|
Post by NCFC on Dec 13, 2012 14:56:46 GMT -7
[Question posed by Harvey Licht]
Alternative frontier designation methodologies currently being used have designated different sets of areas. While there is significant overlap, there are many differences which stem from the different approaches. The proposed methodology will identify a different will yield different results.
Have you completed any comparative analyses between the proposed frontier designation methodology and other designation methodologies?
|
|
|
Post by NCFC on Dec 13, 2012 15:05:17 GMT -7
[Gary Hart] We haven’t done any of those things yet, but we do have a proposal in to ORHP now to do demographies of these levels, and to take NCFC’s definition, 6 people per square mile, the FAR methodology and the RUCAs and cross-tabulate them and see what you get, what matches and what doesn’t match.
[John Cromartie] Most previous definitions are county-based, so while I do think a comparison would be useful, I’m afraid that the results will mostly be showing frontier areas in counties that are not designated as frontier at the county level. I think it is a very valuable exercise to compare this definition to others to see if you can detect any systematic biases in this version, especially if there are sub-county definitions out there.
|
|