Search

Search Results

• 1. [Article] 2013 Annual Population Report Tables (April 15, 2014)

  This item contains Oregon population tables. Prepared by Population Research Center, Portland State University, April 15, 2014. The tables in the tabs in this workbook hold the 2013 population estimates ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: 2013 Annual Population Report Tables (April 15, 2014) Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center Year: 2014 This item contains Oregon population tables. Prepared by Population Research Center, Portland State University, April 15, 2014. The tables in the tabs in this workbook hold the 2013 population estimates produced by the Population Research Center, Portland State University. The July 1 estimates of total population for counties and cities and towns were certified December 15, 2013. Note that the July 1, 2013 population estimate for Lincoln City was revised and certified to be retroactive to December 31, 2013. Some tables include the U.S. Census Bureau's decennial Census counts and historical population estimates produced by our Center, and other tables include calculations of change since Census 2010. There are footnotes that accompany Tables 1 through 7. Title: 2013 Annual Population Report Tables (April 15, 2014) Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center Year: 2014 This item contains Oregon population tables. Prepared by Population Research Center, Portland State University, April 15, 2014. The tables in the tabs in this workbook hold the 2013 population estimates produced by the Population Research Center, Portland State University. The July 1 estimates of total population for counties and cities and towns were certified December 15, 2013. Note that the July 1, 2013 population estimate for Lincoln City was revised and certified to be retroactive to December 31, 2013. Some tables include the U.S. Census Bureau's decennial Census counts and historical population estimates produced by our Center, and other tables include calculations of change since Census 2010. There are footnotes that accompany Tables 1 through 7. Close

• 2. [Article] Methods and Data for Developing Coordinated Population Forecasts

  This document is to accompany the coordinated population forecasts and their corresponding reports prepared by the Population Research Center (PRC). Developing long-term coordinated population forecasts ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Methods and Data for Developing Coordinated Population Forecasts Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center Year: 2015 This document is to accompany the coordinated population forecasts and their corresponding reports prepared by the Population Research Center (PRC). Developing long-term coordinated population forecasts for a county and its sub-areas (UGBs and areas outside UGBs are referred to sub-areas in this document), requires these main stages: 1) compiling and evaluating historical and recent data to ascertain demographic characteristics and trends in the study area and to obtain a population base from which the forecasts may be launched; 2) making assumptions about the future and adjusting the data or rates in the forecasting models (calibrating the models) to incorporate predicted rates or trends; and 3) reconciling, or adjusting the forecasts so the sum of the sub-area forecasts is consistent with the forecast for the county total. We first develop population projections and then we make adjustments to these projections in order to produce population forecasts. Population projections are developed by extending historical and current demographic and housing trends into the future. Forecasting population requires that assumptions be made about future population change, and adjusting the projection models to account for circumstances that perhaps skewed past trends or may affect future change. Such circumstances in the past could be a building moratorium or the opening of a new group quarters facility. Events affecting future change would be, for example, planned future housing development that is higher than usual, a foreseen change in an area’s physical ability to accommodate growth (buildable land available is approaching capacity or improvements to infrastructure are underway), anticipated changes in the economy (the location of a new employer or the upswing or downturn of the economy in general), or an expected change in the local population and household composition (age, ethnicity, and average household size). Title: Methods and Data for Developing Coordinated Population Forecasts Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center Year: 2015 This document is to accompany the coordinated population forecasts and their corresponding reports prepared by the Population Research Center (PRC). Developing long-term coordinated population forecasts for a county and its sub-areas (UGBs and areas outside UGBs are referred to sub-areas in this document), requires these main stages: 1) compiling and evaluating historical and recent data to ascertain demographic characteristics and trends in the study area and to obtain a population base from which the forecasts may be launched; 2) making assumptions about the future and adjusting the data or rates in the forecasting models (calibrating the models) to incorporate predicted rates or trends; and 3) reconciling, or adjusting the forecasts so the sum of the sub-area forecasts is consistent with the forecast for the county total. We first develop population projections and then we make adjustments to these projections in order to produce population forecasts. Population projections are developed by extending historical and current demographic and housing trends into the future. Forecasting population requires that assumptions be made about future population change, and adjusting the projection models to account for circumstances that perhaps skewed past trends or may affect future change. Such circumstances in the past could be a building moratorium or the opening of a new group quarters facility. Events affecting future change would be, for example, planned future housing development that is higher than usual, a foreseen change in an area’s physical ability to accommodate growth (buildable land available is approaching capacity or improvements to infrastructure are underway), anticipated changes in the economy (the location of a new employer or the upswing or downturn of the economy in general), or an expected change in the local population and household composition (age, ethnicity, and average household size). Close

• 3. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Sherman County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Sherman County’s total population has declined since 2000, at an average annual rate of nearly one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Wasco UGB, one of its sub-areas, experienced population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Sherman County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Sherman County’s total population has declined since 2000, at an average annual rate of nearly one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Wasco UGB, one of its sub-areas, experienced population growth during the 2000s. Wasco, the most populous UGB, posted an average annual growth rate of a little less than one percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. This translated into a population increase of about 30 persons. Sherman County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of consistent net out-migration and periods of natural decreases (more deaths than births, Figure 12). The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, which combined with a relatively steady number of births has resulted in a natural decrease for nine out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015. While net out-migration and natural decrease were common during the last decade, in more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has occurred, bringing with it some population growth. Total population in Sherman County is forecast to increase in the near-term (2016 to 2035), a trend that is driven by growth in the two sub-areas of Rufus and Wasco (Figure 1); however population decline is expected for the county over the remaining 31 years of the forecast period. This population decrease is the result of a growing natural decrease, which is expected to exceed net in-migration around 2030. Sherman County’s total population is forecast to increase by about 50 persons over the next 19 years (2016-2035), but will likely see population decline of more than 80 persons during the last 31 years of the forecast period (2035-2066). Sub-areas are expected to generally follow their historical patterns of population increase or decrease over the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Sherman County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Sherman County’s total population has declined since 2000, at an average annual rate of nearly one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Wasco UGB, one of its sub-areas, experienced population growth during the 2000s. Wasco, the most populous UGB, posted an average annual growth rate of a little less than one percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. This translated into a population increase of about 30 persons. Sherman County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of consistent net out-migration and periods of natural decreases (more deaths than births, Figure 12). The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, which combined with a relatively steady number of births has resulted in a natural decrease for nine out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015. While net out-migration and natural decrease were common during the last decade, in more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has occurred, bringing with it some population growth. Total population in Sherman County is forecast to increase in the near-term (2016 to 2035), a trend that is driven by growth in the two sub-areas of Rufus and Wasco (Figure 1); however population decline is expected for the county over the remaining 31 years of the forecast period. This population decrease is the result of a growing natural decrease, which is expected to exceed net in-migration around 2030. Sherman County’s total population is forecast to increase by about 50 persons over the next 19 years (2016-2035), but will likely see population decline of more than 80 persons during the last 31 years of the forecast period (2035-2066). Sub-areas are expected to generally follow their historical patterns of population increase or decrease over the forecast period. Close

• 4. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Harney ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Harney County’s total population has slowly declined since 2000, with an average annual rate of negative 0.2 percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). Burns is accountable for the county’s overall declining population. All other sub-areas experienced very slight population growths during the 2000 to 2010 period, increasing by a total of 32 persons. Harney County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of frequent net out-migration. The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, however, a larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase for 8 out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015 (Figure 12). Even so, net out-migration outweighed these slight natural increases, causing a slow decrease in the Harney County’s population since 2000. Total population in Harney County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas are forecast to all decrease at a slightly faster rate in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Harney County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 500 persons over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066), a loss in population mostly happening in areas outside the UGBs. Sub-areas are expected to generally follow historical patterns of population decrease over the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Harney County’s total population has slowly declined since 2000, with an average annual rate of negative 0.2 percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). Burns is accountable for the county’s overall declining population. All other sub-areas experienced very slight population growths during the 2000 to 2010 period, increasing by a total of 32 persons. Harney County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of frequent net out-migration. The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, however, a larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase for 8 out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015 (Figure 12). Even so, net out-migration outweighed these slight natural increases, causing a slow decrease in the Harney County’s population since 2000. Total population in Harney County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas are forecast to all decrease at a slightly faster rate in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Harney County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 500 persons over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066), a loss in population mostly happening in areas outside the UGBs. Sub-areas are expected to generally follow historical patterns of population decrease over the forecast period. Close