1. Methodological issues
Valeriya Angelova
Eurostat Unit E4
NUAC meeting
15/05/2018, Brussels

2. 1. Validation reports – less restrictive validation rules for the future 2. Overview of the latest changes in the Methodological Manual 3. Clearer definition of city 4. Open questions C O N T E N T S

3. Validation reports – less restrictive validation rules for the future
• CR2001V Total nights spent in tourist accommodation establishments
Current Max value
National figure for ES (2016)
• EN4008V Municipal waste generated (domestic and commercial), total
Current Max value (in thousand tonnes)
National figure for IT (2016)
• In the future these rules will not be applied to the country level

4. Validation reports – less restrictive validation rules for the future
• Year to year difference validation
Current T vs T-1<15%
Makes sense in case of large figures – totals, figures for big cities
Does not make sense for mortality and natality, population by age groups and number of students for small cities where the figures are small
E.g. Livorno: 1 death in road accident in T-1 vs 7 in T -> 600%
In the future error message only for the cities with > inhabitants

5. Reminder on flag b
• Always in the first reporting year after the update of the cities and FUAs (in case of new version codes)
• In case of changed methodology or data source (also described in the metadata)

6. Overview of the latest changes in the Methodological Manual
• The lone pensioner households are households composed of one person aged 65 or more
• The average annual rent for housing covers both – furnished and unfurnished dwellings
• Average price for buying a real estate: old data has been kept (price for the whole property) and new variable has been introduced (price for sq. m)
• The online students are not counted

7. Clearer definition of city, Greater city and FUA of Greater city
Eurostat, DG REGIO and OECD continuously improve the description of the methodology
NSIs, ESPON etc. interpret and apply the definitions and the method in the same way

8. More detailed explanations to the method for definition of cities
Step 4 of the Manual: b) at least 50 % of the city population lives in an urban centre and;
• This rule does not say a single High Density Cluster (HDC)
• Besides the central HDC a LAU can be crossed by neighbour HDCs or the HDC can be split by a geographical obstacle
• To rephrase the rule to make it clear that at least 50% should live in one or more urban centres.

9. More detailed explanations to the method for definition of cities
Step 4 of the Manual: c) at least 75 % of the population of the urban centre lives in a city
• To give priority to the 75% rule
• This means that all HDC will be captured since 75% of the population of each urban centre should live in one or more cities

10. The example of Haarlemmermeer between Amsterdam and Haarlem
Only 46% of the LAU
population lives in the
Haarlemmermeer' city
centre that is why CBS
wanted to remove it
from the city list
but altogether
54% live in the 3 HDC
people live in the central HDC

11. More detailed explanations to the method for definition of Greater cities
• It should be very clear when a city is more than the central municipality
• Within a Greater city not all municipalities or the central one have to be separate city
• In the case of a city consisting of multiple LAU-2s, the 50% rule applies to the combination of the LAU-2s. A LAU-2 that is 50% in a HDC can be dropped, while still respecting this rule (but degurba should change to 2)
If someone looks for the population of Copenhagen and the city population is bigger than the municipal population it should be clear why.

12. More detailed explanations to the method for definition of Greater cities
A crucial question: When should one stop adding LAUs to the Greater city?
• An additional rule: Try to get the city population close to the HDC population!

13. A clear case of Greater city A complicated case of Greater city
Middelburg and Vlissingen don't have population > but together they fulfil all conditions.
Geldrop-Mierlo is dropped from both the city Eindhoven and city Helmond.

14. FUA of a Greater city
Barcelona
Commuting flows not only to the central municipality (usually giving the name of the Greater city) have to be examined, but the flows from outside to all municipalities composing the Greater city

15. 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 Further ideas for improvement of the Manual?
Do you have other
examples
for validation rules
that don't reflect on the reality? 3
Do we need the Manual
also in FR and DE? 4
Ideas for more firm
rules for match between
degurba and the city list? 5
Is the city definition
clear now?
Are the pdf maps of
the cities correct? 6 7
Any other questions?

16. Thank you for your attention!
Contact: E4