1. Rural development indicators
Item 8 of the agenda
Teodóra Brandmüller
Eurostat Unit E4

2. These regions are inhabited by 112.1 million people, 22.3% of the EU27
In Ireland 72.4% lives in rural regions.
less people of working age
8 out of the 10 regions with the highest shares of persons aged 65+ were rural
51.3 % of the EU’s land area is within regions classified as being predominantly rural
More than half (51.3 % in 2012) of the EU’s land area is within regions classified as being predominantly rural; these areas were inhabited by million people, more than one fifth (22.3 %) of the EU-27’s population. The highest share of the population living in predominantly rural regions was recorded for Ireland (72.4 %). When compared with the total population, the population in predominantly rural regions tends to have less people of working age, more older people, and more young people aged 10–19. The 10 regions with the highest shares of persons aged 65 or over included eight that were predominantly rural regions,
Photograph by Chris Rainier/National Geographic Stock
Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development 30/09-01/

3. Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development
Predominantly rural regions generally had a lower employment rate than urban regions
In Greece, Spain and Austria predominantly rural regions had a higher employment rate than both intermediate and predominantly urban regions
In 2010 predominantly rural regions accounted for approximately 15.3 % of GDP within the EU-27.
In % of the number of bed places in all collective accommodations (hotels, campsites and others) were in predominantly rural regions. In Austria the share was 72.5 %.
In 2010, predominantly urban regions accounted for approximately 54.3 % of GDP within the EU-27, while intermediate regions contributed around 29.2 % and predominantly rural regions the remaining 15.3 %. Services have been the major driver of growth within the EU during recent decades. However, their share of regional GDP (note that data are not available for the vast majority of Italian regions) was much lower in 2010 in predominantly rural regions (64,8) than in intermediate regions (68.7 %) or predominantly urban regions (78.6 %). By contrast, the shares of the other broad sectors were higher for predominantly rural regions — 23.7 % from industry, 7.1 % from construction and 4.4 % from agriculture, forestry and fisheries — than for the two other types of regions.
In half of the EU Member States for which data are available and which have at least two types of regions, predominantly rural regions generally had a lower employment rate than the other types of regions. In seven EU Member States intermediate regions had the lowest employment rates while in Greece, Spain and Austria predominantly rural regions had a higher employment rate than both intermediate and predominantly urban regions.
In Greece, Spain and Austria predominantly rural regions had a higher employment rate than both intermediate and predominantly urban regions
In 2011, just over two fifths (42.5 %) of the number of bed places in all collective accommodation establishments (hotels, campsites and others) in the EU-27 were in intermediate regions, just under one third (32.2 %) in predominantly rural regions and the remaining quarter (25.3 %) in predominantly urban regions. Ireland (75.2 %), ahead of Greece (74.1 %) and Austria (72.5 %)
Services contributed 64.8 % of total value added in predominantly rural regions % from industry, 7.1 % from construction and 4.4 % from agriculture, forestry and fisheries.
30/09-01/
Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development
Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development 30/09-01/

4. Data need
Socio-economic data for rural development
Data by NUTS 3 regions
Data already available in Eurostat databases
Data not at Eurostat disposal need of additional breakdowns, etc.
Geographic location of services or facilities
Information not at Eurostat disposal, need of update, etc.
Gisco database
and specific geographical data sources
Project on supply of statistical information in the field of rural development
Working Party on Regional Statistics 1-2 October 2012
Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development 30/09-01/

5. Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development
Building aggregates
30/09-01/
Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development
Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development 30/09-01/

6. Project on quality improvements
- What is the impact of missing input on the output data?
- Can a procedure for imputation of the missing input data be proposed?
- What would be its impact on the resulting output data?
- Can a procedure be proposed for assigning flags to the output?
All results will be published on CircaBC
30/09-01/
Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development

7. Update of urban-rural typology
Updated typology
Helsinki-Uusimaa (FI1B1) - NUTS effect
Pohja-Eesti (EE001) – grid effect
Previous typology

8. Impact of the reclassification of the urban-rural typology on the distribution of the population, 2011 %

9. Latest publications
 - Statistics in focus 16/2013: Updated urban-rural typology: integration of NUTS 2010 and the latest population grid
- Statistical Atlas / Regional yearbook: Focus on rural development
- Statistic explained / Regional yearbook: Focus on rural development
- Statistic explained: Territorial typologies

10. Thank you for your attention!
More information:
Contact:
30/09-01/
Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development

11. Urban-rural typology
The typology classifies NUTS 3 regions in three groups. The region type depends on the share of regional population living in rural grid cells.
Predominantly urban regions
Rural population is less than 20 % of the total population.
Intermediate regions
Rural population is between 20 % and 50 % of the total population.
Predominantly rural regions
Rural population is 50 % or more of the total population.
Working Party on Regional Statistics and Rural Development 30/09-01/