Figure 1:
Flowchart of the research process.
Figure 2:
Urban-rural categories, regions, and mobile phone data grids in Finland. In the Figure, urban classes have been combined into a single class to make urban areas stand out more clearly.
Table 1:
Description of the variables used in regression modelling.
| Row vector | Variable | Description | Data source, year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Urban area (dummy) | Area belongs to urban area in urban-rural typology (coded as 1 if area belongs to category and 0 if not). | SYKE, 2018 |
| Category | Sparsely populated rural area (dummy) | Area belongs to sparsely populated rural area in urban-rural typology (coded as 1 if area belongs to category and 0 if not). | SYKE, 2018 |
| Category | Rural area close to urban area (dummy) | Area belongs to rural area close to urban area in urban-rural typology (coded as 1 if area belongs to category and 0 if not). | SYKE, 2018 |
| Category | Local centre of rural areas (dummy) | Area belongs to local centre of rural areas in urban-rural typology (coded as 1 if area belongs to category and 0 if not). | SYKE, 2018 |
| Land use | Water cover (%) | Proportion of water areas from the total surface of the grid. | CORINE, 2018 |
| Land use | Forest cover (%) | Proportion of forest areas from the total surface of the grid. | CORINE, 2018 |
| Land use | Second homes from land cover (%) | Proportion of leisure areas from the total surface of the grid. | CORINE, 2018 |
| Land use | Second homes (%) | Proportion of second homes from the total number of residential buildings in the grid. | YKR, 2020 |
| Land use | Average value for zonation index | Average value for zonation index in grid which indicates biodiversity value of the forests. The higher the numeric value is, the higher the biodiversity value is in the grid. | Zonation, 2018 |
| Land use | Proportion of nature reserve from the total area (%) | Proportion of nature reserves from the total surface of the grid. | CORINE, 2018 |
| Location | Distance to the city over 50,000 inhabitants (km) | Distance from the grid centroid to the nearest city over 50,000 inhabitants. Distance is calculated based on Digiroad (2018) network. | Own calculation, 2020 |
| Location | Distance to the city over 200,000 inhabitants (km) | Distance from the grid centroid to the nearest city over 200,000 inhabitants. Distance is calculated based on Digiroad (2018) network. | Own calculation, 2020 |
| Location | Distance to the primary school (km) | Distance from the grid centroid to the nearest primary school. Distance is calculated based on Digiroad (2018) network. | Own calculation, 2020 |
| Infrastructure | Availability of broadband (%) | Proportion of the population with access to broadband. | Traficom, 2020 |
| Population | Population density (100 inhabitants/km2) | Population density of area. | YKR, 2020 |
Figure 3:
Differences in the local recreational activities by grid data and mobile phone data approaches.
Table 2.
Differences in local recreational activity by methods in urban-rural classes. Negative percentage values indicate underestimation and positive values overestimation of the local recreation activity.
| Data source | Estimates for local recreational activity | Inner urban area | Outer urban area | Urban fringe | Rural area close to urban area | Local centre of rural area | Core rural area | Sparsely populated rural area |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Permanent population statistics | Total annual activity (n, million visits) | 242.2 | 155.0 | 84.4 | 31.8 | 54.3 | 73.4 | 41.3 |
| Average monthly activity (n, million visits) | 20.2 | 12.9 | 7.0 | 2.6 | 4.5 | 6.1 | 3.4 | |
| Average monthly populations based on grid data | Total annual activity (n, million visits) | 219.4 | 141.7 | 82.2 | 29.1 | 66.1 | 79.1 | 64.9 |
| Difference in activity during the whole year compared with permanent population statistics (%) | 9.4 | 8.6 | 2.6 | 8.3 | −21.8 | −7.7 | −57.1 | |
| Activity in January (n, million visits) | 16.1 | 10.3 | 5.7 | 2.1 | 3.9 | 5.1 | 3.2 | |
| Activity in July (n, million visits) | 18.3 | 12.0 | 7.7 | 2.5 | 7.9 | 8.4 | 9.4 | |
| Difference in activity between January and July (%) | −13.7 | −16.3 | −34.7 | −17.0 | −105.4 | −65.7 | −196.0 | |
| Average monthly populations based on mobile phone data | Total annual activity (n, million visits) | 200.7 | 140.2 | 79.6 | 30.7 | 61.6 | 78.6 | 62.2 |
| Difference in activity during the whole year compared with permanent population statistics (%) | 17.1 | 9.6 | 5.7 | 3.4 | −13.6 | −7.1 | −50.5 | |
| Difference in activity during the whole year compared with the average monthly populations of grid data (%) | 8.5 | 1.1 | 3.1 | −5.4 | 6.7 | 0.6 | 4.2 | |
| Activity in January (n, million visits) | 13.1 | 9.4 | 5.2 | 2.1 | 4.0 | 5.2 | 4.0 | |
| Activity in July (n, million visits) | 17.6 | 12.7 | 7.6 | 2.8 | 6.6 | 8.3 | 7.9 | |
| Difference in activity between January and July (%) | −34.0 | −34.6 | −44.2 | −35.0 | −65.8 | −57.8 | −97.7 |
Figure 4:
Monthly variation of recreational activity by region. Calculation is based on mobile phone data.
Table 3.
Results from the regression analyses explain differences in local recreation activity between monthly average populations and average population in 2020 in mobile phone data (%).
| Variable | Difference in January, SAR | Difference in March, SAR | Difference in July, SAR |
|---|---|---|---|
| Population density (100 inhabitants/km2) | 0.011 | −0.030 * | 0.036 * |
| Urban area (dummy) | −1.835 * | 1.021 | −8.077 *** |
| Sparsely populated rural area (dummy) | −2.175 ** | −1.904 | 7.756 *** |
| Rural area close to urban area (dummy) | 0.358 | −0.919 | −0.100 |
| Local centre of rural areas (dummy) | 0.371 | 1.230 | −0.602 |
| Water cover (%) | −0.067 *** | −0.104 *** | 0.203 *** |
| Forest cover (%) | −0.042 *** | −0.008 | 0.037 * |
| Second homes from land cover (%) | 0.222 * | 0.028 | 0.804 *** |
| Second homes (%) | −0.009 *** | −0.012 *** | 0.022 *** |
| Average value for zonation index | 4.826 ** | −4.781 * | 1.238 |
| Proportion of nature reserve from the total area (%) | 0.057 | 0.064 | −0.111 * |
| Distance to the city with over 50,000 inhabitants (km) | 34.499 *** | 47.828 *** | 0.377 |
| Distance to the city with over 200,000 inhabitants (km) | 8.540 ** | 2.753 | 35.106 *** |
| Distance to the primary school (km) | −0.280 *** | −0.612 *** | 1.140 *** |
| Availability of broadband (%) | 0.032 *** | 0.026 *** | −0.059 *** |
| Constant | −24.007 *** | 3,334 * | 12.513 *** |
| Lambda | 0.074 | 0.081 | 0.103 |
| Observations | 13358 | 13358 | 13358 |
| R2 (based on lm-model) | 0.062 | 0.104 | 0.476 |
| AIC | 112690 | 118580 | 116580 |