Quote:
Originally Posted by markovian process
The claim that half of the 81% of Canadians who live in cities, are living in suburbs sounds odd to me. What definition of suburb are they using and what would similar stats be for Americans if the same definition is used as in the infographic?
|
It's unclear, maybe it's by municipality (ie anything outside the central municipitality)? If you expected it to be higher living in suburbs, it would be because Canadian municipalities often amalgamated/annexed suburbs/greenfields.
There's only a few cities where the central municipitality has less than half the metro population (Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, Victoria, and maybe Kitchener depending on the definition) but they do include the biggest metros.
There was another measure which involved looking at transport mode however according to that about 3/4 of metro area residents live in suburbs.
Planning research shows Canada is suburban nation | Queen's University News Centre
However the methodology is a bit odd in that it looks like it defines auto suburbs as those with a transit commute mode share less than 150% of the metro average. So if your metro has a 30% transit mode share, your census tract could have a 44% transit mode share and be considered an auto suburb but if your metro has a 10% transit share then if your census tract has 16% transit mode share it's a transit suburb.
That's rather different from the impression one got from reading the dozens of media articles on the subject which made no mention of the fact that the mode share cut-off for auto suburb was different for each metro when they reported Toronto had the most auto suburbs.