Defining rural: Inconsistencies in observed travel behavior across rural and urban classifications in Vermont

Transportation research and funding programs frequently use geographic identifiers like rural, urban, or something in-between, but the ways these terms are defined vary widely. This can have real consequences on funding decisions, identifying transportation burdens, and what we think we know about travel behavior. In this study, we examine how observations of travel behavior change when we apply different rural-urban classification schemes. We use data collected from the odometers of vehicles used by 150,088 Vermont households to assess similarities and differences in vehicle miles travelled (VMT) when aggregated using four rural-urban classification schemes that are frequently used in transportation research and practice. We find that, on average, rural drivers travel farther than urban drivers as expected, but with important caveats. The scale at which rurality is defined and the choice of a rural-urban definition results in statistically significant differences in VMT estimates. Additionally, places classified as somewhere in between urban and rural can exhibit comparable if not higher mileage than rural areas. And finally, the heterogeneity of community travel cannot be ignored: all communities have low and high mileage drivers. We conclude with a broad call to move beyond rural-urban classification for many transportation research and policy applications rather than creating more refined definitions. A greater focus on identifying travel burdens faced by individuals and different population groups using an accessibility framework would provide more policy relevant and actionable information that gets to core purpose of transportation – the ability to get to where you need to go.