Combined Statistical Areas by Area in Square Miles

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by LuluBobo

LA CSA is bigger than Netherlands and Belgium and Luxembourg combined.

31.4 million people combined in those three countries too.

The LA CSA is obviously misleading. Its almost all desert being counted. Nobody lives in those desert areas.
Not sure how this is so confusing to people.

[mhays]

Western CSAs are mostly like that. Seattle's includes thousands of square miles of complete wilderness, including Mt. Rainier National Park.

LA does stand out in this regard.

[LA21st]

Sure, but Seattle isn't getting the same treatment on this, even though it's well known why LA's CSA extends to Nevada. There's people on here trying to pretend people are commuting from the state border or something.

[Yuri]

Los Angeles CSA is the most reasonable of all. No reason to complain. You could make it like 10x smaller and population would be pretty much the same.

Metro areas all over the world are based on administrative subdivisions. There is nothing out of ordinary on the US Census Bureau define theirs.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Sure, but Seattle isn't getting the same treatment on this, even though it's well known why LA's CSA extends to Nevada. There's people on here trying to pretend people are commuting from the state border or something.

San Bernardino County really seems to ruffle feathers

[Docere]

Yes in Chicago's case don't you have something like 90% of the population living in about a third of the land area?

The outlying "corn counties" take up a lot of land, but add little to the population numbers.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Docere

Yes in Chicago's case don't you have something like 90% of the population living in about a third of the land area?

In terms of CSA, it's 92% of the population on 1/4 of the land area.

Chicago CSA: 9,866,960 on 10,634 sq. miles

Chicago UA + Round Lake UA + Kenosha UA*: 9,059,446 on 2,522 sq. miles

The other 3/4 of Chicago's CSA is cornfields widely interspersed with a smattering of small towns and a handful of small cities (Kankakee, DeKalb, Michigan City, Valpo).



(*) the 3 major contiguous UAs of Chicagoland.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

These "metros" are the size of entire European countries.

yes, and it is so absurd in most cases.

I don't think CSAs should be used (here on this website) to denote metro population statistics, most of which are of the dick measuring sort.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

In terms of CSA, it's 92% of the population on 1/4 of the land area.

Chicago CSA: 9,866,960 on 10,634 sq. miles

Chicago UA + Round Lake UA + Kenosha UA*: 9,059,446 on 2,522 sq. miles

The other 3/4 of Chicago's CSA is cornfields widely interspersed with a smattering of small towns and a handful of small cities (Kankakee, DeKalb, Michigan City, Valpo).



(*) the 3 major contiguous UAs of Chicagoland.

UA and CSA numbers very close, even for Chicago.

Los Angeles UA (+5 neighbouring UAs): 15,780,303 within 6,730 km²; LA CSA: 18,650,666 in 87,982 km².

LA UA (+5) has 84.6% population and 7.6% of the CSA area.

If we include outer UAs such as Oxnard, Lancaster, Victorville, Temecula, Palm Springs, etc., we go to 18,079,432 (96.9%) and 8,506 km² (9.7%). And that's ignoring the smallest ones.

Basically UA = CSA.

[FtGreeneNY]

And Philadelphia-Reading-Camden: 7,336.2.

[Docere]

Yeah, when I look at demographic figures I don't really care much about the large outlying areas. MSAs (less so CSAs) are convenient enough for that purpose.

[iheartthed]

MSAs might underestimate populations more than CSAs overestimate them. Looking at the top 30 CSAs by population, the primary MSAs on average account for about 80% of the CSA population. The metros where the primary MSA population is below 70% tend to be multi-polar regions like the Baltimore-Washington region or the San Francisco Bay Area.

Primary MSA population percentage of overall CSA population for top 30 CSAs (2020 census)
98.9% -- Phoenix–Mesa–Chandler, AZ MSA / Phoenix–Mesa, AZ CSA
97.4% -- Houston–Pasadena–The Woodlands, TX MSA / Houston–Pasadena, TX CSA
97.0% -- San Antonio–New Braunfels, TX MSA / San Antonio–New Braunfels–Kerrville, TX CSA
96.4% -- St. Louis, MO-IL MSA / St. Louis–St. Charles–Farmington, MO-IL CSA
96.3% -- Chicago–Naperville–Elgin, IL-IN MSA / Chicago–Naperville, IL-IN-WI CSA
93.6% -- Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington, TX MSA / Dallas–Fort Worth, TX-OK CSA
90.5% -- Minneapolis–St. Paul–Bloomington, MN-WI MSA / Minneapolis–St. Paul, MN-WI CSA
89.8% -- New York–Newark–Jersey City, NY-NJ MSA / New York–Newark, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA
89.4% -- Sacramento–Roseville–Folsom, CA MSA / Sacramento–Roseville, CA CSA
88.9% -- Miami–Fort Lauderdale–West Palm Beach, FL MSA / Miami–Port St. Lucie–Fort Lauderdale, FL CSA
88.8% -- Pittsburgh, PA MSA / Pittsburgh–Weirton–Steubenville, PA-OH-WV CSA
87.5% -- Atlanta–Sandy Springs–Roswell, GA MSA / Atlanta–Athens-Clarke County–Sandy Springs, GA-AL CSA
86.7% -- Kansas City, MO-KS MSA / Kansas City–Overland Park–Kansas City, MO-KS CSA
84.6% -- Philadelphia–Camden–Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA / Philadelphia–Reading–Camden, PA-NJ-DE-MD CSA
82.3% -- Charlotte–Concord–Gastonia, NC-SC MSA / Charlotte–Concord, NC-SC CSA
82.1% -- Columbus, OH MSA / Columbus–Marion–Zanesville, OH CSA
81.8% -- Denver–Aurora–Centennial, CO MSA / Denver–Aurora–Greeley, CO CSA
81.1% -- Seattle–Tacoma–Bellevue, WA MSA / Seattle–Tacoma, WA CSA
81.0% -- Detroit–Warren–Dearborn, MI MSA / Detroit–Warren–Ann Arbor, MI CSA
80.4% -- Indianapolis–Carmel–Greenwood, IN MSA / Indianapolis–Carmel–Muncie, IN CSA
76.6% -- Portland–Vancouver–Hillsboro, OR-WA MSA / Portland–Vancouver–Salem, OR-WA CSA
70.8% -- Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim, CA MSA / Los Angeles–Long Beach, CA CSA
63.7% -- Orlando–Kissimmee–Sanford, FL MSA / Orlando–Lakeland–Deltona, FL CSA
63.7% -- Washington–Arlington–Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV MSA / Washington–Baltimore–Arlington, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA CSA
63.1% -- Raleigh–Cary, NC MSA / Raleigh–Durham–Cary, NC CSA
59.2% -- Boston–Cambridge–Newton, MA-NH MSA / Boston–Worcester–Providence, MA-RI-NH CSA
58.0% -- Cleveland, OH MSA / Cleveland–Akron–Canton, OH CSA
51.5% -- San Francisco–Oakland–Fremont, CA MSA / San Jose–San Francisco–Oakland, CA CSA
46.5% -- Salt Lake City–Murray, UT MSA / Salt Lake City–Provo–Orem, UT-ID CSA
43.3% -- Hartford–West Hartford–East Hartford, CT MSA / New Haven–Hartford–Waterbury, CT CSA

[mhays]

Even MSAs can have massive amounts of complete wilderness, again like Mt. Rainier National Park for Seattle. Actually the point isn't the park, but the fact that maybe 2/3 of all three counties is wilderness.

The 2/3 aren't 20% of the population or even 5%. I'd guess 0.1%, nearly all in a few small towns.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

MSAs might underestimate populations more than CSAs overestimate them. Looking at the top 30 CSAs by population, the primary MSAs on average account for about 80% of the CSA population. The metros where the primary MSA population is below 70% tend to be multi-polar regions like the Baltimore-Washington region or the San Francisco Bay Area.

Primary MSA population percentage of overall CSA population for top 30 CSAs (2020 census)
98.9% -- Phoenix–Mesa–Chandler, AZ MSA / Phoenix–Mesa, AZ CSA
97.4% -- Houston–Pasadena–The Woodlands, TX MSA / Houston–Pasadena, TX CSA
97.0% -- San Antonio–New Braunfels, TX MSA / San Antonio–New Braunfels–Kerrville, TX CSA
96.4% -- St. Louis, MO-IL MSA / St. Louis–St. Charles–Farmington, MO-IL CSA
96.3% -- Chicago–Naperville–Elgin, IL-IN MSA / Chicago–Naperville, IL-IN-WI CSA
93.6% -- Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington, TX MSA / Dallas–Fort Worth, TX-OK CSA
90.5% -- Minneapolis–St. Paul–Bloomington, MN-WI MSA / Minneapolis–St. Paul, MN-WI CSA
89.8% -- New York–Newark–Jersey City, NY-NJ MSA / New York–Newark, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA
89.4% -- Sacramento–Roseville–Folsom, CA MSA / Sacramento–Roseville, CA CSA
88.9% -- Miami–Fort Lauderdale–West Palm Beach, FL MSA / Miami–Port St. Lucie–Fort Lauderdale, FL CSA
88.8% -- Pittsburgh, PA MSA / Pittsburgh–Weirton–Steubenville, PA-OH-WV CSA
87.5% -- Atlanta–Sandy Springs–Roswell, GA MSA / Atlanta–Athens-Clarke County–Sandy Springs, GA-AL CSA
86.7% -- Kansas City, MO-KS MSA / Kansas City–Overland Park–Kansas City, MO-KS CSA
84.6% -- Philadelphia–Camden–Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA / Philadelphia–Reading–Camden, PA-NJ-DE-MD CSA
82.3% -- Charlotte–Concord–Gastonia, NC-SC MSA / Charlotte–Concord, NC-SC CSA
82.1% -- Columbus, OH MSA / Columbus–Marion–Zanesville, OH CSA
81.8% -- Denver–Aurora–Centennial, CO MSA / Denver–Aurora–Greeley, CO CSA
81.1% -- Seattle–Tacoma–Bellevue, WA MSA / Seattle–Tacoma, WA CSA
81.0% -- Detroit–Warren–Dearborn, MI MSA / Detroit–Warren–Ann Arbor, MI CSA
80.4% -- Indianapolis–Carmel–Greenwood, IN MSA / Indianapolis–Carmel–Muncie, IN CSA
76.6% -- Portland–Vancouver–Hillsboro, OR-WA MSA / Portland–Vancouver–Salem, OR-WA CSA
70.8% -- Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim, CA MSA / Los Angeles–Long Beach, CA CSA
63.7% -- Orlando–Kissimmee–Sanford, FL MSA / Orlando–Lakeland–Deltona, FL CSA
63.7% -- Washington–Arlington–Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV MSA / Washington–Baltimore–Arlington, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA CSA
63.1% -- Raleigh–Cary, NC MSA / Raleigh–Durham–Cary, NC CSA
59.2% -- Boston–Cambridge–Newton, MA-NH MSA / Boston–Worcester–Providence, MA-RI-NH CSA
58.0% -- Cleveland, OH MSA / Cleveland–Akron–Canton, OH CSA
51.5% -- San Francisco–Oakland–Fremont, CA MSA / San Jose–San Francisco–Oakland, CA CSA
46.5% -- Salt Lake City–Murray, UT MSA / Salt Lake City–Provo–Orem, UT-ID CSA
43.3% -- Hartford–West Hartford–East Hartford, CT MSA / New Haven–Hartford–Waterbury, CT CSA

Salt Lake's MSA is a mess. It's basically Salt Lake County and Tooele. The Ogden MSA actually starts literally at the northern Salt Lake city limits and encompasses the northern suburbs (including North Salt Lake). I can understand Utah County having its own MSA but Davis County not being included in Salt Lake's numbers always made little sense to me (and I understand the government compares work population when drawing these but still)...

In reality, the Salt Lake MSA should include the following counties:

Salt Lake
Tooele
Weber
Davis
Summit

It used to - for the most part - as the old MSA was the Salt Lake-Ogden MSA ... but Ogden (Weber) was divided into its own and Davis County was included with it.

If it did, the population of the MSA would be 2,021,627, which feels right to be honest.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by Docere

Yeah, when I look at demographic figures I don't really care much about the large outlying areas. MSAs (less so CSAs) are convenient enough for that purpose.

Urban Area(UA) data is even more precise than Metro Area(MSA) data.

[IcedCowboyCoffee]

MSA definitions are useful for raw population counts in a region because even those individuals who live isolated and in the middle of nothingness are still linked to the region they are pooled into in a way that they are explicitly not with more distant regions.

Urban Area population measures on the other hand are most useful when you want to look at population densities. It carves away all of that empty land to get at the heart of just how closely 95% of people in a region are to one another without the arbitrariness of how much or how little unused land there is within county lines.

They both have their usefulness depending on what exactly you want to compare. But Urban Areas only get redefined and counted every 10 years so we can't use them for these yearly estimate debates like we do with MSAs so where's the fun in that

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by IcedCowboyCoffee

MSA definitions are useful for raw population counts in a region because even those individuals who live isolated and in the middle of nothingness are still linked to the region they are pooled into in a way that they are explicitly not with more distant regions.

Urban Area population measures on the other hand are most useful when you want to look at population densities. It carves away all of that empty land to get at the heart of just how closely 95% of people in a region are to one another without the arbitrariness of how much or how little unused land there is within county lines.

They both have their usefulness depending on what exactly you want to compare. But Urban Areas only get redefined and counted every 10 years so we can't use them for these yearly estimate debates like we do with MSAs so where's the fun in that

And urban area is not a frozen area. They change every census. Metropolitan areas, which are based on fixed borders administrative subdivisions, are very important to measure population evolution.

[Docere]

Also a lot more information is provided for MSAs.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Yuri

And urban area is not a frozen area. They change every census. Metropolitan areas, which are based on fixed borders administrative subdivisions, are very important to measure population evolution.

MSAs/CSAs don't stay static either.

The Chicago MSA recently had Kenosha County splintered off into its own MSA (though it remained in the Chicago CSA).

Now the CB needs to do the same thing for DeKalb, Grundy, Newton, and Jasper Counties.


And there are countless examples of MSAs adding new counties over the past 70 years.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

MSAs/CSAs don't stay static either.

The Chicago MSA recently had Kenosha County splintered off into its own MSA (though it remained in the Chicago CSA).

Now the CB needs to do the same thing for DeKalb, Grundy, Newton, and Jasper Counties.


And there are countless examples of MSAs adding new counties over the past 70 years.

Counties stay static and MSA/CSA are formed by them. UAs change every single day, literally.