"This Summary Report provides an accessible overview of the policy framework and recommendations in the AustralianLaw Reform Commission (ALRC), Classification-Content Regulation and Convergent Media (ALRC Report 118). The full Report sets out in detail the issues raised in the Terms of Reference for the ALRC's review of the National Classification Scheme, and the research and evidence base upon which the ALRC's recommendations were formulated. This Summary begins with a brief account of the background for the Inquiry, including the law reform brief and problems with the current framework for classification and content regulation in Australia, and a description of the principles underpinning the recommendations of the Report. This is followed by a description of the key features of the new scheme recommended by the ALRC, and the net effect of the ALRC's recommendations. This Summary concludes with an outline of each chapter in the full Report."--P. [9].

Various editions of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles have served as the Employment Service's basic tool for matching workers and jobs. The Dictionary of Occupational Titles has also played an important role in establishing skill and training requirements and developing Employment Service testing batteries for specific occupations. However, the role of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles has been called into question as a result of planned changes in the operation of the Employment Service. A plan to automate the operations of Employment Service offices using a descriptive system of occupational keywords rather than occupational titles has led to a claim that a dictionary of occupational titles and the occupational research program that produces it are outmoded. Since the automated keyword system does not rely explicitly on defined occupational titles, it is claimed that the new system would reduce costs by eliminating the need for a research program to supply the occupational definitions. In light of these considerations, the present volume evaluates the future need for the Dictionary of Occupational Titles.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service (USDA/ERS) maintains four highly related but distinct geographic classification systems to designate areas by the degree to which they are rural. The original urban-rural code scheme was developed by the ERS in the 1970s. Rural America today is very different from the rural America of 1970 described in the first rural classification report. At that time migration to cities and poverty among the people left behind was a central concern. The more rural a residence, the more likely a person was to live in poverty, and this relationship held true regardless of age or race. Since the 1970s the interstate highway system was completed and broadband was developed. Services have become more consolidated into larger centers. Some of the traditional rural industries, farming and mining, have prospered, and there has been rural amenity-based in-migration. Many major structural and economic changes have occurred during this period. These factors have resulted in a quite different rural economy and society since 1970. In April 2015, the Committee on National Statistics convened a workshop to explore the data, estimation, and policy issues for rationalizing the multiple classifications of rural areas currently in use by the Economic Research Service (ERS). Participants aimed to help ERS make decisions regarding the generation of a county rural-urban scale for public use, taking into consideration the changed social and economic environment. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.