VIC population surges ahead in latest ABS stats

Discussion in 'Property Market Economics' started by gman65, 27th Sep, 2017.

Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community
  1. Simon Hampel

    Simon Hampel Founder Staff Member

    Joined:
    3rd Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    12,394
    Location:
    Sydney
    ABS uses Greater Capital City Statistical Area (GCCSA) to define population size.

    There is no physical boundary or population size criteria - it is based on function.

    As GCCSAs are designed to represent a socio-economic definition of each of the eight State and Territory capital cities, this means the greater capital city boundary includes people who regularly socialise, shop or work within the city, but live in the small towns and rural areas surrounding the city. It does not define the built up edge of the city.​

    This is why the central coast is included in Sydney population statistics because of the large numbers of people who commute to Sydney for work or regularly visit for shopping.

    For example, my wife used to regularly drive TO the central coast for work (she was responsible for some of the hospitals there), so it works both ways. It's only not "contiguously built up" (another definition used for defining cities which I don't believe the ABS uses) between Berowra and Gosford/Woy Woy because of the national parks inbetween.

    I'm sure there are similar population centres surrounding Melbourne which contribute to an increased population over the "suburban" areas. I'm pretty sure towns like Mt Barker in the Adelaide hills would count towards Adelaide's population too since a large percentage do commute to the city for work.

    I'm not sure where they draw the line though - probably based on some percentage of the population, since lots of people from Newcastle also commute to Sydney for work - but it's probably a much smaller percentage of the overall population, the majority of whom work/shop/socialise locally and less frequently travel to Sydney.
     
  2. Cimbom

    Cimbom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,568
    Location:
    Back in Canberra!
    Yes, i agree but you would think somewhere like say Geelong in Melbourne would fit the same definition (I don't know Adelaide at all) but it's not included. I'm sure there must be some reason for it but it's interesting to note
     
  3. Simon Hampel

    Simon Hampel Founder Staff Member

    Joined:
    3rd Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    12,394
    Location:
    Sydney
    No, Geelong wouldn't be included for the same reason that Newcastle isn't - there will be some cutoff where they consider it a separate GCCSA based on the percentage of population who does NOT regularly travel to the city for work/social/shopping.

    Geelong is a large enough centre (with a large business district and local industry) that the majority of people would work/socialise/shop locally and a relatively small percentage of the overall population (even if the absolute numbers are quite large) would commute or travel regularly.

    These cities are large jobs centres, unlike areas like the NSW central coast where there simply aren't enough jobs compared to the population base - which means that a large percentage of them need to commute for work.