Standard Sub-State District National Dataset Design and Implementation Proposal for Substate Area Development

Keywords: MSA, nonmetro, development, State, Census, Virginia, regional, legislation, data, FIPS
Session Type: Virtual Paper Abstract
Day: Monday
Session Start / End Time: 2/28/2022 05:20 PM (Eastern Time (US & Canada)) - 2/28/2022 06:40 PM (Eastern Time (US & Canada))
Room: Virtual 72

Abstract

All jurisdictions are judged by their level of urban services in this high-tech age. Non-metro and small MSAs are left behind as though they offer nothing compared to large MSAs, which is far from the case. To achieve economies of scale, they often work together in multi-County sub-State districts as defined within their State. A lack of current data hampers such programs. Census data has always been important, but data ages quickly. Administrative records are used but are not designed for that. The Virginia Area Development Act of 1968 led to the delineation of 22 Planning Districts, as other States had done. It was unique in that a 1972 Executive Order required State Agencies that used sub-State districts for their management to realign them to an individual Planning District or multiples. General Assembly redistricting appears to have used that alignment as well. Virginia’s progress has been substantial due to the geographic alignment that flowed from this simple administrative action, but that contribution is unrecognized. Local area development in any State would benefit from this, but can it be achieved in alignment with Census geography? Very simply, a single layer geography of Standard Sub-State Districts, as defined and codified by each State, is possible. New data is not needed. A geocode field assigned with the alphabetic-based FIPS code would enable analysts and implementers to build a region that matches the issue or opportunity. This dataset serves public, private for-profit/nonprofit organizations and citizens. A legislative approach is proposed.