattern exists in

Wales, but in Scotland the proportion of urban households without

access to a car was almost one in two (45.4 per cent).

The concentration of tenements and blocks of flats in urban areas

in Scotland is shown by the proportion of accommodation above

Urban/rural Rooms per Percentage of households with

area household

Over 1.0 No No car 2 or Not on

persons central more ground

per room heating cars floor*

England

Total 5.1 2.1 18.5 32.4 24.0 -Urban areas 5.0 2.2 18.8 34.3 22.0 -Rural areas 5.9 1.1 16.3 14.6 42.2 -

WalesTotal 5.4 1.6 18.5 32.3 22.1 -Urban areas 5.3 1.7 17.7 35.4 19.2 -Rural areas 5.8 1.5 22.3 18.2 34.9 -

Scotland

Total 4.5 3.6 22.3 42.6 16.2 26.7Localities 4.4 3.7 21.9 45.4 14.2 29.3Rural areas 5.4 2.6 25.3 18.4 33.2 3.7

Great Britain 5.0 2.2 18.9 33.4 23.1 -

* Question on floor level of accomodation only asked in Scotland.

Table 10 Rooms and amenities, urban and rural areas, 1991 Census

Box B

Hectare figures for urban and rural totals

Most of the larger urban areas and some smaller urbanareas straddle administrative boundaries, but users have

shown an interest in the population defined as living in

urban or rural areas, as a whole, within the

administrative units of counties and Scottish Regions.

Census enumeration districts (EDs) do not straddle

county boundaries however, so statistics for all EDs

forming those parts of urban areas within each county

have been aggregated to urban totals. These in turn were

aggregated to urban totals for England and Wales,

Scotland, and Great Britain respectively. The differences

between national, county and Scottish Region totals and

the respective urban totals were calculated and appear

as rural totals.

The hectare figures for urban and rural land for each of

the England and Wales counties and Scottish Regions at

the time of the 1991 Census were calculated from

digitised boundaries prepared by the Ordnance Survey

and GRO Scotland. These calculations are dependent on

the scale and edition of the map base used, and thus the

results could differ slightly from other calculations of

areas and densities. In fact, there is no recognised

definitive measure of land area to which hectare and

density calculations can be benchmarked, but the large

relative difference between urban and rural parts of

counties and Regions are unaffected by such differences

in method.

ground floor level. Some 29.3 per cent of households in localities

live in such accommodation compared with just 3.7 per cent in

rural parts of the country. This proportion increased with size of

urban area reaching almost a half of all households in the largest

areas (See Figure 4). (Comparable figures for the rest of Great

Britain are not available from the 1991 Census as the question on

lowest floor level of accommodation was not asked in England

and Wales.)

Page 40


44/405



S o c i a l c l a s s , o c c u p a t i o n a n d i n d u s t r y

The national profile of social class showed a general tendency for

greater proportions of heads of household in rural areas to be

recorded in Social Classes I (Professional, etc occupations) and II

(Managerial and technical occupations) than was the case in urban

areas, and correspondingly lower proportions in Classes III-V (see

Table 11). A significant difference to this overall profile was found

in Scotland where heads of household in Social Class IV (Partlyskilled occupations) many of whom were working in occupations

associated with agriculture, forestry and fishing were

proportionately more common in rural areas (11.3 per cent) than in

localities (8.6 per cent).

There must be, by definition, similarities in the urban/rural patterns

of occupation to those of social class described above. Rural areas

generally had proportionately more residents working in

management, administration, professional and technical

occupations than did urban areas, and occupations in the other

main groups tended to be more prevalent among urban residents

than in rural areas. The urban/rural profile seems to be fairly

consistent across different parts of the country with no main

occupation group predominating in any particular areas.

This is less true when analysing patterns of industry. Not

surprisingly, proportions of employees and self-employed workers

in agriculture, forestry and fishing were more common in rural

areas by a factor of 13 in England, 17 in Wales and almost 20 in

Scotland (see Table 12). But in some counties and Scottish Regions

the proportion of workers in this industry, even by rural standards,

was particularly high; in rural Dumfries and Galloway, the Orkney

Islands and Borders, for example, over a quarter of the workforce

were employed in agriculture, forestry and fishing, compared with

just under one in five for rural Scotland as a whole. In Wales, rural

Powys (22.0 per cent) and Dyfed (20.0 per cent) also had high

proportions of agricultural workers compared with 13.9 per cent inall rural areas. In England, the counties whose rural component had

the highest proportions working in the industry were Lincolnshire

(16.2 per cent), Shropshire (16.0 per cent) and Devon (15.5 per

cent).

Urban/rural Percentage of households with head in Social Class*

area

I II III(N) III(M) IV V

England

Total 4.2 19.3 8.5 16.4 8.3 2.8Urban areas 4.1 18.5 8.7 16.6 8.4 2.9Rural areas 5.3 27.0 6.1 14.5 8.0 2.1

Wales

Total 3.0 15.7 6.7 15.8 8.2 3.0Urban areas 2.9 14.0 7.0 16.2 8.4 3.1Rural areas 3.6 23.5 5.6 14.3 7.4 2.5

Scotland

Total 3.8 16.4 7.8 15.9 8.8 3.5Localities 3.8 15.4 8.1 16.0 8.6 3.5Rural areas 4.1 25.1 5.3 15.2 11.3 3.0

Great Britain 4.1 18.8 8.3 16.4 8.4 2.9

* I (Professional, etc occupations); II (Managerial and technical occupations)

III (Skilled occupations: (N) non-manual; (M) manual);

IV (Partly skilled occupations); V (Unskilled occupations).

Table 11 Social class (based on occupation), urban and rural areas,1991 Census

Figure 4 Percentage of households not on ground floor by sizeof urban area, Scotland, 1991 Census

Urban/rural Percentage of employees and self-employed residents working in:

area

Agriculture Manu - Distribution Transport

Forestry and facturing and

Fishing Catering

England

Total 1.7 18.0 20.7 6.4Urban areas 0.8 18.4 20.8 6.7

Rural areas 10.0 14.1 19.8 4.3

Wales


Scotland

Total 2.9 16.4 19.1 6.1Localities 0.9 17.2 19.2 6.3Rural areas 18.0 10.5 18.2 5.1

Great Britain 2.0 17.8 20.5 6.4

Table 12 Industry, urban and rural areas, 1991 Census

500,000and over

200,000499,999

100,000199,999

50,00099,999

20,00049,999

10,00019,999

5,0009,999

2,0004,999

Under2,000

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Percentage

Size of urban areas (resident population)

On the other hand, urban areas consistently contained greater

proportions of manufacturing workers, particularly in

Leicestershire, Warwickshire, Derbyshire, Borders and Mid

Glamorgan where over a quarter of the urban workforce were

employed in manufacturing industries (compared with 18 per cent

nationally). Transport was the only other main industry to show a

consistently clear urban/rural pattern, with proportions of workers

higher in urban areas for every mainland shire county and Scottish

Region except Humberside, Northumberland and Highland.

Tr a v e l t o w o r k

In England and Wales, more than three out of five urban workers(that is, employees and self-employed, resident in urban areas)

used their car to travel the major part of their journey to work by

car (60.3 per cent), and over two thirds (68.6 per cent) of workers

living in rural areas did so. A similar but slightly lower level of car

Page 41


45/405



R e f e r e n c e s a n d n o t e s

1 ONS/GRO(S). 1991 Census Key Statistics for Urban and

Rural Areas: Great Britain. The Stationery Office (1997).

ISBN 0 11 691679 6.

2 ONS. 1991 Census Key Statistics for Urban and Rural

Areas: The North. The Stationery Office (1998). ISBN 0 11

620904 6.


Areas: The Midlands. The Stationery Office (1998). ISBN 0

11 620905 4.


Areas: The South East. The Stationery Office (1998). ISBN 0

11 620906 2.


Areas: The South West and Wales. The Stationery Office

(1998). ISBN 0 11 620907 0.

6 GRO(S). 1991 Census Key Statistics for Localities in

Scotland. HMSO (1995). ISBN 0 11 495736 3.

7 General Register Office. Census 1951: England and Wales:

Report on Greater London and five other conurbations.HMSO (1956).

8 The localities forming the largest continuously built-up area

in Strathclyde are: Airdrie, Bargeddie, Barrhead, Bearsden,

Bellshill, Bishopbriggs, Blantyre, Bothwell, Busby,

Calderbank, Carfin, Chapelhall, Clarkston, Clydebank,

Coatbridge, Duntocker and Hargate, Elderslie, Erskine,

Faifley, Giffnock, Glasgow, Hamilton, Holytown, Inchinnan,

Johnstone, Kilbarchan, Kirkintilloch, Lenzie, Linwood,

Milngravie, Milton, Motherwell, Neilston, New Stevenson,

Newarthill, Newmains, Newton Mearns, Old Kilpatrick,

Paisley, Renfrew, Stepps, Uddingston, Viewpark, and

Wishaw.

usage occurred in Scotland (see Table 13). Reflecting the generaldecline in rural public transport services, the train or bus was more

than three times as likely to be used for travelling to work in urban

areas than in rural parts of the country.

Particularly high usage of rail transport occurred in London, and of

the bus in the metropolitan counties and localities in Strathclyde.

The relative closer proximity of home to workplace in urban areas

results in there being greater proportions of residents in such areas

travelling to w

Date post:	29-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	kuzevski5386
View:	235 times
Download:	0 times

MTT Research Package

Documents