Coastal Moving Services’ 2025 destinations dataset with median home prices, rent, cost of living, unemployment, industries, and key notes.

In 2020, about 82.66 percent of the total population in the United States lived in cities and urban areas. As the United States was one of the earliest nations to industrialize, it has had a comparatively high rate of urbanization over the past two centuries. The urban population became larger than the rural population during the 1910s, and by the middle of the century it is expected that almost 90 percent of the population will live in an urban setting. Regional development of urbanization in the U.S. The United States began to urbanize on a larger scale in the 1830s, as technological advancements reduced the labor demand in agriculture, and as European migration began to rise. One major difference between early urbanization in the U.S. and other industrializing economies, such as the UK or Germany, was population distribution. Throughout the 1800s, the Northeastern U.S. became the most industrious and urban region of the country, as this was the main point of arrival for migrants. Disparities in industrialization and urbanization was a key contributor to the Union's victory in the Civil War, not only due to population sizes, but also through production capabilities and transport infrastructure. The Northeast's population reached an urban majority in the 1870s, whereas this did not occur in the South until the 1950s. As more people moved westward in the late 1800s, not only did their population growth increase, but the share of the urban population also rose, with an urban majority established in both the West and Midwest regions in the 1910s. The West would eventually become the most urbanized region in the 1960s, and over 90 percent of the West's population is urbanized today. Urbanization today New York City is the most populous city in the United States, with a population of 8.3 million, while California has the largest urban population of any state. California also has the highest urbanization rate, although the District of Columbia is considered 100 percent urban. Only four U.S. states still have a rural majority, these are Maine, Mississippi, Montana, and West Virginia.

When the COVID-19 pandemic forced tens of millions of people to work remotely, some chose to relocate out of high-cost, large metro areas. Did people move to cheaper metros or give up in city living altogether? How many will follow in their footsteps, and what could their relocating mean for the places they choose?

Hamamatsu was the largest major city in Japan based on city area in 2024, with a size of close to **** thousand square kilometers. It was followed by Shizuoka, with a size of more than **** square kilometers. Overconcentration in Tokyo Economic, political, and financial activity in Japan is heavily concentrated in Tokyo. With around **** million inhabitants, the metropolitan area of Tokyo is the largest urban conglomeration in the world. Most of Japan’s largest companies have their headquarters in Tokyo, and the region attracts many young people who move there to study or work. A breakdown of the net migration flow in Japan showed that the prefectures of Tokyo, Kanagawa, Saitama, and Chiba, all part of the Tokyo metropolitan area, attract the largest number of people. In contrast, the majority of prefectures, especially those located in rural parts of the country, lose a substantial part of their population every year. Demographic trend in rural regions The overconcentration of economic activity in Tokyo has an impact on the demographic situation in rural parts of the country. Japan’s population is shrinking and aging, and rural regions are particularly affected by this. Many young people leave their rural hometowns to seek better opportunities in urban parts of Japan, leaving behind an aging population. As a result, many rural communities in Japan struggle with depopulation and a notable share of municipalities are even threatened with disappearance in the coming decades.

There are three components of change: births, deaths, and migration. The change in the population from births and deaths is often combined and referred to as natural increase or natural change. Populations grow or shrink depending on if they gain people faster than they lose them. Looking at an area’s unique combination of natural change and migration helps us understand why its population is changing, and how quickly the change is occurring.Natural IncreaseNatural change is the difference between births and deaths in a population. Often times, natural change is positive, which means that more babies are being born than people are dying. This positive natural change is referred to as natural increase. Examples of natural increase exist across the United States, one being the Salt Lake City metro area in Utah. Between 2014 and 2015, Salt Lake City had around 19,100 births and 6,400 deaths. Since there were about 12,700 more births than deaths, Salt Lake City had a natural increase of about 12,700 people, making natural increase a key reason why its population grew over the year.The opposite of natural increase is called natural decrease, where more people are dying than babies being born, which can cause a population to shrink. Areas with aging populations often have natural decrease. Two states had natural decrease between 2014 and 2015, Maine and West Virginia. Between 2014 and 2015, Maine had 450 more deaths than births and West Virginia had 940 more deaths than births. In both cases, natural decrease was one of the reasons why their populations shrank between 2014 and 2015 in our latest estimates.MigrationMigration is the movement of people from one area to another. It is often expressed as net migration, which is the difference between how many people move into and out of an area. When net migration is positive, a population has more people moving in than out. We split migration into domestic migration and international migration.Domestic migration refers to people moving between areas within the United States, and is often one of the largest contributors to population change. Regionally, the South gains the most net domestic migrants, with roughly 440,000 more people moving into southern states than leaving them between 2014 and 2015. Sometimes net domestic migration is negative, in which case more people are moving away than are moving in. The Chicago metro area in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin lost about 80,000 people through migration between 2014 and 2015, which is consistent with a long-standing pattern of negative net domestic migration for the metro area.International migration refers to people moving into and out of the United States, and consists of a diverse group of people such as foreign-born immigrants from many countries around the world, members of the U.S. Armed Forces, and U.S. citizens working abroad. Some areas, like the Miami metro area in Florida, grow (in part) due to net international migration. Miami gained about 70,000 net international migrants between 2014 and 2015, making net international migration a major factor in Miami’s population growth.

According to a survey among nearly ****** renters in the United States who are moving between apartments in 2021, the main reasons for moving was because they found a better deal or because they needed a change of scenery. Contrary to many early predictions in the wake of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, more people are looking to stay in the same city or move to a bigger one than move to a smaller city.

A dataset listing Illinois cities by population for 2024.

Many Rust-Belt cities have seen almost half their populations move from inside the city borders to the surrounding suburbs and elsewhere since the 1970s. As populations shifted, neighborhoods changed—in their average income, educational profile, and housing prices. But the shift did not happen in every neighborhood at the same rate. Recent research has uncovered some of the patterns characterizing the process.

How many incorporated places are registered in the U.S.?

There were 19,502 incorporated places registered in the United States as of July 31, 2019. 16,410 had a population under 10,000 while, in contrast, only 10 cities had a population of one million or more.

Small-town America

Suffice it to say, almost nothing is more idealized in the American imagination than small-town America. When asked where they would prefer to live, 30 percent of Americans reported that they would prefer to live in a small town. Americans tend to prefer small-town living due to a perceived slower pace of life, close-knit communities, and a more affordable cost of living when compared to large cities.

An increasing population

Despite a preference for small-town life, metropolitan areas in the U.S. still see high population figures, with the New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago metro areas being the most populous in the country. Metro and state populations are projected to increase by 2040, so while some may move to small towns to escape city living, those small towns may become more crowded in the upcoming decades.

Where should we live in the next 10 years? Where should we settle down without relying on public transport? Which city should we move to without fearing losing our homes?

As weather patterns become more unpredictable with aggressive changes in temperatures, I collected some data below to see if there would be a city that could help assess our answers to the prior questions. I am curious to see if cities that typically have great infrastructure for walking, biking or public transit will be better prepared than those that are more typically car centric. Whichever you prefer, we can have a sense on where you might be migrating, and to which areas.

Here's how the data was collected:

1. Rhodium & ProPublica's combined work on counties risk factors against climate change across continental US (excludes Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico and Guam. Washington D.C, is excluded as it does not have a county.)
2. The available Walk Score of major cities that have a population above 100,000 represented. Cities like Delaware's Wilmington or Maine's Portland are not considered as it falls under a small-city definition
3. Maximum temperatures (for select cities): This dataset is collected from the UC Davis Department of Agricultural and Resource by Prof. Aaron Smith. I selected a monthly temporal unit and county spatial unit ranging from 2019 - 2024 July. This dataset is extracted based on the average of highest temperatures in each selected counties. I did not use the overall daily average as it can easily shadow the extremities of temperature fluctuations.

The columns have different rating systems. The counties have all major climate risks expected in the future, while corresponding cities in each county have walking, transit and biking scores to assess livability without cars.

Understanding County Climate Risks The counties were were represented on a 1- 10 scale, based on RCP 8.5 levels. Here are the following explanations (0 = lowest, 10 = highest)

1) Heat: Heat is one of the largest drivers changing the niche of human habitability. Rhodium Group researchers estimate that, between 2040 and 2060 extreme temperatures, many counties will face extremely high temperatures for half a year. The measure shows how many weeks per year will we anticipate temperatures to soar above 95 degrees. (0 = 0 weeks, 10 = 26 weeks).

2) Wet Bulb: Wet bulb temperatures occur when heat meets excessive humidity. This is commonplace across cities that have a urban island heat effects (dense concentration of pavements, less nature, higher chances of absorbing heat). That combination creates wet bulb temperatures, where 82 degrees can feel like southern Alabama on its hottest day, making it dangerous to work outdoors and for children to play school sports. As wet bulb temperatures increase even higher, so will the risk of heat stroke — and even death. The measure shows how many days will a county experience high wet bulb temperatures yearly, from 2040 to 2060. (0 = 0 days, 10 = 70 days)

3) Farm Crop Yield: With rising temperatures, it will become more difficult to grow food. Corn and soy are the most prevalent crops in the U.S. and the basis for livestock feed and other staple foods, and they have critical economic significance. Because of their broad regional spread, they offer the best proxy for predicting how farming will be affected by rising temperatures and changing water supplies. As corn and soy production gets more sensitive to heat than drought, the US will see a huge continental divide between cooler counties now having more ability to produce, while current warmer counties loosing all abilities to produce basic crops. The expected measure shows the percent decline yields from 2040 to 2060 (0 = -20.5% decline, 10 = 92% decline).

4) Sea Level Rise: As sea levels rise, the share of property submerged by high tides increases dramatically, affecting a small sliver of the nation's land but a disproportionate share of its population. The rating measures how much of property in the county will go below high tide from 2040 to 2060 (0 = 0%, 10 = 25%).

5) Very Large Fires: With heat and evermore prevalent drought, the likelihood that very large wildfires (ones that burn over 12,000 acres) will affect U.S. regions increases substantially, particularly in the West, Northwest and the Rocky Mountains. The rating calculates how many average number of large fires will we expect to see per year (0 = N/A, 10 = 2.45) from 2040 to 2071.

6) Economic Damages: Rising energy costs, lower labor productivity, poor crop yields and increasing cr...

A dataset listing Mississippi cities by population for 2024.

Live city rankings with ignore politics political preference weighting applied. Showing 1-50 of 386 cities.

This dataset summarizes the inter-prefecture migration of Japanese citizens only in 2024, excluding foreign nationals from the original data collected by the Statistics Bureau of Japan. It includes migration counts between each of the 47 prefectures (ken), enabling analysis of top migration flows for any given prefecture in terms of both in-migrants and out-migrants.

• In-migrants: Individuals who moved into a new prefecture.
• Out-migrants: Individuals who moved out of a prefecture to a new location.

Although the original data contains information on major cities and migrant demographics such as gender, this dataset includes data only for the 47 prefectures. Therefore, city-level data is excluded from geographic visualisations like maps.

The dataset was created to study and visualise migration patterns within Japan, particularly focusing on rural depopulation and the emergence of “ghost villages.”

this graph is ourworlddata and canva :

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2F2c5ecc7d32bc985105b3cf6143ec1620%2FIA%20na%20Moda%20A%20Revoluo%20da%20Personalizao%20e%20Recomendao%20de%20Produtos.gif?generation=1710620892888694&alt=media" alt="">

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2F60f6b2aa68e1f415e0a8a41fcf85d1ca%2Fshare-of-population-urban.png?generation=1710620549193614&alt=media" alt="">

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2Fee2fd7669303ccebdd014f3f11861700%2FUN-Definition-Urban-Agglomeration_932.png?generation=1710620591892902&alt=media" alt="">

For the majority of human civilization, small communities and rural areas were the predominant habitats. However, a monumental transformation has unfolded over the past few centuries, culminating in a seismic shift towards urbanization, particularly evident in recent decades. Presently, more than half of the world's population, surpassing the staggering figure of 4 billion individuals, resides in urban areas. This shift marks a significant departure from historical settlement patterns, signaling the rise of the urban epoch.

The United Nations, a key authority on global demographics, has pinpointed the year 2007 as a pivotal moment in human history when the urban population eclipsed its rural counterpart. This transition underscores the rapid pace at which urbanization has advanced, reshaping the demographic landscape on a global scale. While rural areas still hold importance, particularly in regions reliant on agriculture and natural resource extraction, the allure of urban life has become increasingly irresistible for billions worldwide.

The allure of urban living emanates from a multitude of factors, ranging from economic opportunities to cultural attractions. Urban centers serve as hubs of innovation, commerce, and employment, drawing individuals seeking better livelihoods and prospects for upward mobility. The concentration of resources, infrastructure, and services in urban areas often translates to improved access to education, healthcare, and other essential amenities, fostering human development and well-being.

Moreover, the dynamic nature of urban environments fosters creativity, diversity, and social interconnectedness. Cities pulsate with cultural vibrancy, offering a rich tapestry of experiences shaped by diverse communities, traditions, and perspectives. This cosmopolitan ethos appeals to individuals seeking intellectual stimulation, artistic expression, and social engagement, contributing to the allure of urban life.

However, the rapid pace of urbanization also poses formidable challenges, ranging from infrastructural strains to socio-economic disparities. The unprecedented influx of migrants into urban areas strains existing resources and infrastructure, leading to issues such as overcrowding, inadequate housing, and strained public services. Furthermore, rapid urban expansion often encroaches upon natural habitats, exacerbating environmental degradation and threatening biodiversity.

Socio-economic disparities also loom large in urban landscapes, with marginalized communities often relegated to informal settlements or deprived of basic services. The urban poor face a myriad of challenges, including limited access to education, healthcare, and formal employment, perpetuating cycles of poverty and exclusion. Addressing these disparities requires holistic approaches that prioritize inclusive urban development, equitable resource allocation, and social welfare initiatives.

Despite these challenges, urbanization remains an irreversible global trend, reshaping the contours of human civilization. Recognizing the transformative potential of urbanization, policymakers, urban planners, and stakeholders must adopt proactive strategies to harness its benefits while mitigating its adverse effects. Sustainable urban planning, investment in infrastructure, and social welfare programs are essential components of fostering inclusive, resilient, and livable cities for all inhabitants.

Furthermore, embracing technological innovations and smart city solutions can enhance efficiency, sustainability, and quality of life in urban areas. From renewable energy systems to digital infrastructure, leveraging cutting-edge technologies can catalyze urban development while minimizing environmental impact. Moreover, promoting community engagement, participatory governance, and grassroots initiatives empowers residents to shape the future trajectory of their cities, fostering a sense of ownership and belonging.

In conclusion, the global phenomenon of urbanization represents a paradigm shift in human settlement patterns, with more than half of the world's population now residing in urban areas. This transformative...

Real-time city rankings with political preference weighting for Ignore Politics

Some say climate change is the biggest threat of our age while others say it’s a myth based on dodgy science. We are turning some of the data over to you so you can form your own view.

Even more than with other data sets that Kaggle has featured, there’s a huge amount of data cleaning and preparation that goes into putting together a long-time study of climate trends. Early data was collected by technicians using mercury thermometers, where any variation in the visit time impacted measurements. In the 1940s, the construction of airports caused many weather stations to be moved. In the 1980s, there was a move to electronic thermometers that are said to have a cooling bias.

Given this complexity, there are a range of organizations that collate climate trends data. The three most cited land and ocean temperature data sets are NOAA’s MLOST, NASA’s GISTEMP and the UK’s HadCrut.

We have repackaged the data from a newer compilation put together by the Berkeley Earth, which is affiliated with Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Study combines 1.6 billion temperature reports from 16 pre-existing archives. It is nicely packaged and allows for slicing into interesting subsets (for example by country). They publish the source data and the code for the transformations they applied. They also use methods that allow weather observations from shorter time series to be included, meaning fewer observations need to be thrown away.

In this dataset, we have include several files:

Global Land and Ocean-and-Land Temperatures (GlobalTemperatures.csv):

• Date: starts in 1750 for average land temperature and 1850 for max and min land temperatures and global ocean and land temperatures
• LandAverageTemperature: global average land temperature in celsius
• LandAverageTemperatureUncertainty: the 95% confidence interval around the average
• LandMaxTemperature: global average maximum land temperature in celsius
• LandMaxTemperatureUncertainty: the 95% confidence interval around the maximum land temperature
• LandMinTemperature: global average minimum land temperature in celsius
• LandMinTemperatureUncertainty: the 95% confidence interval around the minimum land temperature
• LandAndOceanAverageTemperature: global average land and ocean temperature in celsius
• LandAndOceanAverageTemperatureUncertainty: the 95% confidence interval around the global average land and ocean temperature

Other files include:

• Global Average Land Temperature by Country (GlobalLandTemperaturesByCountry.csv)
• Global Average Land Temperature by State (GlobalLandTemperaturesByState.csv)
• Global Land Temperatures By Major City (GlobalLandTemperaturesByMajorCity.csv)
• Global Land Temperatures By City (GlobalLandTemperaturesByCity.csv)

The raw data comes from the Berkeley Earth data page.

Connected Moving Walkway Market Outlook

According to our latest research, the global Connected Moving Walkway market size reached USD 3.2 billion in 2024, driven by rapid urbanization and the increasing adoption of smart infrastructure worldwide. The market is experiencing a robust compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7.1% from 2025 to 2033. By 2033, the Connected Moving Walkway market is forecasted to reach USD 5.97 billion, reflecting a significant expansion in both developed and emerging regions. As per our latest research, the primary growth factors include increased investments in airport modernization, the proliferation of smart city initiatives, and a rising demand for efficient people-moving solutions in high-traffic commercial and public spaces.

The growth of the Connected Moving Walkway market is strongly supported by the global surge in urban infrastructure projects. As cities become more congested and populations continue to rise, there is a pressing need for efficient and safe transportation solutions within large facilities such as airports, shopping malls, and public transit stations. Connected moving walkways, equipped with advanced sensors and IoT-enabled features, are increasingly preferred for their ability to facilitate seamless passenger movement, reduce congestion, and enhance user safety. The integration of real-time monitoring and predictive maintenance further boosts the operational efficiency of these systems, making them a critical component in modern infrastructure planning.

Another significant growth driver for the Connected Moving Walkway market is the technological evolution toward smart and connected systems. The advent of Industry 4.0 and the Internet of Things (IoT) has enabled moving walkways to become smarter, allowing for features such as remote diagnostics, automated speed adjustments, and energy-efficient operation. These innovations not only minimize downtime and maintenance costs but also align with global sustainability goals by reducing energy consumption. The demand for smart moving walkways is especially pronounced in regions with high passenger volumes and stringent safety regulations, such as North America and Europe, where facility managers are under constant pressure to deliver superior user experiences.

Furthermore, the market is benefiting from favorable government policies and public-private partnerships aimed at improving urban mobility and accessibility. Investments in airport expansion, the construction of new shopping complexes, and the upgrade of public transit infrastructure are creating lucrative opportunities for manufacturers and service providers in the Connected Moving Walkway market. Additionally, the growing emphasis on inclusivity and accessibility for all, including people with disabilities and the elderly, is prompting facility operators to adopt advanced moving walkway solutions that meet international safety and accessibility standards. This trend is expected to further accelerate market growth over the forecast period.

From a regional perspective, Asia Pacific is anticipated to dominate the Connected Moving Walkway market during the forecast period, owing to rapid urban development, large-scale infrastructure investments, and the proliferation of smart city projects in countries such as China, India, and Japan. North America and Europe are also significant contributors, driven by ongoing upgrades to airport and transit facilities and a strong focus on technological innovation. Meanwhile, the Middle East & Africa and Latin America are emerging as promising markets due to increasing investments in tourism infrastructure and urban mobility solutions. Each region presents unique opportunities and challenges, shaping the competitive landscape and growth trajectory of the global market.

Product Type Analysis

The Product Type segment of the Connected Moving Walkway market is primarily divided into Belt Type, Pallet Type, and Others. Belt type moving walkways are widely adopted in commercial settings d

In 2024, approximately ******* people lived in Stockholm, making it not only the capital, but also the biggest city in Sweden. The second biggest city, Gothenburg (Göteborg) had about half as many inhabitants, with about ******* people. Move to the citySweden is a country with a very high urbanization rate, the likes of which is usually only seen in countries with large uninhabitable areas, such as Australia, or in nations with very little rural landscape and agrarian structures, like Cuba. So why do so few Swedes live in rural areas, even though based on total area, the country is one of the largest in Europe? The total population figures are the answer to this question, as Sweden has only about 10.3 million inhabitants as of 2018 – that’s only 25 inhabitants per square kilometer. Rural exodus or just par for the course?It is no mystery why most Swedes flock to the cities: Jobs, of course. Over 65 percent of Sweden’s gross domestic product is generated by the services sector, and agriculture only contributes about one percent to the GDP. Employment mirrors this, with 80 percent of the workforce being deployed in services, namely in foreign trade, telecommunications, and manufacturing, among other industries.

This study of violent incidents among middle- and high-school students focused not only on the types and frequency of these incidents, but also on their dynamics -- the locations, the opening moves, the relationship between the disputants, the goals and justifications of the aggressor, the role of third parties, and other factors. For this study, violence was defined as an act carried out with the intention, or perceived intention, of physically injuring another person, and the "opening move" was defined as the action of a respondent, antagonist, or third party that was viewed as beginning the violent incident. Data were obtained from interviews with 70 boys and 40 girls who attended public schools with populations that had high rates of violence. About half of the students came from a middle school in an economically disadvantaged African-American section of a large southern city. The neighborhood the school served, which included a public housing project, had some of the country's highest rates of reported violent crime. The other half of the sample were volunteers from an alternative high school attended by students who had committed serious violations of school rules, largely involving illegal drugs, possession of handguns, or fighting. Many students in this high school, which is located in a large city in the southern part of the Midwest, came from high-crime areas, including public housing communities. The interviews were open-ended, with the students encouraged to speak at length about any violent incidents in school, at home, or in the neighborhood in which they had been involved. The 110 interviews yielded 250 incidents and are presented as text files, Parts 3 and 4. The interview transcriptions were then reduced to a quantitative database with the incident as the unit of analysis (Part 1). Incidents were diagrammed, and events in each sequence were coded and grouped to show the typical patterns and sub-patterns in the interactions. Explanations the students offered for the violent-incident behavior were grouped into two categories: (1) "justifications," in which the young people accepted responsibility for their violent actions but denied that the actions were wrong, and (2) "excuses," in which the young people admitted the act was wrong but denied responsibility. Every case in the incident database had at least one physical indicator of force or violence. The respondent-level file (Part 2) was created from the incident-level file using the AGGREGATE procedure in SPSS. Variables in Part 1 include the sex, grade, and age of the respondent, the sex and estimated age of the antagonist, the relationship between respondent and antagonist, the nature and location of the opening move, the respondent's response to the opening move, persons present during the incident, the respondent's emotions during the incident, the person who ended the fight, punishments imposed due to the incident, whether the respondent was arrested, and the duration of the incident. Additional items cover the number of times during the incident that something was thrown, the respondent was pushed, slapped, or spanked, was kicked, bit, or hit with a fist or with something else, was beaten up, cut, or bruised, was threatened with a knife or gun, or a knife or gun was used on the respondent. Variables in Part 2 include the respondent's age, gender, race, and grade at the time of the interview, the number of incidents per respondent, if the respondent was an armed robber or a victim of an armed robbery, and whether the respondent had something thrown at him/her, was pushed, slapped, or spanked, was kicked, bit, or hit with a fist or with something else, was beaten up, was threatened with a knife or gun, or had a knife or gun used on him/her.

This survey was carried out as part of a study entitled 'Migration, residential preferences and the changing environment of cities'. This project, one of 23 funded by the ESRC Cities Programme sought to improve understanding of the factors which bind, attract and repel residents in the larger cities and their inner areas. The project approached this task from the perspective of migration and residential mobility, focusing on overall population trends and the role of migration in these, social differences in the migration balances of Britain's largest conurbations, and the factors influencing people's migration behaviour. The research set itself five more specific objectives, as follows: i) to review the existing literature on migration behaviour and residential preferences relating to the city; ii) to identify the cities and parts of cities which in the recent past have proved more able to attract and hold on to residents and examine the characteristics that distinguish these places; iii) to investigate the extent to which different population groups are participating in these residential movements and seek out the reasons behind these differences; iv) to evaluate the implications of these findings for policy development; and v) to contribute to the theoretical literature on urban change. The work was carried out as a set of eight sub-projects, which included studies in collaboration with the Housing Corporation, Newcastle City Council and colleagues at Newcastle University. The survey of Tyneside residents was one of these sub-projects. The primary purpose of this survey was to obtain better intelligence about the causes of recent population movements affecting Newcastle and the surrounding region. The survey was undertaken by household questionnaire, which asked about how long people have lived at their present address, about the place they had moved from and the reason for their move, about their current intentions of moving and about basic demographic characteristics. The principal focus of the survey was on people living in and around Newcastle that have moved home within the last five years or so, i.e. since the start of 1995. It was targeted primarily at households of family-raising age or older moving into owner occupied housing. The survey was focused on ten, fairly compact localities. Half are located within the City boundary, four of them containing significant amounts of relatively new housing (Little Benton, Gosforth, Blakelaw/Kingston Park, Westerhope) and one picked as representative of a more established family area (Jesmond). The five in the surrounding region were selected on the basis of containing much new housing and being located in an area that has traditionally been popular among those moving out of Newcastle (Gateshead/Ryton, Prudhoe, Ponteland/Darras Hall, West Allotment, Cramlington).