Oregon has been among the most rapidly urbanizing states — but not lately – OregonLive.com

Report on Urbanization Trends in Oregon and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Demographic Shift Towards Urban Centers

Over the past fifty years, Oregon has experienced a profound demographic transformation, shifting from a state with a significant rural population to one that is predominantly urban. This rapid urbanization has reshaped the state’s economic, political, and cultural landscape. This report analyzes the historical trends, policy drivers, and recent developments in Oregon’s population distribution, evaluating these changes through the framework of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with a particular focus on SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

Historical Urbanization and Economic Growth

The transition to an urban majority in Oregon was one of the fastest in the nation. Data from Portland State University’s Population Research Center highlights the key phases of this shift:

1. In 1970, approximately one-third of Oregonians lived in rural areas.
2. The pace of urbanization accelerated in the 1980s and peaked in the 1990s, driven by growth in Portland and the densification of its suburbs.
3. By the 2010s, over 80% of the state’s population resided in urban areas.

This period of intense urbanization was concurrent with major economic expansion, particularly in the Portland metropolitan area with the growth of corporations like Intel and Nike. This alignment of population concentration and corporate investment reflects progress toward SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), though it also contributed to a significant economic divide between urban and rural regions.

Policy Impact on Sustainable Urban Development

State-level policy decisions were instrumental in managing Oregon’s urban growth, promoting models that align with key sustainability targets.

• Land Use Planning (SDG 11 & SDG 15): The landmark 1973 passage of Senate Bill 100, which established urban growth boundaries, was a critical intervention. This policy directly supported SDG 11 by promoting urban density and SDG 15 (Life on Land) by discouraging sprawl and protecting forests and farmland.
• Sustainable Infrastructure (SDG 9 & SDG 11): The development of the MAX light-rail system, beginning in 1986, was a key factor in fostering dense, transit-oriented communities. This investment in public transportation infrastructure is a core component of making cities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable.

Recent Trends: A Slowdown in Urbanization and Rural Resilience

Since 2010, the trend of rapid urbanization has slowed considerably, and rural areas are showing new signs of demographic and economic resilience. This potential rebalancing is crucial for addressing SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) by narrowing the gap between urban and rural communities.

• The share of urban residents in Oregon slightly decreased between 2010 and 2020.
• Population in many rural areas has stabilized or begun to grow.
• Notably, household incomes are now growing fastest in largely rural counties, suggesting new economic vitality outside of the traditional urban core.

Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainable Regional Development

Despite positive signs, a comprehensive rural revitalization faces significant challenges that must be addressed to ensure equitable and sustainable development across the state.

1. Demographic Pressures (SDG 3): Oregon has the oldest average population in the Western U.S., a trend that is even more pronounced in its rural counties. This poses challenges to providing adequate healthcare and social services, impacting progress toward SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).
2. Infrastructure Gaps (SDG 9): Limited access to high-speed broadband and insufficient transportation links remain significant obstacles for rural economies. Overcoming these deficits is essential for achieving SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and enabling small towns to connect to the broader economy.
3. Socio-Economic Disparities (SDG 10): The deep-seated political and cultural divide between urban and rural Oregon continues to be a major challenge. Fostering inclusive development requires bridging these gaps to ensure that opportunities are accessible to all residents.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
   • The article’s primary focus is on urbanization, the growth of cities in Oregon, and the dynamics between urban and rural populations. It discusses population density, land use planning (“Senate Bill 100”), and public transportation (“MAX, the Portland area’s light-rail system”), all of which are central themes of SDG 11.
2. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
   • The article explicitly mentions the role of infrastructure in development. It credits the MAX light-rail system for promoting urban density and identifies the lack of “broadband access and airports/train/highway travel times” as significant obstacles to rural development. This directly relates to building resilient infrastructure.
3. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
   • Economic factors are presented as drivers of urbanization. The article notes the “rapid expansion of Intel’s operations in Hillsboro and Nike’s growth near Beaverton” coincided with the urban boom. It also discusses economic resilience in rural areas, mentioning that “Oregon household incomes… are growing fastest in largely rural counties.”
4. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • The article highlights a significant disparity between different parts of the state, describing a “big political, economic and cultural divide separating the Portland area from Oregon’s small towns and rural communities.” This points to inequalities based on geographic location, a key concern of SDG 10.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Under SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities):
   • Target 11.3: By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries. The article’s discussion of Oregon’s historic land use law (Senate Bill 100) and the establishment of an “urban growth boundary” to “promote urban density and discourage sprawl” directly relates to this target of planned and managed urbanization.
   • Target 11.2: By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all. The article credits the MAX light-rail system as a key factor that “promot[ed] urban density across the three counties in the metro region,” which aligns with this target.
   • Target 11.a: Support positive economic, social and environmental links between urban, peri-urban and rural areas by strengthening national and regional development planning. The article’s entire narrative about the urban-rural divide, the slowing of urbanization, and the new “resilience” and population leveling in rural areas speaks to the dynamic and necessary linkages between these areas.
2. Under SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure):
   • Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure, including regional and transborder infrastructure, to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all. The article identifies infrastructure like the MAX light-rail system as a driver of urban growth, while conversely noting that obstacles like “broadband access and airports/train/highway travel times” hinder development in rural areas.
3. Under SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth):
   • Target 8.2: Achieve higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading and innovation. The mention of the growth of technology and apparel giants like Intel and Nike as coinciding with the urban boom is an example of economic productivity driving regional development.
4. Under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities):
   • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status. The article’s reference to the “big political, economic and cultural divide” between urban and rural Oregon directly points to a lack of inclusion and a disparity that this target aims to address.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For SDG 11 Targets:
   • Proportion of population living in urban areas: The article is built around this indicator, citing specific data points such as “About a third of Oregonians lived in rural areas in 1970” and “more than 80% of Oregonians lived in cities” later on. This directly measures the extent of urbanization (related to Target 11.3).
   • Population growth rates in urban vs. rural areas: The article implies this indicator by stating that “population growth in the largely urban Portland area stalled after the pandemic” while “lots of rural areas leveling off or gaining population around the state.” This helps measure the dynamics between urban and rural areas (related to Target 11.a).
   • Access to public transport: While not providing a specific percentage, the article implies the importance of this indicator by crediting the MAX light-rail system for promoting urban density, suggesting its reach and impact are measurable (related to Target 11.2).
2. For SDG 9 Targets:
   • Access to digital infrastructure (broadband): The article explicitly mentions “broadband access” as a significant obstacle for rural living, implying that the percentage of the population with access is a key indicator of infrastructure development (related to Target 9.1).
   • Access to transport infrastructure: The mention of “airports/train/highway travel times” as an obstacle implies that travel time and accessibility to transport hubs are key metrics for measuring rural infrastructure quality (related to Target 9.1).
3. For SDG 8 and 10 Targets:
   • Household income growth rates by geographic area: The article provides a direct economic indicator by stating that “Oregon household incomes… are growing fastest in largely rural counties.” This can be used to measure progress in reducing economic inequalities (Target 10.2) and tracking regional economic growth (Target 8.2).
   • Population age demographics: The article mentions that “Oregon’s average population is the oldest in the West and rural counties are significantly older than the state’s urban centers.” This demographic data serves as an indicator of the challenges facing rural economies and social structures.

Source: oregonlive.com