Diversity of the foreign-born population

[muppet]

Haha, ANYHOO...

[Docere]

Originally Posted by muppet

^I'd agree on that but it would have to be based on density (as opposed to CSA/MSA commuting), and not 'regional'.

Or proximity eg London + 'immediate counties'.

Alright, so London + Home Counties is a reasonably good comparison with MSAs, and the next ring with CSAs? I can live with that.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by muppet

I imagine, as with all boundary definitions places that aren't really relevent will get included and places that are will get excluded. Similar to London eg Oxford (relevant) versus say, Sheerness (not relevent) that's literally a small town on an island at sea.

Btw though you don't actually have to commute into the city proper by definition, just into a next county. I know it would make more sense, but I think they've based methodologies on the local permeability rather than the connectivity to the 'heart'.

Do the New Haveners commute to a nearby town/ city other than itself alot?

That's the criteria for MSA, I'm not sure if it's for CSA. But I will say that everyone who gets on a New York bound train at Princeton Junction is very likely heading to Manhattan.

[muppet]

Originally Posted by Docere

Alright, so London + Home Counties is a reasonably good comparison with MSAs, and the next ring with CSAs? I can live with that.

Yep, let's call it a bastardised proximity count and ignore the size of catchment. I'll trust your figures for the MSA, and estimate for the CSA, I'm using Home Office stats for London.


London city proper 3.35 million (2017), NYC 3.02 million (2019)
London proximity/ NYC MSA: 4.2 million, NYC 5.7 million
London CSA 5.3 million (2017)/ 5.5 million today? NYC 6 million?

Obviously the criteria don't quite match due to the built form/ patterns, but it's a semblance of an overview .

[muppet]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

That's the criteria for MSA, I'm not sure if it's for CSA. But I will say that everyone who gets on a New York bound train at Princeton Junction is very likely heading to Manhattan.

I have a sense that the boundaries tend to shy away from New Jersey somewhat, yet will take in alot of upstate that has lesser links. Dyou think that's some kind of Philly 'effect', like abutting against another 'territory'? Or just that water is seen as more of a barrier (which it shouldn't, due to bridges, tunnels etc).

Birkenhead for example is considered a different authority/ city/ planet to Liverpool across the water, due to it being an inlet of the sea, as opposed to a river:


http://d3e1m60ptf1oym.cloudfront.net...70939_uxga.jpg

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by muppet

I have a sense that the boundaries tend to shy away from New Jersey somewhat, yet will take in alot of upstate that has lesser links. Dyou think that's some kind of Philly 'effect', like abutting against another 'territory'? Or just that water is seen as more of a barrier (which it shouldn't, due to bridges, tunnels etc).

I don't get that sense. The NY MSA stretches pretty far down the New Jersey coast because of Ocean County, well past Trenton. The MSA doesn't really stretch that far upstate. It only includes three counties north of the NYC border: Westchester, Rockland, and Putnam.

[muppet]

Ah okay - does it end before Philly's metro starts? Or do they just abutt each other?

I wonder where the people in that in-between land commute to more, direction-wise.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by muppet

Ah okay - does it end before Philly's metro starts? Or do they just abutt each other?

I wonder where the people in that in-between land commute to more, direction-wise.

Atlantic City and Atlantic County is technically its own metro area, but I think unofficially everything south of Ocean County is considered part of Philadelphia's metro area. Inland, everything south of Trenton is part of core Philadelphia MSA. Everything along the coast past Ocean County is more beach town oriented, and are not really commuting suburbs.

[Docere]

2018 data:

London and Home Counties

Foreign born 4,257,000

Europe 1,633,000
South Asia 847,000
Sub-Saharan Africa 692,000
Caribbean/Latin America 303,000
East/Southeast Asia 295,000
Middle East/Central Asia/North Africa 246,000

Greater London

Foreign born 3,236,000

Europe 1,205,000
South Asia 662,000
Sub-Saharan Africa 520,000
Caribbean/Latin America 264,000
Middle East/Central Asia/North Africa 206,000
East/Southeast Asia 202,000

[muppet]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Atlantic City and Atlantic County is technically its own metro area, but I think unofficially everything south of Ocean County is considered part of Philadelphia's metro area. Inland, everything south of Trenton is part of core Philadelphia MSA. Everything along the coast past Ocean County is more beach town oriented, and are not really commuting suburbs.

We have a similar no-man's land here - Northampton and vicinity is caught between some of its commuters heading southeast towards the London area, and another chunk northwest to the Midlands conurbations. In effect it's utterly forgotten and swept under a geographer's carpet.


https://gifyu.com/image/AFKE

[Docere]

Foreign born

New York (2019) 5.7 million
Los Angeles (2019) 5.3 million
London (2018) 4.3 million
Toronto (2016) 3.1 million
Paris (2015) 2.9 million
Miami (2019) 2.6 million
San Francisco/San Jose (2019) 2.3 million
Sydney (2016) 2.1 million

[Docere]

The Home Counties have a pretty low foreign born percentage, in the 10-20% range. So while NYC and London have similar city proper numbers, NYC has more foreign born because the surrounding region is more diverse.

That being said, London is extraordinarily diverse. The African immigrant population for example is triple that of DC or New York.

[nito]

Originally Posted by Docere

Some Torontonians are adamant about the "Golden Horseshoe" definition. I don't know why. Having more people commuting in to the GTA from Niagara or Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge does absolutely nothing in terms of enhancing Toronto's urban experience or stature. It doesn't make a difference in terms of whether the city is Alpha or Alpha-minus. So I don't really care that much if it's more Atlanta-sized or Chicago-sized.

More people coming into a city will most certainly have an impact on the built form of a city. Crossrail as an example, will bring a further 1 million people to within 45 minutes of Central London; that is a win for employers who will have access to an even larger talent pool, and it is a win for employees who have access to more job opportunities. More activity requires more offices, restaurants, cafes, etc… Interactions whether for business or leisure purposes enhances the urban experience in profound ways. At the same time, there is reciprocal development beyond the city (e.g. residential around commuter stations). This is the agglomeration effect.

If there is not the infrastructure however then this is a moot point because these connections cannot be made.

Originally Posted by Docere

Using a London and Home Counties definition - Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Essex, Kent, Surrey - comes to 4.2 million.

Using the latest 2019 figures for London and the Home Counties (including the Unitary Authorities which sit inside the ceremonial counties, e.g. Medway in Kent) you get to a foreign-born population (FBP) figure of 4.5mn.

Using the Home Counties is convenient, but it is a volatile area for measurement which includes distinct communities distant from London and lacking connections, whilst overlooking areas that do have strong links with London (e.g. London Gatwick airport, the Thameslink corridor, etc…). Kent and Essex for reference cover a vast area, each 50% larger than Suffolk, which is itself 50% larger than the next NY MSA county. The Home Counties (and their districts) are also not urban in the sense that New York MSA counties are and the data isn’t broken down more comprehensively.

Either way the cake is cut, currently the population and FBP of London’s metro area is below that of New York.

That could change though, as London and the surrounding areas (let’s say the Home Counties) are growing at a far faster rate: between 2011-2019 the population of London and the Home Counties (excluding London) expanded by 809,000 and 455,000 respectively; a total increase of 1.26mn (158,000pa). In contrast, the New York MSA (2010-2019) expanded by 306,000 (34,000 pa).

Originally Posted by iheartthed

If you calculate the density each NY MSA county (minus NYC) and average them the density is 2,795 people per square mile. Interestingly, if you calculate the density of London Metro minus Greater London, the density is 2,629 people per square mile. So the average NY suburban county is slightly more dense than London Metro excluding Greater London.

Muppet is both correct and wrong. From a strictly population divided by area measure he is incorrect as you highlight.

From a built-up/urban area coverage perspective it flips the other way as the counties and districts around London are noticeably far less urban than their New York MSA county counterparts; a direct consequence of the Green Belt and other anti-sprawl measures. Development and population is far more concentrated, typically in settlements where there is a railway station, which is why the London commuter rail network is so much larger and more utilised than the New York commuter rail network.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by nito

Muppet is both correct and wrong. From a strictly population divided by area measure he is incorrect as you highlight.

From a built-up/urban area coverage perspective it flips the other way as the counties and districts around London are noticeably far less urban than their New York MSA county counterparts; a direct consequence of the Green Belt and other anti-sprawl measures. Development and population is far more concentrated, typically in settlements where there is a railway station, which is why the London commuter rail network is so much larger and more utilised than the New York commuter rail network.

I think it's probably correct to say that suburban London is more evenly dense than suburban New York. New York's "suburban" areas vary in density quite dramatically. New York has a "suburban" county (Hudson, NJ) that is as dense as London itself. And it has several counties with fairly rural densities (under 1,000 people per square mile: Sussex, Hunterdon, and Ocean in NJ, Putnam in NY, and Pike in PA).

Also, how are you measuring that London's commuter rail network is more utilized than New York's?

[Crawford]

Yeah, I think London's periphery (and most of Northern European metropolitan peripheries) have more flat density compared to Northeastern U.S. density, which is extremely variable.

Coastal Connecticut is a good example. Extremely low densities overall, but fairly high weighted density. And almost everything that matters (retail, employment centers, transit, culture) is in a very narrow corridor along the coast. Everything else is semi-rural wooded areas with multiacre lots, a typology that doesn't really exist outside the eastern U.S.

[nito]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I think it's probably correct to say that suburban London is more evenly dense than suburban New York. New York's "suburban" areas vary in density quite dramatically. New York has a "suburban" county (Hudson, NJ) that is as dense as London itself. And it has several counties with fairly rural densities (under 1,000 people per square mile: Sussex, Hunterdon, and Ocean in NJ, Putnam in NY, and Pike in PA).

The Green Belt – an area 3.5x the area of London itself – has certainly distorted the density and urban profile of London and the surrounding counties and districts, which does have its pros (protection of rural environments and prevention of sprawl) and cons (restrictions on development). Within the city limits, an area equivalent to Queens and the Bronx is categorised as Green Belt, with the urban area abruptly transitioning into a rural landscape of farms and country lanes. London has the rare honour of having an agriculture sector.



Going by the 2019 figures, London has a higher population density than Hudson County. Of course, the developed area population density is higher still; London has less built area than the likes of Rockland County, whilst the counties and districts beyond have a far more rural composition with the population concentrated in a few areas.

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Also, how are you measuring that London's commuter rail network is more utilized than New York's?

In the absence of sprawl, development and population growth concentrated in towns and villages that typically had a railway link with London. That concentration provides a substantial catchment for more train services as demonstrated with the earlier Cambridge, Oxford, New Haven & Princeton Junction comparisons.