The document discusses the OECD's new approach to classifying urban areas, which identifies integrated labor market areas beyond city boundaries. It applies this classification to 28 countries, identifying 1,148 urban areas of different sizes. This new approach provides a more accurate view of where people live and work, and allows for better comparisons of urbanization trends across countries. It finds that urban areas are growing, particularly in the hinterlands of large metropolitan areas, and that metro areas tend to have higher GDP per capita than non-metro areas. The new classification is intended to improve analysis of links between urbanization and development.

1. Redefining urban: a new way to
measure metropolitan areas
Functional Urban Areas in OECD countries
www.oecd.org/gov/regional/measuringurban

2. Why do we need to redefine urban areas
consistently across countries?
1. Policies need reflect the reality of where people live and work
(functional economic areas), as do the institutions that design
and implement such policies.
2. Individual cities are interested in comparing their
performance with “similar peers” around the world.
3. The connections between cities and with surrounding areas
can lead to important changes in how and where economic
production takes place, affecting national growth
performance and quality of life.

3. The OECD has developed a new approach to
classifying urban areas
3 billion and counting of the world’s population live in some form of
urban area. But around the world we don’t have the same definitions or
understandings of what these urban areas are.
1. The new OECD classification, developed with the European
Commission and member countries, identifies urban areas
beyond city boundaries, as integrated labour market areas.
2. It is applied to 28 countries and identifies 1 148 urban areas
of different size: small urban, medium-sized urban, metropolitan and
large metropolitan
3. It allows comparisons among the different forms that
urbanisation takes (densely populated centres and their
hinterlands, sprawling, polycentric connected cities, etc.)

4. How does the new approach change
our views of cities?
Many cities don’t match the city boundaries
Source: OECD calculations based on population density disaggregated with Corine Land Cover.

5. Urban systems in a country comprise cities of different size
Korea
Old measurement method: New measurement method:
3 Large metropolitan regions 45 Functional urban areas of different size
Seoul
Daegu
Busan

6. Urban areas can be organised around one or more densely populated
centres; the extension of the hinterlands varies greatly
Old measurement method: New measurement method:
4 Large metropolitan regions London
Seoul
Leeds
Daegu
Manchester Busan
Birmingham
Urban cores
Hinterland
London

7. Two-thirds of the OECD population live in urban areas,
but the urban experience is very different in each country
•Around 65% of the urban population in Korea live in large metropolitan areas;
•In most European countries around 25% of urban population live in medium-sized areas
Small urban areas Medium-sized urban areas Metropolitan areas Large metropolitan areas
Korea
Denmark
Greece
Japan
United States
Hungary
Austria
Canada
OECD 28
Portugal
Mexico
Italy
Sweden
Belgium
France
Czech Republic
United Kingdom
Spain
Germany
Poland
Netherlands
Estonia
Slovenia
Ireland
Switzerland
Norway
Finland
Slovak Republic
Luxembourg
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percentage of urban population by city size (2008)

8. The urban population keeps growing, particularly in the
hinterlands of large metropolitan areas
Functional urban area Core Hinterland
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
Small urban areas (pop Medium-sized urban areas Metropolitan areas (pop Large metropolitan areas (pop
between 50,000 and 200,000) (pop between 200,000 and between 500,000 and 1.5 mln) above 1.5 mln)
500,000)
Population growth 2000-2006 by city type and core/hinterland
(average yearly growth rates)

9. The extension of land for urban use differs greatly
and so does the urban population density
• Tokyo (Japan) and Napoli (Italy) have the same urban population density (around 8 500 people
per m2 of urban area), even if Tokyo is 10 times bigger than Napoli in population size
Tokyo (JPN) Seoul Incheon
New York (KOR)
(USA)
Los Angeles Nagoya (JPN)
(USA)
Berlin (DEU)
Phoenix (USA) Napoli (ITA)
Lisboa (PRT) Daegu (KOR)
Helsinki (FIN)
Ottawa (CAN) León (MEX)
Bilbao (ESP)
Liège (BEL) Lublin (POL)
0 1,500 3,000 4,500 6,000 7,500 9,000 10,500 12,000 13,500 15,000
urban population density (people per km2 of urban area)
Urban population density and total population in selected metro areas (2008)

10. 48% of the OECD population live in the 264 urban areas with
a population of at least 500 000 (metro area) and these areas
account for 53% of OECD GDP
OECD (28) Asia (2) North America (3) Europe (23)
80%
68.6% 70.1%
60% 57.9%
53.4%
52.3%
47.9%
42.7%
40% 35.7%
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
POPULATION
GDP
20%
GDP
GDP
GDP
0%
# of metro areas 264 46 105 113
Percentage of population and GDP in metro areas (2008)

11. Metro areas tend to be wealthier than the rest of the economy
• GDP per capita premium is generally higher in metro areas (particularly in large
metropolitan areas)
•The GDP per capita premium varies by country (and continent)
Metropolitan areas (pop between 500,000 and 1.5 mln)
Large Metropolitan Areas (pop above 1.5 mln)
50% 46.5%
40%
32.1% 31.9%
30%
20.3%
20%
11.1%
9.3%
10%
4.7%
2.0%
0%
OECD (28) Europe (23) North America (3) Asia (2)
Per capita GPD gap between metro areas and the rest of the economy (2008)

12. The most dynamic metro areas are driven by different growth models
6% Centro (MEX)
moderate Praha (CZE)
population high
growth and high Changwon (KOR) population
GDP per capita Annual average GDP per capita growth rate 5% and GDP per
growth capita growth
New Orleans (USA)
Budapest (HUN)
Athina (GRC) Edmunton (CAN)
4%
Veracruz (MEX)
Querétaro (MEX)
(2000-2008)
Tulsa (USA) San Luis Potosí (MEX)
Calgary (CAN)
3% Duisburg (DEU) Portsmouth (GBR) Monterrey (MEX)
Essen (DEU) Edinburgh (GBR)
London (GBR) El Paso (USA)
Hermosillo (MEX)
Dresden (DEU) Baton Rouge (USA)
Leipzig (DEU) Helsinki (FIN) Málaga (ESP)
2% Dortmund (DEU)
San Antonio (USA)
Karlsruhe (DEU) Fort Worth (USA)
Dallas (USA)
Münster (DEU) Houston (USA)
Tampa (USA)
Paris (FRA) Tucson (USA)
Palermo (ITA) Portland (USA) Toulouse (FRA)
Bonn (DEU)
Lyon (FRA) Vancouver (CAN)
Salt Lake City (USA) high population
moderate 1% Naha (JPN) growth and
Rennes (FRA) Denver (USA)
population Las Vegas (USA) moderate GDP
and GDP per Orlando (USA) Austin (USA) per capita
capita Roma (ITA)
Phoenix (USA) growth
growth 0%
-1% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4%
Annual average population growth rate (2000-2008)
Population and GDP per capita growth in the 61 fastest -growing metro areas (with GDP
growth 25% higher than the country average GDP growth)

13. What future developments are expected?
• Build a dataset of economic, social and environmental
conditions for the 2 largest city types (Metro Areas Database)
• Adapt the definition of urban areas to emerging economies
• Explore other economic functions beyond commuting to
identify different typologies of areas
With the objectives of:
• Analysing links between urbanisation and development
• Opening up to further analysis on the potential of inclusive
growth in urban areas of different size and analysis of
governance structure

14. Find out more:
On line report: “Redefining urban: a new way to measure
metropolitan areas” , OECD Publishing, 2012,
www.oecd.org/gov/regional/measuringurban
Interactive maps and data on metro areas
www.oecd.org/gov/regional/statisticsindicators/explorer
For more information on OECD work on regional and metropolitan
statistics, visit: www.oecd.org/gov/regional/statisticsindicators
For more information on OECD work on urban
development, visit: www.oecd.org/gov/urbandevelopment