socioeconomic conditions and trends for communities in the ... · objectives to delimit communities...
TRANSCRIPT
Socioeconomic Conditions and Trends
for Communities in the
NWFP Region
Ellen DonoghueN. Lynnae Sutton
USDA Forest ServicePNW Research Station
ObjectivesTo delimit communities in the Plan
region to facilitate socioeconomic monitoring and research.
To assess socioeconomic conditions and trends for communities in the Plan region.
Challenges of defining communities in the Plan region
Size of the region (72 counties)10 million peopleNeed for trend dataCensus dataIssues of secondary data
Issues with Secondary Data “Availability of data” does not mean easy to work with at low costs
Census does not emphasize making data comparable from one decade to the next
Challenges and opportunities for using Census data to define the unit of analysis
One challenge of census places as the unit of analysis:
Who is left out?
#* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#*#* #*
#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#*#* #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#* #* #*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #* #*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #* #* #* #*#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#*#* #* #*#* #* #*#* #*#*#* #*#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#* #* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#* #* #*#* #* #*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*
#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#* #* #*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #* #*#*#*#* #* #*#* #*#* #*#*#* #* #*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#* #*#* #* #*#* #*#* #* #*#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#* #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#* #* #*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#* #*#* #* #*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#* #*#*#* #* #*#* #* #* #*#*#*
#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*
#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#*
#* #*#* #*#*
#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #* #*#*#*#* #*#* #* #*#*#*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*
#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*
#*#*#*
#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #* #*#* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*
#* #*#*#*#*#* #*
#*#* #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#*
#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#* #*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#* #*#* #* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
Seattle
Portland
San Francisco
Censusplaces
´0 50 10025 Miles
Census places
Northwest forestplan region
States
Major lakes and rivers
Major roads
Bureau of LandManagement
Forest Service
#*
Metropolitanareas
An opportunity: aggregating census block groups
Combine adjacent and related block groups into meaningful social units
Data availability – BGs are the smallest unit for which all census summary statistics are reported
Track record – Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project (Doak and Kusel 1996)
Issue: 1990 – 2000 data compatibility
Aggregating census block groups1) GIS analysis2) Visual review3) Issue of 1990 and 2000 data compatibility
② used population and housing proportions and multipliers
For detailed description of defining the unit of analysis:www.fs.fed.us/pnwPublication number: PNW-GTR-570
!!!
!!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!!! !
!
!
!!!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!! !
!!!!
!
!
!!!
!
!!
!!
!
!! !!
!!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!! !!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!
! !!
! !!
!! !!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
! !!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!!! !
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!!
!
!!!
!
!!!!!
!
!!!!!!
!!!
!!
!
!
! !
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!
!!!
! !
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!!!!!
!
!!!
!
! !!
!!
! !
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!!
!!!!
!
!!!
!
!!!
!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!!!!
!! !
! !
!!
!
!!!
!!
!!!
!
!
!!!!
!!
!!
! !
!!
!
!!
!! !! !!
!!!!!
!!!!!!
!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!!! !!
!!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!!!
!
!!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!! !
! ! !!
!!!!!
! !!!!!! !
!
!!!
!!!
!!!!!
!!
!
!!!!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
! !!
!
!
!
!
!! !
!!!!!
!!
!
!!
!!!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!
! !
! !
!!
!
!
!
!!! !
!!!!
!
!!! !
!!
!
!
!
!!!!
!
!!!!! !
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!! !
!!!
!!
!!!
!!
!!
!
!!!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!! !
!! !
! !!!!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!!
!!! !
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!
!!!!!!!
!!
!
!
!!!!
!!!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!!!
!!!
!! !
!!
! !
!
!
!
!!!
!!! !!!!
!!
!!!!!
!
!!
!
!
! !
!
!!
!
! !!!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!!!!
!
! !!!!
!!!!
!! !!!!!!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!!
!
!! ! ! !
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!!!!
!
!!!
!
!
!!
!
!!
! !!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!! !!
!!!
!
!
!!
!
!!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
! !!!!!
! !
!! !
!!!!
!
!!!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
! !!
! !
!
!!!
!!
!
!
!
!!!!
! !
!
!
!
!!!!!
!!
!
!!!!!!!
!!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!
!!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!!
! !!!
!
!!!!!! !!!
!!!
!!!!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!!
!!!
!!
!
!
!!
! !
!
!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!!!
!!
!!
!
!! !!
!!
!
!
!
! !!
!!!! !
!
! !!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!! !!!
!
!!!
!!
!!!!
!!!
!!
!!!!
!
! !! !
!!
! !!
! !!!
!
!
!!!!
!!!!!!!
!
!!!
!!
!
!!
!!!
!!
!!!!
!!!
!!
!!!
!!!
!
!
! !
!!!!
!
!!!!
!
!!
!!
! !! !!!
!
!!!
!!! !
!!! !
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!!!
!! !
!
!!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
! !!!
!!!!! !
!
!
!!
!!!!
!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
I- 5
I-82
I-80
I-205I-5
I-84
I-90
I-84
Seattle
Portland
San Francisco
Communityboundariesand populationcenters withinNWFP region
´0 50 10025 Miles
Northwest forestplan region
States
Major lakes and rivers
Major roads
BLM
Forest Service
Community boundaries
Metropolitan areas
! Population centers
1,314 community block group aggregations
“Communities in the Plan region”
Unit of analysis
Community block group aggregations vs. census places
1,314 vs 517 places4.0 million people vs 2.5 million peopleNote the proximity of red dots to public forestlands
Seattle
Portland
San Francisco
Communitiesand census places
´0 50 10025 Miles
CommunitiesCensus places
Northwest forestplan region
States
Major lakes and rivers
Major roads
Bureau of LandManagement
Forest Service
#*
$+
Metropolitanareas
Socioeconomic conditions and trends
for communities in the Plan region
PopulationPlanCommunities, 2000
Seattle
San Francisco
Portland
´0 50 10025 Miles
Northwest Forest Plan region
Population, 2000
States
Major lakes and rivers
Major roads
Metropolitan areas
88 - 500
501 - 2,000
2,001 - 5,000
5,001 - 50,000
50,001 - 144,306
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
88-250 251-500 501-2,000 2,001-5,000
5,001-50,000
50,000-144,306
Total population category, 2000
Num
ber o
f com
mun
ities
Number ofcommunities
0.8%
6.4%
54.0%
24.0%
14.0%
0.8%
54% of communities had between 500 and 2000 people
Population Change in the Plan Region, 1990 – 2000Communities in Plan region: 4.13 million people in 1990, 4.98 million in 2000Population increased 20.6 %Entire region: 8.57 to 10.26 million people (10 metro + 1,314 nonmetro)
U.S. population increased 13.2 %
Change in Population,PlanCommunities1990 - 2000
#*##
##
#*#
#
#
##
##
#*
###
##
#*
#*
#* #*
##
#
#
#
#*#*
#*#*#*#*##
#*#*#*##*#* #*#*
#
#*
#
#
#*# #
##*#*#*
##*#
##*#
#*####
## ####*
#* #*
#*#
##
##
## ##*##
##*
#
##
##*
###
#*#
#*#
##*#
#*#*
#
###
###* #*
## #*
#
#*# ##*#
##
#
#
##
####
#
#*
#
#
#
##*
#*#*
##*
# ##
##*#*#*
#
#
#*#
##*##
#*###*
#
#*###
#
#*#*#
#
#*
#*
#*
#*#
#*
# # #
#
#*#*#*
##*
#*#*
# #
#*#*#*
#*#
#
###*
#*
##*
##
#*#*
###*
#*###
#*
##*####*##*####
####*
#*
#*
## #*
#
##
#
##*#
##*#*
#
#*
##*#*# #
#
#*###
#
#
#
###*####
####
#*
# ##
#*#*
#* #
#*#*
#*
#*
#*
##*
#######
##
###
####
## #####*
#
#* #*#
#
####
#####*#*######*#######*###*##*#*#*#
##
##
#
###
# # ###*#
#####
##*
### #
##*
#
#*#
## #*#*##
#*##*########
#
#*##*#*#*# #*#
#*###*#*####*#*####
#*#*#*#
#
#
###
#
#*
#
#*##*#*
#
##
##
#
##
#
#
##
###
##
#
#*#* #*#*
#
#*#*#*
#
#*###
#*####*####
# # #*##
##### ###*#*##* #*#*
#*#*#
###
##*###
###
###*##
####
##
#
##
#
###
#
#
###*
#*#
##*#
###
#
#
##
#
#######*#
##
#####*#*
###
#*
#
#
##
#
# #*
# #*#*##
#
#
### #* ##*#*##
#*## #
#*#*#*
#
#*
#*#*#*#
#
#*####*#
#
####*#
#
#* ##*#
###*##*
#*##
##
###
###*
###
##
#*#
##* #
##* #
#* #*#*##
##
#####*
##*#*
### ##*
##
##
##*
##*
##
## #######*##*
#
#
#
##*##
#######
##
##*
#*
###*###
## #
##
# #
#
#*
#
##*#*##*##*
##*#
##
##*#*###
###
#
# #*
#
##
#
####*
##
#*
##
###*##
#*#######
# ##*##
#*##*#
########
##*#
#
#
#*##
##
#
#
#####
#*
#
##
#
##
###
####*####
#
#
#*#*
#*
##
###########
################
#
####
##
## #
##
#*#####
##
###
#*#*##
#*
#* ##
###
#*#
#
#
##
#*
#
#
##
###
# ##
# #
#
###
##
#
#*
##*###
#* #*
#*
#*#
####*#
#* #
#
#*##*##*##*##
#*
#*#
##
######
#
#*####
#*#*
#
##
#*#
##
######
##
# ###*
#
#########
#####*##
##
#
###########
###
####
####
###
##
#
###
#
#
######
###*
#*
#*
#
####
#####
####
##
##
#
## #*#* #*
#
#
#*#
# ##
#*### ##
#####
##
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
### #
###
###
##
#
#
#
#*###*##
#
#*##*
##
#*
#
#####
##########
##*#*#*# #
###
#
### #
####
## ##
#
##
#########
##*
#
### ##
###
############
##
###### ##
# #
#####
#####
####*### #######*####
#*#
# ###
# #
##
##
#####
##
#*#*
#######
#####
#
#
####
#
#
##
######### ##
#
######
##
##
##
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
Seattle
San Francisco
Portland
Change inpopulation,1990-2000
´0 50 10025 Miles
Northwest Forest Plan region
Percent changein population,1990-2000
States
Major lakes and rivers
Major roads
Metropolitan areas
Decreased population(-74 - 0)
Population belowregional average(1-20)
High increase in population (21 - 75)
Very high increase in population (75 - 200 +)
#*
Community Population Change# of comms
% change
49 (4%)75 – 200+Very high increase
472 (36%)21 – 75 High increase
518 (39%)1 – 20Increase below regional average
275 (21%)-74 - 0Decrease in population
% of comms
Change in community age distribution
0100200300400500600700800900
1000
0-4 5-19 20-29 30-44 45-64 65 andup
Age ranges (years)
Num
ber
of p
eopl
e
19902000
Percent of population by race
Two or more races, 3.30
Asian and Pacific Islands, 2.08
Native American, 2.07
Black, 0.88
Other, 5.63
White, 86.04
Year: 2000
Hispanic origin1990 5.8%2000 8.5%
Education
30.7811621School enrollment (average # persons per community)
25.319.315.4Percent with a Bachelor’s degree or higher
6.782.877.6Percent completed high school
Percent change20001990
Economic indicators 1990 2000 Percent
change Median household income
$35,214(in 2000 $)
$37,151 5.5%
Percent unemployment
7.3% 7.3% 0.0%
Percent poverty 12.9% 11.8% -8.5%
67
16
4
12
5 5
18
8
5
15
5
8
12
4
12
5 5
21
8
6
15
0
5
10
15
20
25
Agric
ultu
re,fo
rest
ry,fi
shin
g,hu
ntin
gan
d m
inin
g Con
stru
ctio
n
Man
ufac
turin
g
Who
lesa
le tr
ade
Ret
ail t
rade
Tran
spor
tatio
n, w
areh
ousi
ng, a
ndut
ilitie
s
Fina
nce,
insu
ranc
e, re
al e
stat
ean
d re
ntal
, and
leas
ing
Educ
atio
n, h
ealth
, and
soc
ial
serv
ices
Arts
, rec
reat
ion,
acc
omod
atio
n,an
d fo
od s
ervi
ces
Publ
ic a
dmin
istra
tion
Prof
essi
onal
and
oth
er s
ervi
ces
Employment by industry
Perc
ent o
f lab
or fo
rce
1990
2000
Employment by industry, 1990 and 2000
Community socioeconomic well-being index
Employment diversityEducationUnemploymentPovertyHousehold income inequalityTravel time to work (SEWB = EmD + Ed – Unem – Pov – InIn – TT)
Community socioeconomic well-being categories, 1990 and 2000
Categories Standard deviations from the mean (x = 67.2)
Socioeconomic well-being score range
Very low > -1.5 0 to 48.72
Low >= -1.5 and < -0.5 48.73 to 61.07
Medium >= -0.5 and < 0.5 61.08 to 73.36
High >= 0.5 and < 1.5 73.37 to 85.58
Very high >= 1.5 85.59 to 100.00
2064
4118
3614
16371312
3128
4461
4171
3145
1888
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
Very low Low Medium High Very high
Community socioeconomic well-being
Population 19902000
Average size of community population by socioeconomic well-being category, 1990 and 2000
")#*")
#*#*
#*#*")
#*#*#*GF#*
")
")#*")
#*#*
")#*")")
#*#*GF
")
")")")
#*GFGF#*GF#*
GFGF")#*#*") ")")
")GF
")
GF")")")")")#*#*
#*#*#*")#*
")")GF")#*#*")#*#*GF")")
#*#*
GF")
#*")
#*")
#*#*")#*#*#*
")
")
GFGFGFGF
GFGFGF
#*GFGF")
#*")")
")")#*
GF#*#* #*#*#*#*GF#*")GF
GF#*#*GFGF
#*")GF
")")#*#*#*GF")")
")
")
")#*
#*")
#*#*
GFGFGFGFGFGFGFGFGF
")
")GF#*
#*#*#*GF")#*")GF")
GFGF#*")#*
")#*GF
")
")
")
#*
")")
#*#*") ")
")
#*#*")
#*GF
#*")
#*#*
")")#*
")#*GF")GF")
")
#*#*GFGF#*#*
GF#*GFGF
GFGFGF
GFGFGFGFGFGFGFGF
")#*")#*GFGFGFGFGFGFGF
#*GF")
GFGFGF#*
#*#*")#*#*")#*")
")#*#*#*GF
")#*#*
#*")#*
GF
")
#*#*")#*")")#*")
#*#*")
GF
GF#*")
#*")#* ")")
")
")
")
")
GF#*
#*GFGFGFGF#*GF
GF")
#*")
")")#*
#*GF
GFGFGFGFGFGF")
GF#*GFGF
GF
GFGFGFGFGFGF#*GFGFGF
GFGFGFGFGFGFGFGF#*#*")")#*#*#*GF#*GFGFGF#*
#*#*#*")")")#*#*
#*GF GFGFGF#*
#*GF#*#*#*#*#*
GFGFGFGF
")")
")
GF #*#*#*#*#*#*")#*#*#*")#*#*GF#*GF#*
")
")#*#*GFGF#*")#*GF#*")#*#*#*#*#*#*")#*GFGF#* ")
")")")")")
GF#*GF")
")#*
")")#*GFGF
GFGF
GFGF#*
GFGF
GF
GF
GFGF
#*#*#*
GFGF #*
")#* ")#*")
#*")#*#*#*")")")
")#*")GF
#*#*GF#*#*GF #*") GFGF#*#*")#*") ")")")#*")") ")")
")")")
#* GF#*#*#*#*#*GF
#*GFGF#*GF")")#*
GF#*GF#*GFGF
#*")")
")#*#*#*
#*#*#*GF#*GF#*
#*GF#*
")")#*#*")
")#*
")
#*#*#*#*")#*")#*")#*")
")")")")")
") ")#*
")
")
")")")
#*
") ")
#* ")#*GF#*#*GF
#*GFGF#*")GF#*#*#*
#*#*#*GF#*")
")#*GF
#*GF")#*
#*GF#*GF#*#*#*#*GF#*#*")#*")
") #*")#*
")")#*#*")#*GFGF
GF#*GFGF#*GF#*#*
#*GF#*
#*GF
")")
#*GF#*#*#* ")
") ")")#*GF
#*")
#*")#*#*GF#*#*
GF
GFGFGF#*")#*")
#*GFGFGFGFGFGFGF
GF")GFGFGF#*#*")#*")#*#*")
GF
")#*")#*GF#*#*#*#*#*GF
GFGFGFGF
GF
GFGF#*GF#*GF#*GFGF
")")
#* ")
#*#*GF
#*GF#*GF#*GFGF#*#*#*GFGF
")#*#*")#*")
GF")#*
GFGF#*
")
#*#*
#*GFGFGFGF
#*#*")
#*GF#*GF#*#*#*GF")GFGFGFGFGF#*
#*#*#*#*#*
GF#*")")GFGF#*#*#*GF#*#*
GFGF")
GF
GF
")#*#*
GFGF #*
")
#*#*#*#*#*
#*
")")
")#*GF
#*")#*
#*")#*GFGF#*GF#*
")
#*
#*#*")
#*#*#*#*GFGFGF
GFGF#*#*#*GF
#*#*#*GF#*GFGF#*GF")GFGF#*#*
#*#*GF
GFGFGF#*
#*#*
#*#*#*
#*#*
#*#*")")#*GF
")")#*")#*
GF")")")
")
") GF#*
")GF#*
#*")
#*
GF
#*")
#*
#*
")
#*#*
#*")#*#*#*")") GF
#*GF GF#*
#* ")
")
")
GF")")")")") ")
")
#*#*")#*#*")#*
#* ")")
GF#*#*#*#*")GF#*")#*
GFGFGF#*GF")GFGF#*#*GF")#*#*#*#*
GF")
")
")")")")
GF#*
")#*GFGFGFGF
GFGF#* GFGFGFGF#*#*GF
GFGFGFGFGFGFGFGFGFGFGFGFGFGF#*
#*
GF")GFGFGFGFGFGF#*GFGFGFGF#*GFGF#*GFGF#*#*GF
#*#*#*GF#*#*#*GFGF
")
")
#*")#*")#*")
#*GF")")")#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*
GF")")")#*
")")
")#*") #*") ")
#*
#*
")GF")#*")
")#*#*#*#*#*#*GFGF#*#*
#*GF
")
")
GF
")")
")
")
#*")
")
#*#*")
GF#*#*GF#*")#*")")GF
#*#*#*
")
#*")")#*")
#*#*
#*#*#*GF
GFGF
GF
#*
#*")#*")#*GFGFGFGF#*GF#*")")#*#*#*")")#*#*#*")")
GFGFGF#* GF
GFGFGFGF#*#* #*#*
")
#*#*
#*#*GFGFGFGFGFGF#*#*GF
")
")#*#*GF#*
GFGFGFGFGFGF#*#*#*GFGF#*#*#*GFGFGF
#*GF#*#*#*") ")#*
")")
GF#*")")")
GFGFGFGFGF
GFGF#*")GF#*#*#*#*")GF#*#*")
#*")#*#*
#*")") #*GF
#*
#*GFGFGFGF
#*
GFGFGF GFGFGF#*#*")
GFGF#*GFGFGFGFGFGF#*GF#*
#*
GF
#*GF#*GF
")
#*")")
")")#*#*GF")#*")") ")")
")
#*GF#*#*")#*
#*#*
")#*GFGF
GF
#*
GF
GF
")
")
")
Seattle
Portland
San Francisco
´0 50 10025 Miles
Socioeconomicwell-being categories, 1990
Very low, lowMedium
Very high, high
Northwest ForestPlan region
States
Major lakes and rivers
Major roads
Bureau of LandManagement
Forest Service
#*
")
Metropolitanareas
GF
The rankings (very low to very high)allow us to see how communities are doing relative to their neighbors.
Community socioeconomic well-being change
Change in score (scale of 0 to 100)
Number of communities
Percent of communities
Decrease -51 to < -3 484 37
Little change >= -3 and <= 3 353 27
Increase > 3 to 44 477 36
Change in community socioeconomic well-being scorebetween 1990 and 2000
Change in average socioeconomic well-being score between 1990 and 2000.
1990 socioeconomic well-being category
Number of communities 1990
1990 score
2000score Difference
Very Low 100 40.5 53.0 12.5*Low 250 55.9 58.8 2.9*Medium 543 67.7 66.2 -1.5*High 368 78.3 75.8 -2.5*Very High 53 89.5 84.3 -5.2* *Significant at p <.05 level.
Regional population and socioeconomic well-being categories
Socioeconomic well-being category
Total population
1990
Percent of population in
SEWB category
1990
Total population
2000
Percent of population in
SEWB Category
2000
Very low 131,211 3.2 215,191 4.3
Low 409,336 9.9 833,340 16.7
Medium 1,962,201 47.5 2,064,668 41.5
High 1,515,526 36.7 1,641,515 33.0
Very high 109,385 2.7 225,197 4.5
Total 4,127,659 100.00 4,979,911 100.00
Regional population and socioeconomic well-being categories
Doubled
21%
37.5%
Proximity of Communities to Forest Service and BLM lands
!!!
!!
!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!!! !
!
!
!!!!!
!!!
!
!
!
!! !
!!!!
!
!
!!!
!
!!
!!
!
!! !!
!!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!! !!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!! !!
! !!
!! !!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
! !!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!!! !
!
!!
!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!!
!
!!!
!
!!!!!
!
!!!!!!
!!!
!!
!
!
! !
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!
!!!
! !
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!!!!!
!
!!!
!
! !!
!!
! !
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!!
!!!!
!
!!!
!
!!!
!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!!!!
!! !
! !
!!
!
!!!
!!
!!!
!
!
!! !!
!!
!!
! !
!!
!
!!
!! !! !!
!!!!!
!!! !!!
!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!!! !!
!!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!!!
!
!!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!! !
! ! !!
!!!!!
! !!!!!! !
!
!!!
!!!
!!!!!
!!
!
!!!!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
! !!
!
!
!
!
!! !
!!!!!
!!
!
!!
!!!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!
! !
! !
!!
!
!
!
!!! !
!!!!
!
!!! !
!!
!
!
!
!!!!
!
!!!!! !
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!! !
!!! !!
!!!
!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!
!
!
!! !
!! !
! !!!!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!!
!!! !
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!
!!!!!!!
!!
!
!
!!!!
!!!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!!!
!!!!
! !
!!
! !
!
!
!
!!!
!!! !!!!
!!
!!!!!!
!!
!
!
! !
!
!!
!
! !!!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!!!!
!
! !!!!
!!!!
!! !!!!!!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!!
!
!! ! ! !
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!!!!
!
!!!
!
!
!!
!
!!
! !!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!! !!
!!!
!
!
!!
!
!!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
! !!!!!
! !
!! !
!!!!
!
!!!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
! !!
! !
!
!!!
!!
!
!
!
!!!!
! !
!
!
!
!!!!!
!!
!
!!!!!!!
!!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!!!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
!!
! !!!
!
!!!!!! !!!
!!!
!!!!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!!
!!!
!!
!
!
!!
! !
!
!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!!!
!!
!!
!
!! !!
!!
!
!
!
! !!
!!!! !
!
! !!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!! !!!
!
!!!
!!
!!!!
!!!
!!
!!!!
!
! !! !
!!
! !!
! !!!
!
!
!!!!
!!!!!!!
!
!!!
!!
!
!!
!!!
!!
!!!!
!!!
!!
!!!!!! !
!
! !
!!!!
!
!!!!
!
!!
!!
! !! !!!
!
!!!
!!! !
!!! !
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!!!!! !
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
! !!!
!!!!! !
!
!
!!
!!!!
!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
I -5
I-82
I-80
I-205I-5
I-84
I-90
I-84
Seattle
Portland
San Francisco
Communityboundariesand populationcenters withinNWFP region
´0 50 10025 Miles
Northwest forestplan region
States
Major lakes and rivers
Major roads
BLM
Forest Service
Community boundaries
Metropolitan areas
! Population centers
Proximity to Public Forestlands57% (750 of 1,314) communities are
within 5 miles of FS or BLM lands
2 million people – just under half the population (not including 10 metro areas)
Proximity to Forest Service and BLM lands
and
Community Socioeconomic Well-being
‘‘ ‘‘LL‘‘
‘‘MH ‘‘HH‘‘H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H‘‘
H‘‘M‘‘M
‘‘
H
HHHH‘‘
HH
‘‘
H
‘‘
H‘‘
H‘‘H
‘‘
H‘‘M
‘‘
HH‘‘HHH
‘‘
H ‘‘
H
‘‘
M ‘‘
M
‘‘
L
‘‘
H‘‘
H‘‘LH
‘‘
HH‘‘HM
‘‘
M
M‘‘M
M‘‘
M
‘‘
M
L‘‘L ‘‘L
MM
‘‘M‘‘L‘‘L‘‘L
‘‘M ‘‘
H
‘‘
H MMM ‘‘
H
H‘‘M‘‘M ‘‘M
‘‘
L
‘‘
M
‘‘
L
‘‘
H
‘‘
HM MM‘‘L‘‘L
‘‘
M‘‘LM
ML
M‘‘MH‘‘M‘‘M‘‘
H
‘‘
L
‘‘
M‘‘ML
‘‘
H‘‘M‘‘M ‘‘LM
‘‘M‘‘ML‘‘L M
‘‘
H
‘‘LM
‘‘
M
‘‘
L
‘‘
M‘‘M‘‘MM
‘‘
L ‘‘
L
‘‘
MLL
‘‘L
‘‘
HM
‘‘
H
L
‘‘
L
‘‘M ‘‘
L‘‘
H‘‘
HH
‘‘H
H‘‘M
‘‘H‘‘M
M
H
‘‘H‘‘
H
H‘‘
H
‘‘H
‘‘
HM
‘‘
H
H‘‘H ‘‘
H
‘‘
L
‘‘L L‘‘L
‘‘L‘‘LLL
‘‘M
‘‘
M ‘‘
M‘‘L‘‘
M ‘‘
LM‘‘
H
H
‘‘
H ‘‘
H ‘‘
H
‘‘
M‘‘MH
‘‘
H
‘‘
M
‘‘M‘‘
H
‘‘MM‘‘
MM‘‘
M L
‘‘
M‘‘
M‘‘L L
‘‘
M L
‘‘
M
‘‘
L
‘‘
ML
L‘‘H ‘‘
M
M
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
M‘‘M
‘‘M‘‘MH
MH
L ‘‘
L
M
H ‘‘
M
‘‘M
‘‘
H
‘‘H‘‘M
‘‘L
M
M
‘‘
M
‘‘M
‘‘
ML
M
M
‘‘M‘‘M
M
‘‘M ‘‘
M
‘‘
HH
‘‘L
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘
H
‘‘
M
‘‘L
‘‘LM
‘‘L‘‘
M‘‘M
‘‘
M
M‘‘
L L ‘‘
M‘‘L ‘‘
L
‘‘M
‘‘
L
L ‘‘L‘‘
L
‘‘L
‘‘
L
‘‘
HL‘‘L
L
‘‘L
L ‘‘
L‘‘L
M
‘‘L
‘‘
L
M L
‘‘
H H
M‘‘L
‘‘H
‘‘H‘‘H
H ‘‘L‘‘
M‘‘H
‘‘H
‘‘
M‘‘H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
M H‘‘
M‘‘L‘‘
M
M
‘‘M
‘‘
H‘‘ML‘‘L
M
HM
‘‘H
‘‘H‘‘M MM
H ‘‘
M
M
‘‘
H
M
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘
M‘‘L ‘‘M
‘‘
M ‘‘
M
‘‘
H
‘‘M‘‘L
‘‘
H
‘‘
H‘‘
H
‘‘M‘‘L
‘‘MM ‘‘
H
‘‘M
‘‘
HM
M‘‘M
‘‘
M
‘‘M‘‘M
L
‘‘
M
M
‘‘
H
‘‘
H‘‘
MM
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘
MH
M ‘‘
M
‘‘L
‘‘
L
‘‘
M
‘‘
M‘‘M‘‘
M
‘‘
HM
‘‘M‘‘H‘‘H L
‘‘
H ‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘
H
‘‘
H ‘‘
HH
H
‘‘
H‘‘
H‘‘H
‘‘M
‘‘
HH
H‘‘
HM‘‘M
‘‘
M‘‘L
‘‘
M
‘‘L M
‘‘
H
H
‘‘
L‘‘L
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘
H‘‘M
M ‘‘
H‘‘
H
‘‘
M
‘‘
H
‘‘
HH
‘‘
H‘‘H
‘‘
H
‘‘H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
HMH
‘‘L‘‘H
‘‘
H
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘M
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
M
‘‘M
‘‘L
‘‘
H
‘‘
M
H ‘‘
MH
‘‘
H‘‘
M
‘‘
H ‘‘
H‘‘MH ‘‘
H
‘‘
M‘‘
H ‘‘
HM‘‘
H
MM
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
M
‘‘M‘‘L
‘‘
H ‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
M‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
M‘‘L ‘‘
H
‘‘M
‘‘
H
HH‘‘M ‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
M
‘‘
H
‘‘
H‘‘
H‘‘M
‘‘
H
HM
‘‘
M
‘‘
H
H‘‘H ‘‘M‘‘MMH
‘‘
M
‘‘
H
‘‘
HM
‘‘L
‘‘
ML ‘‘L M M
‘‘
M
‘‘
HH ‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H ‘‘
H
‘‘
HH
‘‘
H‘‘MH ‘‘
H ‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
H ‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
HH
‘‘L
‘‘ML
MM ‘‘L
M
‘‘M
‘‘
H
‘‘
HM
‘‘
M
‘‘
HH
‘‘
H
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘L
‘‘
L
‘‘LL‘‘L ‘‘
L
‘‘LL
‘‘
M‘‘L‘‘L
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
‘‘
M‘‘M
‘‘
H
‘‘
M‘‘L‘‘L ‘‘M‘‘L
M ‘‘
L ‘‘
M
‘‘
HH
‘‘
M ‘‘H‘‘M
‘‘M
LL
‘‘M
‘‘
H
‘‘
H
‘‘
M
‘‘
M
´0 5025 Miles
Bureau of LandManagement
Forest Service
Low, very low")L
")M
")H
Medium
High, very high
Socioeconomic well-being & proximity to public forestlands
SEWB 2000Communities < 5 miles FS and BLM lands
Communities > 5 miles FS and BLM lands
Very low & low
270 36% 109 19%
Medium 291 39% 204 36%
High & very high
189 25% 251 45%
750 100% 564 100%Total
Socioeconomic well-being & proximity to public forestlands
SEWB 2000Communities < 5 miles FS and BLM lands
Communities > 5 miles FS and BLM lands
Very low & low
270 36% 109 19%
Medium 291 39% 204 36%
High & very high
189 25% 251 45%
750 100% 564 100%Total
270/379 = 71%
189/440 = 43%
Summary of Proximity & SEWBOf the 1.05 million people in Plan-area communities that had very low or low socioeconomic well-being scores in 2000, 61 percent were living in close proximity to FS and BLM lands.
71 percent of communities with very low or low socioeconomic well-being scores in 2000 were communities with 5 miles of FS and BLM lands.
43 percent of the communities that received high or very high socioeconomic well-being scores, however, were also in close proximity.
Summary of Proximity & SEWB
On average, communities farther away had higher percentage of the population with bachelor’s degrees or more, less poverty, less unemployment, less income inequality, higher 1990 employment by industry diversity, and higher commute times.
On average, communities farther away had higher socioeconomic well-being scores than those in close proximity.(differences between means 1990, 2000 sig, p<.001)