U.S. Census Bureau 1

U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Issued July 2000

1990 to 1998

P25-1133

Population Trends in Metropolitan

Areas and Central Cities

Population Characteristics

U S C E N S U S B U R E A U

Helping You Make Informed Decisions

Demographic Programs

The populations of both metropolitan and

nonmetropolitan territories increased

between 1990 and 1998, with strong

growth in the South and West, particularly

in the South Atlantic and Mountain Divisions.

Among metropolitan areas of different sizes,

medium-sized areas grew the fastest. Within

metropolitan areas, the population outside

central cities grew faster than the population inside them.

Both Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Areas’ Populations

Increased Between 1990

and 1998

From 1990 to 1998, the population of the

country’s MAs grew by 9.1 percent, increasing from 198.5 million to 216.5

million. Over the same period, the population in nonmetropolitan territory in the

United States grew at a slower rate —

7.0 percent — increasing from 50.3 million

to 53.8 million. The growth rate for the

entire U.S. population from 1990 to 1998

was 8.7 percent.

Metropolitan Areas

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) defines Metropolitan Areas (MAs)

according to published standards.1 MAs

consist of one or more counties, except

in the New England states, where the

components are cities and towns. MAs

include metropolitan statistical areas

(MSAs) and consolidated metropolitan

statistical areas (CMSAs). CMSAs are

composed of primary metropolitan

statistical areas (PMSAs). There are 276

MSAs and CMSAs in the United States

(effective June 30, 1999).

1 The MA standards identify the largest city in

each MSA or CMSA as a “central city.” Additional

cities may be central cities if they meet specified population size and commuting thresholds.

Midwest Region

East North Central

Division

 Ohio

 Indiana

 Illinois

 Michigan

 Wisconsin

West North Central

Division

 Minnesota

 Iowa

 Missouri

 North Dakota

 South Dakota

 Nebraska

 Kansas

West Region

Mountain Division

 Montana

 Idaho

 Wyoming

 Colorado

 New Mexico

 Arizona

 Utah

 Nevada

Pacific Division

 Washington

 Oregon

 California

 Alaska

 Hawaii

By Paul J. Mackun and

Shawn R. Wilson

Current

Population

Reports

Figure 1.

List of States by Region

and Division

The U.S. Census Bureau divides the country

into four regions. These regions, in turn,

are subdivided into nine divisions.

Northeast Region

New England Division

 Maine

 New Hampshire

 Vermont

 Massachusetts

 Rhode Island

 Connecticut

Middle Atlantic

Division

 New York

 New Jersey

 Pennsylvania

South Region

South Atlantic

Division

 Delaware

 Maryland

 District of Columbia

 Virginia

 West Virginia

 North Carolina

 South Carolina

 Georgia

 Florida

East South

Central Division

 Kentucky

 Tennessee

 Alabama

 Mississippi

West South

Central Division

 Arkansas

 Louisiana

 Oklahoma

 Texas

Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
2 U.S. Census Bureau



	



	












		




	







	









	 










 
  	 







  



















































Metropolitan and

Nonmetropolitan Areas’

Growth Rates Varied by

Region and Division

As in the case of population growth

in the country as a whole, substantial differences in growth for metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas

were evident by region and division.

In general, the largest growth

occurred in the South and West,

constituting 81.3 percent of the

population increase in the country’s

MAs and 78.7 percent of the population increase in the country’s nonmetropolitan areas. The smallest

population growth occurred in the

Northeast, with only 4.3 percent of

the increase in the metropolitan

population and 3.5 percent of the

growth in the nonmetropolitan

population. The population growth

for the Midwest accounted for

14.4 percent and 17.8 percent of the

metropolitan and nonmetropolitan

population change, respectively.

The interior of the country contained

a higher proportion of the nonmetropolitan population than did either of

the coasts. In 1998, among the nine

divisions, the East South Central

Division and the West North Central

Division contained the highest

percentages of the population

living in nonmetropolitan areas,

41.6 percent and 40.3 percent,

respectively. In contrast, the Pacific,

Middle Atlantic, and New England

Divisions had the highest percentage

of the population that was metropolitan, 91.6 percent, 91.3 percent,

and 84.1 percent, respectively.

Metropolitan Areas’ Growth

Was Fastest in the West

The West experienced the fastest

metropolitan population growth rate

of the four regions (13.8 percent),

led by a 25.1 percent increase in the

Mountain Division (see Figure 2).

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program.

Figure 2.

Percentage Change in Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan

Populations by Region and Division: 1990 to 1998
U.S. Census Bureau 3

New England Divisions had higher

rates of growth for nonmetropolitan

areas than for metropolitan areas.

Fastest-Growing Metropolitan

Areas Were in the West

and South

The location of the fastest-growing

MAs provides another view of

regional differences in metropolitan

population change. All of the ten

fastest-growing MAs between 1990

and 1998 were in the West or in the

South, led by Las Vegas, NV-AZ

(55.0 percent), Laredo, TX

(41.2 percent), and McAllenEdinburg-Mission, TX (36.2 percent)

(see Table 1). MAs in the Midwest

and the Northeast grew more slowly.

The fastest-growing MAs in the

Midwest were Sioux Falls, SD and

Madison, WI at 17.4 percent and

15.7 percent, respectively.

Barnstable-Yarmouth, MA

(11.6 percent) and York, PA

(9.9 percent) were the two fastestgrowing MAs in the Northeast.

Metropolitan Growth

Differed Among Population

Size Categories

Of the country’s total population in

1998, 28.1 percent lived in MAs with

5,000,000 or more population. All

eight MAs in this size category grew

between 1990 and 1998 (see Table

2). Within the group, the population

MAs in the South grew by

13.1 percent, led by an increase of

14.4 percent in the West South

Central Division. The population

of the Northeast’s MAs grew by

1.7 percent, with a 1.5 percent

increase in the New England Division

and a 1.8 percent gain in the Middle

Atlantic Division. In the Midwest,

the growth rate for MAs was

5.9 percent; the fastest rate of

patterns similar to those of MAs.

The fastest growth rate for

nonmetropolitan areas occurred in

the West, with 16.1 percent. Like

MA growth in the region, nonmetropolitan population in the Mountain

Division states grew faster than

population in nonmetropolitan

territory in the Pacific Division states,

increasing by 17.6 percent and

14.4 percent, respectively. The

nonmetropolitan growth rate in the

South was 7.5 percent, led by the

South Atlantic Division with a 9.0

percent growth rate. The slowest

growth rate for nonmetropolitan

territory was in the Northeast

(2.3 percent). Nonmetropolitan

growth for the Midwest was 3.9

percent. Among the nine divisions,

only the Pacific, Middle Atlantic, and

growth for this region, 8.3 percent,

occurred in the West North Central

Division.

Patterns in Nonmetropolitan

Territory Were Similar to

Those in Metropolitan Areas

From 1990 to 1998, nonmetropolitan territory had regional growth

Table 1.

Ten Fastest-Growing Metropolitan Areas: 1990 to 19981

Metropolitan area 1998

population

Population change—

1990 to 1998

Number Percent

Las Vegas, NV-AZ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,321,546 468,900 55.0

Laredo, TX.............................. 188,166 54,927 41.2

McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX............. 522,204 138,659 36.2

Boise City, ID. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 395,953 100,102 33.8

Naples, FL .............................. 199,436 47,337 31.1

Phoenix-Mesa, AZ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,931,004 692,506 30.9

Austin-San Marcos, TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,105,909 259,682 30.7

Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR ........ 272,616 61,708 29.3

Wilmington, NC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218,248 46,979 27.4

Provo-Orem, UT ......................... 335,635 72,045 27.3

1

Each of these metropolitan areas is a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA).

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program.

Table 2.

Metropolitan Areas With Populations of 5,000,000 or More: 1990 to 19981

Metropolitan area 1998

population

Population change—

1990 to 1998

Number Percent

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA . . . . . . . . . . . 20,126,150 558,939 2.9

Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,781,273 1,249,744 8.6

Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,809,846 570,026 6.9

Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,285,206 558,811 8.3

San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,816,047 538,522 8.6

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,988,348 95,329 1.6

Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,633,060 177,657 3.3

Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,457,583 270,412 5.2

1

Each of these metropolitan areas is a Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA).

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program.
4 U.S. Census Bureau



	

West North

Central

East North

Central

Middle Atlantic



	

Mountain

Pacific





	

New

England

South

Atlantic





West South 	

Central

East South

Central

 
  	 









































 













Metropolitan, Inside Central City

Metropolitan, Outside Central City

of Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange

County, CA, and San FranciscoOakland-San Jose, CA, increased

most rapidly — 8.6 percent in

each case.

The 12 MAs with 1990 populations

between 2,000,000 and 4,999,999

grew the fastest of any size category

(see Table 3). Between 1990 and

1998, these MAs increased by

13.8 percent, led by PhoenixMesa, AZ, with a growth rate of

30.9 percent. The 96 MAs with

population size between 250,000

and 999,999 experienced the nextfastest growth rate, increasing by

10.8 percent during the same

period. Las Vegas, NV-AZ, was the

fastest-growing MA in this category,

with a growth rate of 55.0 percent.

Population Growth Deferred

Inside and Outside Central

Cities

Total Central City Population

Experienced Slow Growth

The patterns of population distribution

and growth for central cities were

different from that of entire MAs. From

1990 to 1998, the total central

city population increased by a

smaller rate, 3.9 percent, than

MAs as a whole. During the same

period, only 13.0 percent of the

country’s MAs experienced

declines in population, while

38.0 percent of central cities did.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program.

Figure 3.

Percentage Change in Metropolitan Population Inside and

Outside Central Cities by Region and Division: 1990 to 1998

Table 3.

Population Change in Metropolitan Areas by Size Category:

1990 to 1998

Population size category

(based on 1990 population)

Percent

change

Numeric

change

Number of

MAs

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1 18,027,785 276

Less than 250,000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.3 1,580,228 140

250,000 - 999,999. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.8 5,027,506 96

1,000,000 - 1,999,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1 2,724,167 20

2,000,000 - 4,999,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.8 4,676,444 12

5,000,000 or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6 4,019,440 8

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program.
U.S. Census Bureau 5

Central City Population

Decline Was Geographically

Concentrated

From 1990 to 1998, the central

cities in the New England and Middle

Atlantic Divisions in the Northeast

Region and the East North Central

Division experienced overall population decreases (see Figure 3). The

population of central cities in the

entire Northeast Region fell by

2.0 percent between 1990 and

1998, marked by a 2.5 percent

decline in New England. Total

central city population decreased

slightly by 0.3 percent in the Midwest Region —an increase of

1.5 percent in the West North Central

Division states was offset by a loss

of 0.9 percent in the East North

Central Division. In contrast, the

South’s central city population

increased by 5.3 percent overall,

with the fastest growth rate within

the region, 9.0 percent, occurring in

the central cities of the West South

Central Division states. In the West,

the total population of central cities

grew by 10.6 percent, the fastest of

any region, led by a 19.3 percent

increase for central cities in the

Mountain Division.

Fastest-Growing Central Cities

Were in the West and South

As in the case of MAs, the 10 fastestgrowing central cities were all located in the West or the South (see

Table 4). The three central cities with

the fastest rates of growth from

1990 to 1998 were all in the West:

Temecula, CA, 62.9 percent; Las

Vegas, NV, 56.2 percent; and

Scottsdale, AZ, 50.2 percent. The

fastest-growing central cities in the

South were Rogers, AR, 50.1 percent, and Conway, AR, 47.9 percent.

Central City Growth Differed

Among Population Size

Categories

Central cities with 1990 populations

less than 50,000 grew the fastest

of any size category, increasing

by 5.5 percent (see Table 5). This

growth rate was followed by the

smaller medium-sized central

cities—those with populations

between 50,000 and 99,999—which

grew by 4.9 percent. Over the

8-year period, central cities between

250,000 and 999,999 grew by

4.5 percent, while central cities with

at least 1,000,000 people grew by

1.7 percent.

Metropolitan Population Outside Central Cities Grew Faster

Than Inside Central Cities

Between 1990 and 1998, the metropolitan population outside central

cities grew 12.5 percent, whereas

the population of central cities grew

only by 3.9 percent. In fact, the

growth rate for metropolitan populations outside central cities surpassed

the growth rate inside central cities

in every region and division. The

fastest rate of metropolitan

population growth outside of central

cities (31.2 percent) was in the

Mountain Division while the slowest

growth rate (3.4 percent) was in the

New England Division.

In 1998, 62.3 percent of the metropolitan population lived outside of

the central city, an increase from

60.5 percent in 1990. The South

Atlantic Division had the highest

percentage of the metropolitan

Table 4.

Ten Fastest-Growing Central Cities: 1990 to 1998

Central city 1998

population

Population change—

1990 to 1998

Number Percent

Temecula, CA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44,271 17,094 62.9

Las Vegas, NV .......................... 404,288 145,411 56.2

Scottsdale, AZ........................... 195,394 65,295 50.2

Rogers, AR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,073 12,381 50.1

Nampa, ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41,951 13,586 47.9

Conway, AR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,164 12,683 47.9

Laredo, TX.............................. 175,783 52,890 43.0

Port St. Lucie, FL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79,351 23,590 42.3

Mission, TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,083 11,430 39.9

San Marcos, TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,491 10,753 37.4

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program.

Table 5.

Population Change in Central Cities by Size Category:

1990 to 1998

Population size category

(based 1990 population)

Percent

change

Numeric

change

Number of

cities

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.9 3,043,643 542

Less than 50,000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5 388,088 209

50,000 - 99,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.9 591,786 173

100,000 - 249,999. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 618,907 96

250,000 - 999,999. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5 1,113,314 56

1,000,000 or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.7 331,548 8

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program.
6 U.S. Census Bureau

population residing outside of the

central city, 72.6 percent, while the

West South Central Division had the

lowest percentage in the same

category, 48.0 percent.

Reference

"Revised Standards for Defining

Metropolitan Areas in the 1990s,”

Federal Register, March 30, 1990,

Washington, DC: Office of Management and Budget. (Information on

metropolitan areas and central cities

is also available at <http://

www.census.gov/population/www/

estimates/aboutmetro.html>.)

Data Access

The 1998 population estimates for

metropolitan areas and their components, as well as central cities, are

available at <http://www.census.

gov/population/www/estimates/

metropop.html>.

Contacts

For additional information on this

report, contact Paul J. Mackun,

Population Distribution Branch, on

301-457-2419 or via e-mail

paul.j.mackun@ccmail.census.gov.

For specific questions regarding the

methodology of the estimates,

contact Gregory S. Harper,

Population Estimates Branch, on

301-457-2385 or via e-mail

gregory.s.harper@ccmail.census.gov.

User Comments

The Census Bureau welcomes the

comments and advice of data and

report users. If you have any

suggestions or comments, please

write to:

Chief, Population Division

U.S. Census Bureau

Washington, D.C. 20233

or send e-mail to:

pop@census.gov