A Rural Policy for the 21st Century

8192019 A Rural Policy for the 21st Century

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulla-rural-policy-for-the-21st-century 124

A Rural Policy for the 21st Century page 1

A Rural Policy for the 21st CenturyReport from the Proceedings of the2003 Southern Legislative Conference Rural Forum

Jonathan Watts HullRegional Representative

On November 7 and 8 2003 legislators and policymakers from across the South met inPoint Clear Alabama for the 2003 SLC Rural Forum an open discussion on the status and futureof the rural South Through the two days of discussion participants were asked to identify themost critical concerns for rural areas the potential partners for addressing these concerns and theappropriate role for state government in improving the condition of the rural South

That rural America is facing considerable challenges is beyond question The economicdemographic and physical conditions of rural places in America present myriad problems forrural development Rural incomes are in general well below the national average with manyrural counties presenting high rates of poverty over long periods While rural schools performexceptionally well rural areas have fewer college graduates and more people with only a highschool education than other parts of the country Students are in a sense rural areasrsquo top exportRural areas also face serious deciencies in the condition of the infrastructure that drives theeconomy including roads highways bridges airports rail service water and sewage service high-speed Internet access and electricity

Rural America continues to provide considerable opportunities for development includinga host of amenities highly sought by vacationers retirees and sports enthusiasts and vast naturalresources that still constitute the economic engine of America Rural schools have many of the

qualities and characteristics that lead to top performance and the comparative performance of ruralstudents is remarkable given the demographic composition of the areas

What is RuralFor decades rural has been dened largely

by what it is not metropolitan Federalagencies and most states have designated any place that was not a metropolitan area as rural(or the even less descriptive non-metro) TheUS Census Bureau the White House Ofceof Management and Budget (OMB) and theUS Department of Agriculture (USDA) all usediffering denitions of metropolitan These are based on either population density (Census) population size (50000 people) within a cityor metropolitan statistical area dened by theCensus (OMB) or by county population alonga continuum (USDA) Only the Department ofAgriculture denes rural areas in any degree ofdifferentiation and the variety of denitions forldquonon-metrordquo leads to varying conclusions aboutthe size of the rural population in the UnitedStates

In response to calls from a range ofgroups the OMB created a new place categorydenitionmdashmicropolitanmdashdened as a non-metro county with an urban cluster of at least10000 persons or more which becomes acentral county of a micro area with any countywith 25 percent or more commuters to the corecounty considered part of the micro area Thischange will help to paint a more complete picture of conditions outside metropolitanareas and help policymakers to rene programs serving rural areas

The USDA has not surprisingly the mostsophisticated means for categorizing placesthat lie outside metropolitan areas in the UnitedStates The USDArsquos rural-urban continuumcodes differentiate urban counties by size andnon-metropolitan counties by their degreeof urbanization or proximity to metropolitanareas This allows for subtle distinctions such




as counties with small populations near tourban areas or small towns completely outsidemetropolitan areas When possible this reportuses the USDA denition of ldquoruralrdquo in order tofocus most directly on those areas which aremost rural

Snapshot of Rural America

The 2003 Rural Forum took place againsta backdrop of rising worries over the viabilityof rural places particularly those most rural parts of the country and a sense that thetime for a comprehensive coordinated rural policy may be nigh Political leadership inWashington DC and state capitals is heavilyinvested in rural areas and rural issues are being heard on a broader stage than in the past decade The challenges facing ruralAmerica also are increasingly daunting butthe agencies and organizations working on the problems facing rural communities and citizens

are showing renewed vigor for integrativesolutions

While the issues facing rural America areinterrelated and complex there are several keyareas that stood out to participants of the 2003SLC Rural Forum What follows is a briefoverview of these areas

DemographicsIn many ways rural areas are dened by

their demographics Rural population losshas been a major contributing factor to thedecline in rural political clout over the past few

decades It also has made providing servicesmore costly limited the opportunities for private investment and depleted the capacityof rural areas to drive their own developmentforward The rural population is aging aswell with the percent of rural Americans 60years of age and older growing from 177 percent in 1980 to 197 percent in 2001 The percent of residents of metropolitan areas thisage remained relatively unchanged over thissame time period1 Part of this growth can beattributed to the rise in non-metro counties asretirement destinations Another contributingfactor is the continuing drain of young peoplefrom rural areas to metropolitan centers tond employment This growth in the ruralelderly has signicant consequences for rural policy Even as retiree immigrants bring withthem new tax revenue and family income andsustain local businesses and institutions therising elderly population adds to strains on analready overburdened service infrastructurein parts of the country where transportation

challenges a paucity of service providers andlow population density contribute to highercosts and lower availability

Rural America is not just getting olderit is diversifying at a remarkable rate Thegrowth rate in the non-metro population forwhites was a modest 85 percent between 1990

and 2000 roughly equivalent to the rate formetro areas All non-metro minority groupsincreased over the same period both in termsof absolute numbers and as a proportion ofthe population Hispanic population growthfor the same period was at 704 percent 10 points higher than in metro areas with black population growth registering at 122 percent75 points below metro areas The median ageof minorities in rural areas is also far lowerthan for whites meaning that not only is thewhite population not growing as quickly andaging more but whites are being replaced

by minorities primarily African Americansand Hispanics Rural minority families alsohave higher percentages of young people thanwhite rural families2 The impact these shiftswill have is considerable Because minoritiesoften have lower incomes than whites theshifting balance in population points toincreased challenges for overcoming povertyand a continuation of the drain of capital held primarily by whites from rural areas This also points to a rise in demand for bilingual servicesas the number of residents for whom English isnot their rst language increases Schools will

face a greater number of students with parentswith lower educational attainment rates thanin the past and in most cases lower functionalEnglish skills

Employment is an uneven demographicindicator for rural areas Employment in ruralareas has been under a long-term transitionfrom industries such as agriculture mining andmanufacturing to services construction andsocial and government services Professionaland managerial employment also has risenalbeit more slowly for rural residents over

time In general occupational attainmentimproved during the 1990s although thesegains began to erode by the decadersquos endImportantly while unemployment in rural areaswas uneven on a regional basis rates for muchof the rural South score consistently above thenational average

As the economies of rural areas haverestructured and created more low-wagelow-skill jobs in the service sector an inux




of outside labormdashpredominantly Hispanicimmigrantsmdashgenerally provided the necessaryworkers to ll these jobs a trend that islikely to continue This fact does not makethe economic picture for long-standing ruralresidents particularly encouraging although itdoes mean that rural employers agriculturaland otherwise will not likely lack the kind

of labor they currently demand If the ruraleconomy shifts toward higher-skill workhowever the pattern of attracting low-skill low-wage workers could exacerbateemployment problems in these areas Workersattracted to low-skill positions in rural areaseasily could become stranded there withoutemployment options Rural places with awealth of low-skill workers will be hard pressed to ll more demanding positions fromwithin their existing workforce

Infrastructure

Economic development often dependsat least in part upon the presence of adequateinfrastructure to support new existing orexpanding businesses and new workers Taken broadly infrastructure includes transportation(including but not limited to roads bridgesrailways ports and airports) and water sewerelectric and telecommunications systemsInfrastructure investment is a key elementto most state economic development plansregardless of place As the economy becomesincreasingly information-based up-to-datetelecommunications networks are now vital

components Highway and rail transportationsystems remain key components and are understrain in several parts of the country includingmuch of the South because of rapid growthWithin the broad category of infrastructurethere are several areas of particular noteincluding broadband Internet access water andsewer service roads highways and railwaysutilities and statewide strategic planning

Rural areas often are at a decideddisadvantage with respect to infrastructure because of the sparseness of population

Infrastructure investments in densely populatedareas can be paid for across a variety of usersIn rural areas the higher cost of building andmaintaining the necessary infrastructure isunlikely to be borne by the relatively fewer people subscribing to the services For thisreason state and federal support for ruralinfrastructure is particularly important

Broadband Internet access mdashUniversalaccess revolutionized life in rural areas in

many ways The goal of providing equivalenttelephone services to all Americans regardlessof where they lived pushed telephones intorural areas with the costs subsidized by lower-cost urban residents and businesses In the 21st century access to the Internet is being widelyequated to access to a telephone in the 20th century And while most Americanrsquos could

in theory connect to the Internet thanks to theuniversal access activities of the past centurythe reality is that low-speed dial up services andlimited Internet service providers in rural areasas well as the slower penetration of computertechnology to rural areas have created a digitaldivide between the haves and have-nots Nearly 60 percent of American householdshave Internet access overall with ruralhouseholds lagging behind urban households by about 10 percentage points3 High-speed broadband access to the Internet remains farmore limited in rural areas however a fact thathas implications for business site selection aswell as the opportunity for rural entrepreneursto take full advantage of the opportunities theInternet affords As of 2002 just over halfof all rural residents were online with fewerthan 10 percent having access to high-speedconnections4 This is not surprising given thecosts of bringing these services even to denselysettled urban areas The cost of extending thisservice to areas of low population density andmore difcult geography is going to be muchhigher per customer Furthermore demand for

high-speed Internet services may not be as highas in metropolitan areas

The federal government largely throughthe US Department of Agriculture has programs to extend low-interest loans tocompanies to establish broadband Internetconnectivity The downturn in the technologysector and the hurdles to providing service tothese areas have slowed action on this frontSeveral states including Virginia and NorthCarolina also have moved on this issueFrom an economic development standpoint particularly as the economy shifts towardservice and information high-speed Internetaccess can make the distances that separaterural communities irrelevant to their potentialfor economic growth Among the approachesstates have taken are to allow local governmentto offer the service if there are no private providers available and to provide low-costloans for the creation of the infrastructurenecessary to provide high-speed access in ruralcommunities




Getting high-speed Internet to rural areasis unlikely to happen quickly or consistentlywithout the involvement of state and federalgovernments The costs of installing the cableand telecommunications equipment for the low population densities of rural areas mean that passing on the costs to rural residents would be exorbitantly high At the same time the

diversied structure of the telecommunicationsindustry in the United States today makesany government action in this area extremelydifcult The 2002 Farm Bill authorized$2 billion (with $100 million appropriatedin 2003) in loans and guarantees for rural broadband access over a six-year period Thismoney is available according to a formulaallocating funds proportionately to statesrsquo rural populations States and local communitiesare stepping in as well providing residentswith access to high-speed Internet off existingldquoservice spinesrdquo where no private provider isavailable

Water sewer and utility service mdash Distance and sparse population also raise thecosts of providing water and sewer serviceto rural communities Furthermore thelimited tax bases for most of rural Americamake raising the revenue to conduct regularmaintenance and to upgrade out-of-datesystems extremely difcult In recent yearsthe condition of water and sewer systems inrural places has raised concerns at the localstate and federal level In the 2002 Farm

Bill an unprecedented amount of money wasauthorized for the building and maintenance ofwastewater treatment facilities and other sewerand water projects Key among the shifts in policy included in the Farm Bill was a lifting ofthe $590 million cap on grants to communitiesfor water projects a move intended to allowmuch needed additional funding to ow torural communities immediately Even as thefederal budget has grown tighter rural watergrants and loans have continued to be offeredreecting the priority this particular aspectof rural infrastructure has among lawmakersStates also often use Community DevelopmentBlock Grant funds to pay for improvementsand expansions to water and sewer service inrural areas although this program has beeneliminated in the Bush Administrationrsquos 2005 budget proposal

Costs for rural water systems go beyondthe expenses of laying and maintaining waterand sewer lines Meeting safe drinking waterstandards in rural areas often means upgrading

aging water treatment equipment Smallsystems (those serving fewer than 10000customers) are eligible for waivers from federarequirements if compliance is determined bythe US Environmental Protection Agency to be not affordable for small systems To datehowever the EPArsquos review of current and newregulations has generated no waivers These

reviews assess costs at a national level andtherefore do not take into account regional andlocal variations in cost5 The costs of treatingsewage before discharging it to surface watersare high for rural areas Inevitably passing onthe costs to customers is less practical for ruralareasrsquo water systems both because the costs arehigher per user and because the lower incomesfound in rural areas often allow for littleaccommodation of higher utility fees

Rural America enjoys reliable economicelectrical service but as the demands on the

electrical grid have grown the infrastructureoften has not expanded accordingly As became extremely clear on August 14 2003the electrical system in the United States isfragile While this blackout affected urbanand rural areas alike rural residents faceunique challenges in ensuring the continuedhigh-quality provision of electrical servicesAmong these is a threat that a restructuredelectricity market will not reect the natureof the rural market Many rural residents gettheir electricity through an electric cooperativethat serves a small number of mostly

residential and small business customers overa large area The customer makeup of thesecooperatives results in variable demand whichin turn requires either generation capacitysufcient to meet peak demand that results insuperuous capacity for much of the time orheavy dependence on the ldquospotrdquo market Asthe electricity industry has consolidated the potential for market power to distort the spotmarket has grown as California witnessed in20016

Roads and highways mdashRoads and

highways remain the principal means by whichgoods produced in rural areas nd their wayto market Even with federal investment inestablishing infrastructure particularly roadsstates and localities bear signicant costsin their construction and the lionrsquos share oftheir maintenance County and municipalgovernments are responsible for 73 percentof all maintenance on rural roads with states being responsible for an additional 22 percent7




Over the past several decades changesin the trucking and rail industries as well aschanges in driving patterns for average citizensand the growth of metropolitan areas have placed considerable strain on the roads andhighways that service rural areas Deregulationin the rail and trucking industries helped createnumerous new small trucking companies

and consolidate the rail industry The resultof these actions was closed rail lines andincreased truck trafc particularly in ruralareas which in turn led to increased congestionand higher road maintenance costs for stateand county governments which bear the bulkof highway upkeep costs It is signicant thateven as total spending on roads has increasedthe share of this money that is from state andlocal sources has increased from 55 percent in1980 to over 70 percent today8

Rail mdashThe rail system helped to settle

much of rural America over a century agoand remains a vital economic link for manyrural communities As the railroad industryconsolidated in the wake of deregulationthe number of places served by rail lineshas dropped This has been in some wayscompensated for by the aforementioned rise insmall trucking companies although this formof transit is inefcient for some of the principalagricultural commodities especially grains ofrural producers A principal reason for the dropin rail service is the costs of maintaining andservicing these lines As rail lines age in rural

areas their maintenance costs rise placingthese communities even more at risk of losingtheir rail service

Statewide strategic planning mdashAcrossthe board on infrastructure needs there oftenis a lack of strategic planning at the state levelto provide for current and projected needs particularly with respect to rural areas Forginglinks at the state and regional level to guaranteeadequate thought is given to how infrastructurefunds are allocated and that projects reect thestatersquos overall development priorities is key to

well-coordinated infrastructure developmentWithout this planning rural development onlycan happen on an ad hoc basis when capitaland other resources are specically madeavailable or when the necessary conditionsserendipitously occur

EconomicsPovertyThe economic reality of rural America

often is one of higher poverty than in the restof the nation and a weak job market Rural

America and the rural South in particularhas long lagged behind urban areas in mostmeasures of socio-economic progressBeginning with the New Deal in the 1930s andaccelerating in the 1950s and 1960s however poverty reduction and economic development programs have steadily improved conditions inrural areas In 1960 the US Census identied

2083 rural counties as having poverty ratesof 20 percent of their total population By2000 the number of all counties with povertyrates at this level had dropped to 382 of which363 were rural The great preponderance of persistent poverty countiesmdashroughly 340mdasharein the South Persistent poverty during this 40-year span has been concentrated in the BlackBelt the Mississippi Delta Appalachia andsouthwest Texas

Overall rural poverty rates reached recordlow levels in the 2000 Census increasing

slightly in 2001 Nationally the gap betweenrural and urban poverty rates remained low (26 percentage points in 2000 up to 31 percentage points in 2001) Unfortunately for the Souththis is mostly due to gains in the Northeast andMidwest where the poverty rates are almostthe same in metro and non-metro areas Inthe South the gap between metro and non-metro populations is much larger up from 4 percentage points in 2000 to 54 percentage points the South in 2001 Non-metro povertyin the South was 176 percent in 2001 acrossthe region9

While poverty continues to be an issuefor urban areas the degree of poverty andits persistence over time has been most pronounced in rural areas10 In the Southwith rural employment still heavily investedin manufacturing and mining the globalmarketplace has pushed the displacement ofthese jobs through technology and relocation tolower-cost labor markets Recent data suggeststhat the overall job picture in rural Americamay be slightly better than in metro areasand that the recent recession was less severe

in rural areas than elsewhere11

Add to this better earnings growth for non-metro residents(14 percent during 2000-2001) than for metroresidents (9 percent) and rural Americaseems to be faring better in comparison Alsomitigating the real impact of lower incomein rural areas is the lower costs of living inthese areas calculated in a 2000 report asabout 16 percent below the cost of living inmetro areas This implies that the povertyrate overstates the impact of rural poverty to a




degree12 But all this good news is temperedfor the South especially by the vaporizationof manufacturing particularly textiles jobsand the overall poor job mix found in manyrural areas Furthermore over the past decaderural real income has consistently lagged behind metro income actually falling behindination13 In many ways the impact of US

trade policy can be felt most directly in ruralcommunities dependent on manufacturingtextiles and apparel as these industries haverelocated to lower-cost production areasoverseas and those dependent on agricultureas the global food market puts an economicsqueeze on US producers

Employment growth in rural areas hastended to follow a pattern established in the1950s and earlier with companies turning torural America for inexpensive land and low-wage (and low-skill) workers While this

pattern was initially the case for manufacturingand textiles as these sectors have declined inrecent years the job growth has often beenmade up for at least partially by service sector jobs In particular the employment optionsafforded rural residents are more likely to below-wage low-skill entry-level positionswith limited opportunities for professional oreconomic advancement

Perhaps more worrisome than thestatistics on overall poverty are the gureson child poverty Twenty percent of children

in rural areas live in poverty compared to 16 percent of metro children In the South child poverty statistics are even more discouragingThroughout the region rural areas havehigher incidences of child poverty thannon-rural areas In most rural places in theregion the level of child poverty is seldom below 25 percent Of the 100 rural countiesin the country with the highest rates of child poverty 80 are in the South14 While it should be acknowledged that Southern states havemany more counties than states in other partsof the country the great concentration of child

poverty in the region and the population thesecounties represent is very signicant

Child poverty creates numerouscomplications for rural areas Poor childrenare less likely to receive a quality educationcomplete high school receive regular medicalcare and have quality day care availableto them As these children grow up theopportunities afforded them are fewer andfewer further exacerbating the problem of

a rural population with limited ability oropportunities to develop the skills necessary forhigh-earning jobs

EducationIt is unmistakable that the quality of the

rural workforce and the quality of rural schoolsare related Rural areas that neglect education

are less likely to have a well-developedworkforce and thus be less attractive to businesses looking to relocate Rural schoolsin general perform remarkably well scoringclose to schools on the urban fringe and inlarge towns and above schools located in urbancenters both in national assessments and interms of school graduation rates15 Consideringthe degree of poverty in rural schools (asmeasured by the number of students eligiblefor free and reduced-price lunch) which istypically above the state average and is attimes equal to that found in city center schools

the performance of rural schools seemsremarkable As a number of observers havenoted the small size of rural schools and thestrong community ties often compensate for theobstacles poverty and limited resources imposeon student achievement16

Rural schools face serious challengeshowever in maintaining their standard ofquality Decaying infrastructure stagnantor contracting tax bases growing teachershortages increased federal mandates andmore all are weighing upon rural schools In

a number of states the funding disparities between metro and rural districts have givenrise to lawsuits over inequitable and inadequatenancing Rural districts with limited tax bases are more dependent on state formula aidfor increasing per pupil expenditures Theyalso are more limited in their bonding capacityfor capital improvements to rural schools

Roughly half of all schools in the UnitedStates are in rural areas educating nearly40 percent of all students Rural students ingeneral enjoy slightly lower student teacherratios and far smaller school sizes Theaverage school in an urban or urban fringe areahas more than 600 students In rural areas thisgure is 400 students Rural students are lesslikely to have limited prociency in Englishand more likely to have the opportunity totake remedial courses than their metropolitan peers Rural schools also are far less likely tooffer English as a second language or bilingual programs to their students a fact that in partreects the scarcity of teachers with these skills




in rural areas and in part demonstrates theuneven distribution of the students who requirelanguage services among rural areas Ruralschools also are only half as likely to offerextended day programs as urban schools andare less likely to offer kindergarten17

Flat or declining tax bases and limited

revenue capacity contribute to a further worryfor states funding equity and adequacy forrural schools While urban schools have long been parties to litigation against statesrsquo schoolfunding structures rural districts are becominglead plaintiffs in equity and adequacy lawsuitsin a number of states claiming that stateformula funding discriminates against property- poor rural areas A lawsuit of this sort brought by a rural district in Arkansas has forced thestate to entirely reconstruct its funding formulaincreasing the costs of public education tothe state by several hundred million dollars

and triggering the longest special session inArkansas history

The inadequacies and inequities ruralschools face also can be found in theirfacilities which are often older and haveserious maintenance shortcomings Ruraldistricts with their limited bonding capacityand tax rolls have much more difcultyraising the necessary funds to provideadequate maintenance to aging facilitiesmuch less provide for major repairs or newconstruction In the end the students in rural

areas attend schools with greater incidence ofinsufciencies than their metropolitan peers

A further problem for rural schools is thedifculty they face in attracting and retainingstaff Teachers entering the profession fromcollege tend to cluster in schools near wherethey graduate and in major metropolitan areaswhich offer higher salaries Rural areasisolated by distance and often at a signicant pay disadvantage are hard-pressed to competefor new teachers Rural districts also may bethe employer of last resort for some teacher-candidates providing jobs to teachers who areunable to secure employment in their primary preference districts After developing theirskills and experience in the rural district theseteachers are likely to move on turning ruralschools into the training ground for a cadreof qualied experienced teachers working inmetropolitan schools

Given all of the challenges rural schoolsface they nevertheless continue to providestrong educational opportunities to rural

children Graduation rates assessment scoresand measures of school environment all pointto the excellent job many rural schools do Butafter rural children graduate from high school proportionally fewer continue to college astheir peers in metropolitan areas18 There areobviously a number of factors which comeinto play in this regard including the limited

opportunities for college graduates to ndappropriate employment in rural areas therange of jobs for non-college graduates inrural areas and the lower number of childrenof parents with college degrees in rural areasRural students who do go to college moreoveroften move to metropolitan areas where theirdegrees will bring wider opportunities furtherexacerbating the ldquobrain drainrdquo from ruralAmerica

The federal No Child Left Behind Act which sets federal education policy for eight

years included increased exibility for ruralschools Unfortunately the direct grant program that accompanied this increasedexibility was eliminated after only oneyear leaving rural schools to compete fordiscretionary funds with much larger schoolsto complement their per-pupil formula fundingThe Act also has numerous accountabilitymeasures including annual testing ingrades 3-8 to measure student learning and progressive sanctions for schools in whicheach identiable subgroup did not makesufcient progress toward state-established

performance benchmarks For rural schoolswith smaller cohorts of students the impactof each individual test-taker is greater Onestudentrsquos good or poor performance thus could be responsible for placing the entire grade andhence the school into or out of compliancewith the federal law Falling out of compliancewith the federal law triggers a host of remedialactions for the school including requiredacademic services and inter- and intradistricttransfers with the costs related to theseactivities being borne by the schools Giventhe limited and often non-existent natureof tutoring services and the vast distances between some rural schools providing theseopportunities to students may not be possible or practical

Workforce DevelopmentRural workers have lower levels of formal

education and training and receive less inreturn for their investments in their skillsRural areas also offer fewer employmentopportunities for skilled workers a fact that




contributes to lower wages for more highlyskilled workers in these areas Furthermoreshould a community succeed in attracting ahigh-skill employer the workforce may not beable to be lled from local rolls19 To remedythis situation many communities in rural areashave some form of training for local workers toimprove and expand their job skills

These programs generally calledworkforce development or investment offera variety of services to the unemployedunderemployed and discouraged workersas well as opportunities for those who areemployed to expand their skills Activitiesthat fall under this umbrella can run the gamutfrom job listings and information on trainingnancial aid and the employment market tocareer counseling GED courses and on-the- job training These programs often are run outof regional development centers and receive a

mix of local state and federal funds to fullltheir mission

Employers and local technical andcommunity colleges are principal partnersfor local development ofcials in creatingsuccessful workforce development networksThese networks have several key strengthsAmong them are easing the transition fromschool to employment for recent graduatesthrough work-based learning lower turnovercosts through better training and aptitudematches between employers and employers

and more efcient mechanisms for matchingemployers with workers that t their needsBecause employers are hesitant to bear theexpense of providing all the training necessaryfor their workers community colleges andtraining centers often are asked to offersupplemental assistance to local residents attimes in conjunction with major employersThis allows these institutions to be responsiveto the needs of the major employers in thearea and to deliver the necessary skills for jobs workers might be able to ll20 Ruralcommunities in many parts of the South have

especially strong community college systems providing exceptional opportunities for well-articulated programs to invigorate the ruralworkforce The challenge rural areas currentlyface is keeping the students trained in thesefacilities from migrating to metropolitan areasin search of employment

As many rural Southern communities havelearned in particular the skills a workforceneeds for jobs today are very likely to change

quickly The textile and agricultural supporteconomies of many rural Southern towns haveeroded as jobs shift overseas and are replaced by technology This has created a serioushardship among displaced workers in ruralareas who not only are more likely to have onlya high school education but also are less likelyto have developed transferable skills on the

job For this group workforce development programs are a life raft to the new economy

Making this transition is exceptionallyhard for some it should be acknowledgedand the offerings of rural training providersvery often reect the varying skills of the participants Delivering the needed coursesand programs to such a diverse group is adifcult and costly activity and recent budgetconstraints have placed some of these programsin jeopardy

Business and Entrepreneurial SupportEncouraging business and economic

development in rural areas requires specialattention and consideration An educated welldeveloped well-trained and well-preparedworkforce will have little reason to remainin rural areas if employment opportunitiesare not available Indeed rural workersencountering low-wage jobs with little hope ofadvancement have departed for metropolitanareas for decades An important aspect of therural employment environment is the enormouscontribution small employers play This creates

business and entrepreneurial support priorities particular to rural areas

A signicant hurdle small businesses inrural areas face is the adequacy of capital andnancing Rural enterprises especially thoseassociated with value-added agriculture andother relatively new elds pose uncertain risksfor lenders given the limited history of theseendeavors For rural nancial institutions theuncertainty may be unacceptable Furthermorethe decline in small and regional banks hascreated a credit vacuum in small communitiescompounded by larger lenders having littleroom in their portfolios for unfamiliar activitiesin rural areas

Furthermore small businesses inrural areas often lack access to the kinds oftechnical support services and assistancethat are common to their urban andsuburban counterparts Businesses locatedin metropolitan areas often can locateaccountants computer technicians shippingcompanies packaging suppliers printers




and the host of other ancillary services thatsupport businesses and often have choicesamong competing providers In rural areasfewer of these services operate locally withfar less competition among them In themost rural places there may not be manyof the types of support services availableor associated costs or distance may make

them prohibitively expensive Solvingthis problem at the state or local level mayrequire little more than connecting available providers of services and entrepreneurs ormore complex incentive arrangements forservices to be extended or made available torural entrepreneurs Identifying areas withservice gaps and targeting rural funds eitherCommunity Development Block GrantsRural Development funds or other state orfederal aid to close these insufciencieswould improve the situation of existing ruralentrepreneurs and expand opportunities forrural citizens to develop their own businesses

Rural entrepreneurs also face numerouslegal regulatory and zoning hurdles inestablishing new enterprises or expandingexisting ones This is particularly true withagriculture-related operations which mayrequire entirely new zoning categories and permits for a very minor modication inoperation Given the paucity of assistanceto rural entrepreneurs in general and thechallenges of navigating the complicatedregulatory processes opening a new enterprise

in a rural area is all too often a dauntingand excessively costly task This does notneed to be the case however and a numberof statersquos experiences with regulatorystreamlining point to a solution Furthermore providing ldquoone-stop servicesrdquo for businesseslooking to open or expand within eitherrural development councils or through statechambers of commerce or in other sensible points would greatly ease the process of business development and lower the barriersto entrepreneurship which are specic to ruralareas

A nal point of concern for participantsin the SLC Rural Forum was the mindset ofstate economic development ofces to worrymost about the ldquobig shrdquo chasing after large business relocations and expansions with verylimited resources devoted to smaller enterprisesthat are more well-suited to a rural settingChanging this predisposition requires subtleshifts in both programmatic focus and moreexibility in how grants loans and assistance

are distributed to allow for lower job-creationcut-off points to be applied

Business RelocationRural development is in many places

synonymous with business incentive programsEncouraging businesses to locate expand ormerely remain has long been the mainstay of

economic development ofcesrsquo work in ruralareas Rural areas promote their amenitiestheir low land costs their proximity to rail ports highways and air links their low-costor high-skill workforce or a variety of otherfactors to businesses in the hopes of creating jobs and tax revenue for their communitiesBusinesses often are offered tax incentivesgrants and low-cost capital improvement loanstechnical assistance workforce training andinfrastructure improvements to entice them torelocate expand or remain

Many states offer signicant incentive plans to businesses offering to open or expand plants regardless of their locale Somerural development advocates often seek toinclude ldquorural ridersrdquo on these plans requiringcertain percentages of a businessrsquo activitiesto take place in or benet rural parts of thestate In many instances particularly in theSouth this is unnecessary as one of the primeincentives major industry relocations nd isinexpensive land Smaller deals are less likelyto involve rural requirements because of thescope of the activity involved Nonetheless

rural development councils are very activein leveraging every dollar for economicdevelopment for rural areas

On the federal level Rural EmpowermentZones and Enterprise Zones have beenestablished to provide special economicstimulus programs to persistently high povertycounties These communities are eligible forspecial assistance including social service block grants new tax-exempt facility bondstax incentives for employment and otherspecial consideration for existing federal programs

While the full gamut of theseincentives is beyond the scope of this work toreview or assess it should be noted that thereare both supporters and skeptics of almostevery strategy employed A major worry forcritics is that communities go to great lengthsand make major concessions to industries onlyto not have the jobs materialize or to have jobscreated that do little to diversify the existinglocal employment mix Proponents argue




that without such programs however mostindustries would have few reasons to locatein rural areas and employment opportunitieswould be even scarcer

HealthcareRural America faces a daunting list

of challenges with respect to health and

healthcare Rural Americans are more likelyto be elderly tend to be in poorer health havefewer doctors hospitals and other healthresources and often are further from the point of delivery for healthcare21 Amongthe lists of concerns are access to careinsufcient numbers of physicians nursesand other healthcare providers in rural areashealth promotion and education for disease prevention availability of insurance coveragefor rural residents and the provision ofnecessary services to special needs populationsuch as those with HIVAIDS or suffering from

mental illnessAccess to healthcare in rural areas is

more limited and less comprehensive than inmetropolitan areas The disparities betweenmetropolitan and non-metropolitan areas inhealthcare are well illustrated by the gap inmedical professionals between the two typesof places For every 100000 persons in ametropolitan area there are 267 doctors Innon-metro areas there are only 122 physiciansfor this number22 Rural residents are lesslikely to have access to diagnostic services

home healthcare and specialists for referralsRural hospital service areas are considerablylarger than hospitals in metropolitan areasand the hospitals themselves are much smallerand not as well-equipped While this is notsurprising the fact is that many living in ruralareas are miles from a hospital of any kindwith facilities for serious illnesses and injuriesavailable only in distant regional hospitals or inurban centers In part this has always been thecase although it has been exacerbated in recentyears with the closure of rural hospitals andclinics due to nancial stress

In response to this situation the federalgovernment created the category of MedicallyUnderserved Areas (MUAs) to identifythose parts of the United States where thehealth resources either with respect to staffand healthcare professionals or facilitiesare insufcient to meet the medical needsof the population The federal governmentalso identies areas as Health ProfessionalShortage Areas (HPSAs) for primary care

dental health and mental healthcare wherethere is an insufciency of medical staff toserve a geographic arearsquos needs These areasgenerally are designated based on a rationaldistancemdashmost commonly a 30-minute triptimemdashbetween the county or other geographiccenter and the medical staff or facility althoughother factors such as availability in contiguous

areas or unusually high infant mortality or high poverty rates also may be considered

It is unsurprising that MUAs and HPSAscover most rural areas Designation as suchmakes areas eligible for a number of federalgrants and exibility under Medicaid andMedicare rules While a combination offactors most notably high poverty placesmuch of the South rural and urban underMUA designation HPSAs are a predominantlyrural phenomenon Rural areas identiedunder either category have the opportunity

to designate medical facilities as eithercritical access hospitals or rural healthclinics which allow for special Medicaid andMedicare reimbursements and waivers oncertain requirements The outcome of thesedesignations is to allow more rural facilities toremain open serving their geographic area andin part serves to slow the trend toward ruralhospital and clinic closures

While most attention is focused on providing critical and acute care for ruralareas rural Americans lack the mental dental

and continuing care that is available to urbanresidents While rural areas face shortagesin both primary care and dental providersthere is a veritable absence of mental health professionals in many parts of rural America ashortage which affects much of the rural Southwith the exception of parts of Georgia NorthCarolina and Virginia and most of Louisiana23

Dental providers while more common in ruralareas are still in short supply with dwindlingnumbers as few new dentists enter the eld ingeneral and in rural places in particular

In addition to these needs is a growingconcern for the treatment of individualsin rural areas with HIVAIDS This has become a particular worry for the South asHIVAIDS cases rise in the region whichnow accounts for 40 percent of the currentHIV-positive population 46 percent of newcases in the United States and 56 percentof the rural HIV-positive population24 Thedisease is particularly prevalent among populations without access to medical care




with cases among heterosexual minoritywomen many from rural areas representingthe largest proportion of new cases Servicesfor screening and treating HIV-positiveindividuals are very limited in the rural Southand social stigmas further complicate thetreatment situation for this group Seekingscreening and help for HIV infections often

is so difcult in the poorest parts of the Southas to be practically impossible The result ofthis in time could be a rural AIDS epidemic ofcatastrophic proportions

Tied into the loss of rural healthcare providers is limited access to health insurancefor rural residents A signicant cause givenfor rural hospital closures is a shortage ofindividuals able to pay for services WhileMedicare and Medicaid represent a higher proportion of rural residents than metroresidents the lower reimbursement rates for

these programs relative to private insurancemakes matters more difcult for rural healthfacilities and providers Because mostcontemporary health insurance takes theform of group plans the sparseness of therural landscape and the smaller scale of manyrural enterprises makes health insurance less practical and less nancially viable This iscompounded by the higher incidence of povertyand older populations in rural areas which inturn correlate if indirectly to high morbidityand mortality among the population In shortrural residents are more expensive to insure and

have a smaller pool over which to spread therisk This makes insurers hesitant to enter intorural areas aggressively and leaves consumerswith few options

For rural businesses that have offeredhealth insurance to their employees therecent economic downturn may have causedreductions or elimination of these plans furtherlimiting the number of rural residents with private health insurance While nearly 70 percent of urban employers offer their workerscompany-sponsored health insurance fewer

than 60 percent of rural employers do althoughthe rate of participation among employeeswhen insurance is offered varies littleFurthermore rural workers are less likely tohave their insurance costs covered by theiremployer than urban workers by a percentagespread of nearly 10 points25

Of the roughly 44 million Americans wholack health insurance one in ve lives in arural area Rural residentsmdasholder poorer and

in poorer health than metro residentsmdashalsohave greater healthcare needs Because ofthe budgetary problems facing most statesMedicare and Medicaid eligibility has beenrestricted in many places the impact of whichwill be felt strongly in rural areas26 Healthinsurance coverage varies not just betweenrural and metro areas but among rural areas

In many ways rural areas adjacent to urbanareas have very similar health coverage mixeswith just over 70 percent of the nonelderly population insured by private providers morethan 10 percent insured by Medicaid and other public programs and just under 20 percentuninsured But in rural areas that are notadjacent to urban areas only 60 percent ofthe nonelderly population have private healthcoverage with 16 percent insured by public programs and 24 percent uninsured27

Limited access to healthcare due to fewer

practitioners and facilities limited publictransportation higher degrees of uninsuranceand other factors have very real negativeoutcomes for rural areas Individuals in ruralareas also are less likely to have preventativemedical visits or routine screenings leadingto illnesses being caught at far more advancedstages and to the higher incidence ofhospitalizations and death from preventablediseases A review of health indicators in SouthCarolina is fairly typical Rural residents in thestate were 26 percent more likely than urbanresidents to be hospitalized for a condition that

should have been treated on an outpatient basisFor rural children ve years of age and underthe rate for these hospitalizations is 39 percenthigher than for urban children Rural residentsin South Carolina are 20 percent more likely todie from cancer 37 percent more likely to diefrom heart problems or stroke and 35 percentmore likely to die from an accident than urbanresidents Rural emergency room use is higherthan in urban areas as well highlighting theabsence of primary care and preventativeservices28

Housing and HomelessnessAn important issue for the rural poor is

access to affordable housing Rural residentsare far more likely than urban residents tolive in mobile homes an inexpensive housingoption which provides a housing ldquosafetyvalverdquo in many rural areas But inadequatehousing is much more prevalent in rural areasthan in urban areas with 23 percent of poorhomeowners and 27 percent of poor rentersliving in inadequate housing compared to 17




percent of poor homeowners and 22 percent of poor renters in urban areas29 Rental propertiesare less abundant in rural areas than in urbanareas accounting for 37 percent of urbanhousing stock but only 27 percent of ruralhousing30 While this in part reects the higherthan average rate of home ownership in ruralareas it also reveals limited low-cost housing

available for low-wage workers and newresidents This shortage may negatively affectthe ability of rural areas to attract businessessince housing for workers might be in shortsupply

The lack of low cost housing in rural areasexacerbates the problem of the lower wages paid by many jobs there One in 10 ruralhouseholds spends over half of their incomeon housing and one in four rural householdsspends over 30 percent of their income onhousing Among the rural poor the percentage

spending above the 30 percent threshold onhousing rises to 70 percent31 As rural areas become settled as retirement or vacationdestinations and as the rural economy adjuststo these changes the housing market often istransformed as well Retirement and vacationcommunities and resorts push to eliminate low-quality low-cost housing near them and driveup the value of land and housing nearby Thissituation also is complicated by a sluggishnessin the replacement of lost housing stock in ruralareas with new affordable housing

Given this situation it is not surprisingthat some rural residents become homelessOften perceived as an urban problem theinvisibility of the rural homeless is due in part because of the nature of homelessness in ruralareas With few shelters rural people who losetheir housing are most often forced to move inwith relatives or friends or to move into a car orcamper In this sense rural homelessness looksdifferent from the homelessness that plaguescities and because of this it is far harder toassess the scope of the problem in rural areasAs the Christian Science Monitor observed

ldquothe rural homeless are practically invisiblerdquo32

Rural homelessness is distinctly differentfrom homelessness in urban areas in a varietyof ways In what testies to both the strengthof social and familial ties and the paucityof social services in rural areas 41 percentof homeless families in rural areas move intemporarily with family or friends rather thanrely on social agencies compared to only11 percent in urban areas Homelessness in

rural areas is more likely to involve domesticviolence than in urban areas A small survey ofhomeless families in the South indicated that42 percent of the adult rural homeless wereemployed and 28 percent had never received public assistance33

According to the USDA the homeless

in rural areas are more likely to be ldquowhitefemale married currently working homelessfor the rst time and homeless for a shorter period of timerdquo than the homeless in urbanareas34 Among the rural homeless also area number of migrant workers and a higher proportion of children than in urban areasRural residents may become homeless dueto a structural or physical problem with theirresidence that forces them to relocate As has been noted rural areas have few affordablehousing options an issue complicated by thegreater distances between work and home in

these areas Further complicating this issue isa scarcity of service organizations to aid thehomelessmdashshelters temporaryemergencyhousing facilities and counseling agencies in particularmdashin rural areas

Community CapacityAn intangible aspect of rural development

is the status of a rural communityrsquos humancapitalmdashthe skills and abilities of theindividuals and organizations found in thearea The combined talents of an area and thestrengths of regional organizations can make

a tremendous difference in how an area be ita town a county or a larger region developsor fails to develop Some aspects of thiscapacity are obvious literacy and numeracycommunity ties long-standing communityinstitutions and high levels of participation bycommunity members in school associationscivic and county meetings and the like Otherimportant components of this are more difcultto grasp and measure Trust leadership andconnectedness also are central to movingeconomic development forward

This second set of components mostoften referred to as social capital has gainedconsiderable attention in recent years particularly following the publication of Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam of HarvardUniversity In it the author documentsthe decline of civic life and how it affectsAmerican social and civic institutions Partof a growing body of work social capitaltheorists insist that social networks havevalue and are key components in the way a




community and an economy operate Thesenetworks are usually understood to be the webof associations among and between peopleand organizations These relationships can beformal and informal and include componentsof government faith-based institutions thecourts private industry and non-governmentalorganizations and associations The importance

of these associations is well-accepted In amuch quoted passage Alexis de Toqueville the19th century chronicler of American democracycommented on Americansrsquo propensity toform associations for various purposes and itsrelationship to the strength of the democracy inthe then-edgling United States

Fostering the community capacitythat encompasses both human and socialcapital in both contexts is a difcult processAssociations among people in rural areasoften are hindered by distance history and

cultural differences Improving the skills andcapabilities of rural people and organizationsinvolves investment in needs assessmenttraining education and follow-up Theresources for such activities often are scarceand the understanding of how they benetcommunities is not always universal

In many communities regardless oflocation individuals with low educationalattainment are marginalized and set off frommany of the formal and informal networks thatoffer the services they need to develop their

own skills Furthermore rural organizationsoften are ill-equipped or ill-staffed tonavigate the complex bureaucracies thatmanage much of the assistance offered by thefederal government and are equally at seaamong the confusing array of nonprot andfoundation organizations that offer help to ruralcommunities

Rural areas given their geographicisolation and sparseness have greaterchallenges to creating institutional and personalrelationships Historically however this has been a challenge to which rural communitieshave risen through strong church communitiesgrange and agricultural associations andfraternal orders and other informal networksThe task for todayrsquos rural residents iscomplicated by the need to establish bridges between these parochial organizations in orderto establish a sufcient network

Networks of civic engagementmdashbethey church groups fraternal and sororalorganizations volunteer re departments

book clubs or PTAsmdashcreate and reinforceexpectations of reciprocity and trustfacilitate coordination and communicationcreate patterns for success and lessons forimprovement in actions on issues and increasethe risks for those who act opportunisticallythat they will not share future benets35 Thesenetworks can operate to share resources such

as skills tools machinery transportationcapital (including revolving credit) andinformation In this way the total ldquocapitalrdquoof the community when measured both as thenancial wherewithal and the capacity to putit to work is both expanded and made morereadily applicable to problems facing an area

For rural areas the implications areimmense As participants in the Forumnoted rural areas often abound in the kindsof informal and formal organizations andassociations that are at the heart of social

capital networks As with most of the otherissues affecting rural areas there often is a lackof the bridges that tie organizations togetheracross demographic or other social linesFor example members of different religiousdenominations may not socialize in parts of therural south or black and white social groupsmay not coordinate activities and resourcesThe lack of horizontal connections betweenthese groups is a key weakness in turning thestrong but often very isolated and verticalsocial networks in rural areas into engines forcommunity and regional rural progress In

applying the benets of these networks ruralareas are engaging in a form of ldquoself-helprdquooften nding much of the necessary humancapital and perhaps some of the needednancial capital within the area benetingfrom action

An example of how government can serveas facilitator or catalyst for developing socialcapital can be found in agricultural extensionagents County agents move throughout acommunity (or several communities) ofciallyto provide assistance to farmers and ranchers

In many cases the county agent often isone of the few individuals in a communitywho moves across multiple socio-economicand demographic boundaries on a regular basis This provides the agents with a uniqueopportunity to identify needs and resourcesand bring them together to resolve issues thatwould otherwise seem intractable

While in many ways local institutionsand organizations in rural areas seem ill-




equipped to resolve thorny roadblocks totheir advancement the skills and capabilitiesthey must develop often are within theirgrasp Assessment training and skillsdevelopment are however often very difcultfor individuals within an organization to dowell without outside assistance Some statesthrough the community and technical colleges

or state economic development ofces offersupport and staff to provide programs to ruralcommunity groups to develop such skillsas nancial planning and accountabilitylong-range planning needs assessmentsand feasibility studies Also contributing tothese activities are numerous foundationsand philanthropic and nonprot organizationswhich have in the past decade in particularinvested heavily in improving the capacity ofsmall nonprots

There are numerous examples of

organizations that work with rural communitiesto develop their internal capacity includingseveral rural development councils andnonprot organizations Conducted by manyrural development councils rural areas canoften draw upon the expertise and experienceof specialists in a variety of elds including planning nance marketing and assessmentThe Appalachian Regional Commissionencourages some of this work throughthe Development District Association ofAppalachia (DDAA) The DDAA conducts a best practices exchange program which covers

some logistical costs related to technical oradministrative personnel exchange aimedat replicating another Local DevelopmentDistrictrsquos (LDD) activity The DDAA also provides a limited number of scholarships to pay for training of LDD staff or executives andmanagement Another model used by severalstate rural development authorities is to bringspecialists to host communities or organizationsat subsidized costs to provide assessment andtechnical support An advantage to this methodis the built in capacity-building component thatsuch processes include through the activities orinternal assessment and information sharing

The Appalachian Regional Commissionis an impressive resource for communitycapacity building in and of itself TheCommission provides considerable informationand resources for strategic planning andimplementation Communities in the 13-stateregion are able to tap into the technical andnancial resources of the federally-charteredcommission directly or through their LDD

In addition there are a number of nonprotentities that specialize in training and planningfor rural communities applying the experiencesof the past century to contemporary problemsBy engaging communities in a collaborativestrategic planning process these organizationsserve as a catalyst for community capacitydevelopment and information exchange beyond

the scope of their planning activities

Welfare ReformThe persistent poverty and poor

employment opportunities in rural areasmake state and federal welfare programsdisproportionately important for rural residentsFederal transfer paymentsmdashfunds that aresent directly to individualsmdashconstitute ahigher-than-average proportion of the total payments to these areas Nearly 70 percentof federal funds sent to rural areas comein the form of transfer paymentsmdashsocial

security welfare pensions and the like ThePersonal Responsibility and Work OpportunityReconciliation Act of 1996 changed thelandscape of welfare for America introducingmore exibility for states and increasedrestrictions on payments including lifetime payment caps and work requirements Withthe 1996 legislation the focus of the welfaresystem shifted from one of alleviating povertyand hardship to one of encouraging and insome instances enforcing employment

According to the US Census Bureau the

poverty rate for metropolitan areas was 116 percent in 2002 compared to 142 percent fornon-metro areas36 The prevalence and depthof rural poverty makes issues related to welfareand welfare reform particularly importantfor rural policy Importantly the rural poorare more likely to be employed albeit oftenunderemployed than the urban poor They livein a job market that is generally less diversiedand slower to respond to growth indicators thanthe general economy As has been noted therural poor also are concentrated in the Southa region which also has some of the lowest

benets and most restrictive welfare policies inthe country37

The effort to move welfare recipients intothe workforce faces several signicant hurdlesin rural areas including the availability ofsuitable jobs transportation and childcareRural residents are less likely to have pursued post-secondary education and have a greaterlikelihood of not having completed high schoolthan their metro peers Furthermore as has




been noted the more highly educated ruralresidents also are the most likely to leave formetropolitan areas creating a general braindrain for rural areas The result of all of this isa pool of welfare recipients who are less likelyto be prepared for high-skill employment lessattractive to employers harder to place in long-term stable employment and require greater

investment in job training

For the most part this prole of a low-skill worker matches in some part the jobs being created in rural areas primarily in theservice and manufacturing sectors The resultof this is a job market that depresses wagesfor all workers and provides few opportunitiesfor rural welfare recipients to earn a livingabove the poverty line Furthermore the jobmarket in rural areas offers fewer opportunitiesfor advancement than in urban areas withlow-wage entry-level jobs dominating the

employment landscape For rural familiesdependent on welfare the entry into theworkforce does not offer the same opportunitiesfor self-sufciency and advancement thatmetropolitan welfare recipients have Theshift of focus in welfare policy may alsoleave rural areas where employment growthcan be perennially sluggish with increasedemployment problems as increasing numbersof low-skill workers forced from welfare rollscompete for a limited pool of low-wage jobs

Further complicating efforts to shift rural

welfare recipients from the welfare rolls is alack of childcare options in rural areas and thedistances between home work and childcarewhich may be considerable For singlemothers who compose a signicant portionof the rural welfare caseload the limitedavailability of childcare can be a major factorrelated to the ability of the parent to nd andkeep a job Also complicating the lives of therural poor is the absence for most practical purposes of a public transportation systemBecause of this vehicle ownership often isa vital necessity for rural residents Urban

residents are almost certain to have publictransportation systems available a service that both increases the employment opportunitiesthey can take advantage of and reduces theamount of capital they require to enter theworkforce And while a vehicle often is a nearnecessity for life in rural areas more than halfof the rural poor do not own one38

Welfare rolls have declined since 1996regardless of locale although there is some

unevenness in this reduction Poverty whichhad been on the decline throughout the 1990sdue in no small part to a booming economynationally recently began to increase Themost recent economic downturn has placedserious stress on the ability of the welfaresystem to achieve its objective of movingwelfare recipients into the workforce

particularly in rural areas As lifetime limits on benets begin to affect a wider population itis likely that new stresses will begin to be felt particularly in persistent poverty areas

Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentThe diverse range of rural areas have

historically shared one unifying element anatural resource-based economy For muchof the South this has meant agriculture andforestry The place of agriculture within therural economy and within rural developmenthas become less and less central Economists

often point out the relative unimportance offarm income for rural residents with only alimited number of rural counties consideredagriculture-dependent In general the ruraleconomy and rural families have becomedecreasingly focused on food and beractivities as a primary source of income Acasual review of statistics related to thisshift in the rural economy could lead to theconclusion that the United States now has a post-agricultural rural belt

To draw such a conclusion would be a

mistake however While rural communitieshave become less dependent on farming thisis in many ways the outcome of an agriculturaleconomy that has made massive advances in productivity over the past 60 years increasingthe amount of acreage any individual farmercan manage But farming continues to be asignicant part of the fabric and identity ofrural places and the contributions to both therural and national economy of smallholderagriculture and part-time farmers are largeAgriculture continues to provide a contextfor rural life and in many ways for the kinds

of economic activities that take place in ruralareas Rural development paradigms thatignore the agricultural component of rural places and communities face very uncertainfutures

It is difcult to discuss rural policywithout also noting the impacts positive andnegative that federal agriculture programshave on rural communities Federal program payments dating back to the Great Depression




had the initial outcome of establishing anancial safety net for farmers insuring thatfarming would be a viable way to make aliving and in small ways ameliorating the poverty that so starkly dened rural life in the1930s Over time as technology advancedand offered farmers new tools farm programshave become available to a decreasing number

of producers who are responsible for an ever-increasing share of our agricultural outputThese programs have been in part responsiblefor this shift altering planting patterns and production methods toward more capital- andland-intensive systems This has in turn shrunkthe prot margin for all producers making itmore difcult for small and mid-sized farmsto survive economically The decline ofindependent small farmers has resulted in areduced demand for agriculture-related servicesin rural areas as well While these are ldquofactson the groundrdquo the impact of federal farm policy on rural areas has a major impact onthe possibilities that exist in rural areas foreconomic development

In a handful of states agriculture has beneted from the infusion of new cashfrom funds from the tobacco settlement North Carolina Virginia and perhaps mostnotably Kentucky have all made signicantnew investments in agriculture using thisunexpected and predictable source of moneyThis money has been particularly benecialin extending assistance in nding viable

alternatives for tobacco farmers whoselivelihoods have been whittled away over the past decade of cuts to tobacco quota These benets extend to all of agriculture however providing small farmers with new resourcesand information on which to build a variety ofenterprises

Rural Crime and Homeland SecurityWhile crime rates fell across the board

during the 1990s rural areas experiencedless of a decrease particularly in violent and property crime although violent crime rates in

rural areas are still lower than in metropolitanareas When violent crime does strike in arural area it is three times more likely to have been perpetrated by someone familiar to thevictim than by a stranger Homicides whichare a rarity in most rural communities didnot decrease in the past decade as they did inmetropolitan areas39 Rural crime also may be more underreported than in urban areas because a signicant percentage of policein rural jurisdictions do not consistently

participate in the uniform crime reporting program In a study of Mississippi policedepartments between 30 percent and 40 percent of counties reported no incidents to theFBI which collects national crime statistics40 Some rural communities facing swift economictransition or urbanization are experiencinghigher crime rates than urban areas in part due

to the anonymity the ush of new residentsaffords criminals and the decline in communitycohesion due to rapid transformation41

Rural life often is perceived as a refugefrom the crime and violence of Americarsquoscities and in many ways this is indeed trueThis picture is complicated by the fact thatcrime has been increasing in rural areas overtime Statistics on rural crime are few andfar between but those that exist show severalinteresting trends Per capita rural crime rateshave been on the increase since the 1980s with

violent crime rising faster than property crimesAnd while rural crime rates are lower thanurban crime rates the rural rate today standsroughly where the urban crime rate was 20years ago42 While there are many factors thatcan explain the growth in rural crime including persistent poverty increasing urbanization andmobility rapid change in rural areas and the presence of organized crime and gangs Inthe mid 1990s drug production particularlymethamphetamine labs began to be a persisten problem in many rural parts of the countryincluding a number of Southern states where

the problem had been virtually unheard of

The growth of this latter type of crimehas caught many rural sheriffs and policedepartments relatively unaware The natureof the manufacturing of methamphetaminesmakes it very well suited to rural areas Manyof the raw materials are most available infarm communities The laboratories wherethis drug is made can be very small andrudimentary but often are located far fromother dwellings because of the strong odor produced As production has moved eastward

across the country so has related property andviolent crime at times overwhelming smallrural police forces with little experience inaddressing this kind of crime

In addition to increased burdens due torising crime rates rural areas face additional burdens related to homeland security Whilehigh prole targets may seem to be an urban phenomenon rural areas are abundant inhigh-risk facilities including nuclear and




conventional power plants food handlingand distribution centers dams and reservoirsand military installations In the wake ofheightened concerns for homeland securityrural police and sheriffs must increase theirmonitoring and patrol activities around thesights of concern in their jurisdiction and allrst responders must undertake new training

to learn the skills demanded of their new rolesand the new possibilities for attack This poses serious budgetary stresses on small

rural police re and sheriffrsquos departmentsCapturing federal funds for homeland securityat the local level would provide welcome relieffor cash strapped rural areas Minimizing thetraining and equipment costs associated withnew homeland security expectations throughstate-sponsored training and bulk purchases atthe state or regional level would also alleviate

some of the burdens of facing these newthreats




Summary of the Priority RankingsRural America faces challenges on

many fronts some interrelated some inisolation The scope of the gap between ruraland metropolitan areas can at times seemdaunting In approaching rural developmentthe participants in the SLC Rural Forumacknowledged both the interconnectedness

of so many of the issues facing rural areasand the need to establish priorities in order tomove rural prosperity forward While it must be acknowledged that it will be impossible toresolve many of the challenges facing rural places in isolation there also was a sense thatmaking progress on key issues would improvethe status of other concerns

Three sets of participants in the Forumwere asked to prioritize the rural issues laidout in the early part of their discussions

The rankings listed below point to a fewgeneral priorities Chief among these is theneed to undergird rural areas with adequateinfrastructure to meet the challenges of the neweconomy particularly with respect to high-speed Internet access for rural communitiesAlso important for the participants was supportfor businesses and entrepreneurs Another

key area for improving prospects in rural areaswas education and workforce development particularly in the area of building on thestrengths and demonstrated successes of theexisting systems Notable also were the needto nurture and develop leadership and capacityamong rural people and to reinforce thestructures that underpin homeland security inrural places

The priorities for each group in order arelisted below

Priorities for Rural Development

Group 1LeadershipEducation

InfrastructureDemographics

Healthcare

EconomicsBusinessWorkforce

Housing

Rural crime (especiallyrelated to drugs)

Welfare Reform

Group 2Infrastructure

EducationWorkforceDevelopment

Business SupportDevelopment

Group 3Homeland Security

Infrastructure (broadbandrural and regionalairports rails to trails)

EconomicBusinessDevelopment (stateentity to identifyresources andopportunities)

Agriculture should be a part of state economicdevelopment plans

LeadershipCommunitycapacity (focus on localleadership training on planning and resourceidentication)




Assets and Partners for RuralDevelopment

If rural development is highlyinterconnected it also does not take place ina vacuum Rural areas abound in partnersfor ldquodoing the work that must be donerdquoUnderstanding the full range of these andidentifying the resources they offer is a key

part of creating the networks that are mostlikely to offer a boost to rural areas The partners rural places have to draw upon includea range of organizations from the privatesector government entities and faith-basedinstitutions There also are myriad talentedindividuals and institutions that are unique toeach place that complement and amplify the

formal structures for providing connections ineach community Each of these amounts toan asset and a resource that can contribute torural development Identifying the appropriate partners and creating coalitions to addressspecic problems often is one of the mostchallenging aspects of any rural development project or effort

What follows is a brief list of partnersidentied by participants in the Rural ForumBy no means exhaustive it provides a starting point for thinking about who in rural areascan lend a hand in promoting economicdevelopment

Philanthropy and foundationsUniversities and community

collegesEducation systemCooperative extension

experiment stationAgriculture commissioners

departmentsCouncils of government

regional planningcommissions

Land-grant universitiesFarm BureauFarmers Union4HAgriculture and commodity

associationsGrangesState agenciesFSA ofces Nursing homes Nonprot research

organizations (MDCSRDC and state-supported think tanks)

State public interest groups(rural and otherwise)

Chambers of commerceFraternal and business

organizationsRegional organizationsDepartments of tourism and

historical commissionsBoards of educationLeague of CitiesNational

Association of CountiesAppalachian Regional

CommissionDeltaRegional Authority

Farm implement dealers and

farm suppliersTennessee Valley AuthorityUtility cooperatives

National Rural ElectricCooperative Association

Power companiespublicutilities

Federally Qualied HealthCenters

USDA Rural Developmentstate ofces

Urbancentral cities NRCSHospitals and hospital boardsDepartments of correctionsState departments of economic

developmentLocal and regional banksFederal Reserve Bank SystemFaith-based groupsminister

allianceschurchesDepartments of transportationCounty governmentsCongress

Professional associationsRegional associations (SLC

SGA SGPB SREBSSEB SRDC)

Local nonprotsEnvironmental communitiesWater and re districtsMedia and educational

television

Assests and Partners for Rural Development




The Role of State Government in RuralDevelopment

Judith Hackett then the director ofthe Rural Center of The Council of StateGovernments in an article written in thelate 1980s outlined three general types ofactivities government can undertake in ruralareas related to rural development crisis

intervention innovation and prevention43 Crisis intervention be it for disasters of anatural or man-made variety is expensiveand infrequently used In general stategovernments do not take on this type of actionalthough the federal government with itsgreater resources and capabilities will Crisisintervention calls for the timely mustering ofnancial human and material resources toaddress a specic urgent problem such as arash of farm foreclosures oods or collapsesin commodity markets

Prevention activities including long-terminvestment in what may (or may not) be viewedas a persistent or pressing issue Preventionactivities are intended to keep problemsfrom becoming severe Because preventionactivities often require long-range planning andfocus and take longer to realize gains they aremost often undertaken by local governmentsand regional authorities State governmentoften plays a role in providing technical andnancial support for long-range planning and prevention activities but local leaders whoare close to the problem and have immediate

responsibility for implementation most oftenare on the ldquofront linesrdquo of rural developmentactivities

What may be the primary state rolein rural development is innovation that iscrafting and charting changes in rural policyand providing the resources needed to getthese changes moving State governmentmay effect this policy in several ways by providing seed money for new agriculturalor other rural businesses coordinating stateagencies publicizing and organizing available

services providing incentives for rural business development experimenting withnew technologies underwriting infrastructuredevelopment and providing essential trainingfor rural residents

In the quest for an integrative approach torural development that seeks solutions to theinterrelated problems facing rural Americastate government and its leaders have a vitalrole to play State government is ldquocloser to

the groundrdquo for rural policy than the federalgovernment and thus is better able to respondto rural needs in a manner tailored to localconditions State government is also as notedabove more able to press for and developinnovation in rural policy than at either thefederal or local level State government isalso uniquely positioned to foster cooperation

among communities both within a state as wellas on a regional basis including communitiesin neighboring states Local governments andinstitutions often have a very difcult timereaching beyond the orbit of their particular jurisdictions

As increasing attention has becomefocused on the need to address ruralconcerns on a regional level the role of stategovernment in facilitating this has increasedSome observers note that as the economyhas become more global in nature regions

have replaced states in importance as moreissues and problems occur across areas withregional afnity Thus the geographic structurefor development policy moves out of anational-state-local hierarchy to one patternedon international-regional-neighborhoodafliations

The economic boon of the 1990s largely bypassed rural America but the economiccontraction of the early part of the 21st centurywas strongly felt in the rural economy particularly as manufacturing and textile jobs

continued to be exported to lower labor-costeconomies The tight economic times alsohave created scal woes in state capitals andin Congress Following upon the relativevictories in both policy and approved levelsof funding for rural areas in the 2002 FarmBill appropriations at the federal level havedeclined This is unfortunate for severalreasons The fact that rural areas did not createcapital or jobs in the same way that metro areasdid during the economic boom of the 1990smeans that rural communities have no cushionon which to fall Furthermore rural areas

have less capacity to generate capital internallythan metro areas either through public or private mechanisms which translates into anexaggerated impact of any reduction in stateand federal aid Finally federal and state fundsoften make essential services affordable forrural communities with the loss of aid causingincremental declines to the quality of life forrural residents




This is not to say that all ruraldevelopment is a matter of cash transfersAs has been noted the need to developand nurture community capacity is quickly becoming a major focus of rural developmentBut funding is a vital component in mosteconomic development activities regardlessof their location As the available funding

for economic development shrinks theshare available for rural areas often isdisproportionately affected Rural areas and programs often lack advocates and interested parties to lobby on their behalf and aretherefore far less capable of protecting theirinterests during scally difcult times As ruraleconomies decline this process acceleratesas fewer rural residents elect fewer ruralrepresentatives at the state and federal leveland fewer rural county commissioners andmayors participate with state and nationalassociations

At the conclusion of the SLC RuralForum it was clear that the advancementof rural concerns depended on the presenceof someone at the state and regional levellooking at rural areas making connectionsidentifying problems and bringing resourcesto bear As illustration of this the Texasexperience with the Rural Caucus and theOfce of Rural Community Affairs (ORCA)was noted Created by the Legislature out ofexisting components of state agencies ORCAconsolidates under one roof the rural ofces

of several state agencies along with the assetsassociated with those programs This createda rural ofce with a budget of $90 million(primarily from transferred CommunityDevelopment Block Grant funds) and anexclusive purview of looking after the interestsof rural Texas and rural Texans Along withthis new agency was a mandate that thosecomponents of state government not broughtunder ORCA were obligated to meet oncea year with the Ofce to discuss and when possible coordinate their activities in ruralTexas The result has been a need for diverseagencies having to think actively about theirrole in rural Texas

The Ofce would not have come aboutwithout the active interest of the members ofthe Texas House of Representatives who belongto the Rural Caucus The Caucus includesmembers of the House from rural suburbanand urban districts alike By creating a forumfor legislators to raise and review legislationand concerns from a rural perspective the

Caucus educated rural and non-rural lawmakerson rural issues and created a constituency forrural legislation beyond the members who hailfrom rural districts The Rural Caucus in Texasmeets regularly during legislative sessions tohear from members and non-members alikeon legislation and issues related to rural TexasThe size of the Caucus (85 members when the

ORCA legislation was considered) increasedthe likelihood that any legislative initiativesupported by the Caucus would be passed bythe Legislature

Rural Forum participants noted thatlegislators are in a unique position to bringtogether the stakeholders on rural issues toseek solutions State government can andshould support community innovators anddevelopment of community capacity to aid theeconomic development of rural places but inthe end rural communities must be responsible

for the planning and activities that affect theirfutures

Finally the question must be asked isit worth it to save rural areas The answer participants agreed was that everyone is betteroffmdashurban suburban and ruralmdashwith healthyrural communities Rural advocates oftenforget this critical concept The economiccontributions of rural areas and the economiccosts of rural community failure often areonly clear to those who are connected torural places State legislators have a unique

opportunity to spread this message to a broaderaudience both within the legislature and thegeneral public R R




Endnotes1 ldquoAge distribution of the older population by metro-non-

metro residence 1991 1996 and 2001rdquo United

States Department of Agriculture Economic

Research Service (ERS) Washington DC

from the Internet site httpwwwersusdagov

briengPopulationelderlytable1htm

accessed on January 13 2004

2 From the ERS Brieng Room on Race

and Ethnicity in Rural America http

wwwersusdagovBriengraceandethnic

accessed on December 14 2003

3Peter L Stenberg ldquoCommunications and the

Internet in Rural Americardquo Agricultural

Outlook United States Department of

Agriculture June-July 2002

4 A Nation OnlinemdashWhorsquos Not Online and Why

It Matters The Childrenrsquos Partnership

Washington DC February 2002

5 John Regnier ldquoCan Small Systems and TheirCustomers Afford Their Drinking Waterrdquo

Rural Water Magazine Duncan Oklahoma

2nd Quarter 2003

6 Infrastrtucture and Rural Development Policy

Energy Infrastructure United States

Department of Agriculture from the Internet

site wwwersusdagovBriengInfrastructure

InfrastructureEnergyhtm accessed on October

14 2003

7 Eileen S Stommes and Dennis M Brown

ldquoTransportation in Rural America Issues for

the 21st Centuryrdquo Rural America Washington

DC United States Department of

Agriculture Volume 16 Issue 4 Winter 2002

8 Ibid

9 Dean Jolliffe ldquoRural Poverty at Record Low

in 2000rdquo Rural America United States

Department of Agriculture Washington

DC Volume 17 Issue 4 Winter 2002

and USDA brieng room on rural income

poverty and welfare from the Internet site

wwwersusdagovBriengIncomePoverty

Welfareruralpoverty accessed September 222003

10 USDA Understanding Rural America

County Types from the Internet site

wwwersusdagovpublicationsaib710

aib7101html accessed on September 22

2003 Kathleen K Miller Mindy S Crandall

and Bruce A Weber ldquoPersistent Poverty and

Placerdquo presentation from the Rural Poverty

Research Center from the Internet site

wwwrprconlineorg accessed on September

20 2003

11 Karen Hamrick editor Rural America at a

Glance Rural Development Research Report

No RDRR97-1 United States Department

of Agriculture Washington DC September

2003

12 Mark Nord ldquoDoes It Cost Less to Live in RuralAreas Evidence from New Data on Food

Security and Hungerrdquo Rural Sociology

Bellingham Washington Volume 65 Number

1 March 2000

13 USDA ERS Brieng Room Rural Income

Poverty and Welfare Nonfarm Earnings

from the Internet site wwwersusdagov

BriengIncomePovertyWelfare

nonfarmearnings accessed on December 16

2003

14 Population Reference Bureau analysis of data

from 2000 US Census Bureau DemographicProles

15 Jonathan Watts Hull Status of Rural Education in

the South Southern Legislative Conference

Atlanta Georgia October 2003

16 Jaekyung Lee and Walter G McIntire

Understanding Rural Student Achievement

Identifying Instructional and Organizational

Differences Between Rural and Nonrural

Schools The University of Maine Orono May

2000

17 National Education Association ldquoStatus of PublicEducation in Rural Areas and Small TownsmdashA

Comparative Analysisrdquo from the Internet

site wwwneaorgruralcompanal-ruralhtml

accessed October 10 2003

18 Robert Gibbs editor Rural Education at a


No RDRR98 United States Department of

Agriculture Washington DC January 2004

19 Gary Paul Green Workforce Development

Networks in Rural America University of

Wisconsin-Madison 2000

20 Ibid

21 Improving Health Care for Rural Populations

Research in Action Fact Sheet Agency for

Health Care Policy and Research from

the Internet site wwwahcprgovresearch

ruralhtm accessed October 14 2003

22 Physician Supply Increased in Metropolitan and

Non-metropolitan Areas but Geographic




Disparities Persisted Government Accounting

Ofce Washington DC October 2003

23 Analysis based on maps provided by the

Community Informatics Resource Center

2002

24 ldquoPzer Foundation Announces Grant Program

to Reduce HIVAIDS in Southern

Multicultural Communitiesrdquo press releasefrom the Rural Assistance Center from

the Internet site wwwraconlineorg news

news_detailsphpnews_id=205 May 23

2003 Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention ldquoRisks for HIV Infection Among

Persons Residing in Rural Areas and Small

Citiesrdquo Morbity and Mortality Weekly

Report November 20 1998

25 The Uninsured in Rural America Kaiser

Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured

Washington DC April 2003

26 Catherine Hoffman remarks at the National RuralHealth Association ldquoHealth Insurance Access

in Rural Americardquo Brieng Washington DC

October 6 2003

27 The Uninsured in Rural America

28 South Carolina Rural Health Report Ofce of

Research and Statistics South Carolina State

Budget and Control Board from the Internet

site wwwors2statescusrural_healthasp

accessed September 23 2003

29 Laudan Y Aron and Janet M Fitchen ldquoRural

Homelessness A Synopsisrdquo in Homelessnessin America Oryx Press Phoenix Arizona

1996

30 Leslie Whitener ldquoRural Housing Conditions

Improve but Affordability Continues To Be

a Problemrdquo as cited in Jill L Findeis et al

Welfare Reform in Rural America A Review

of Current Research Rural Policy Research

Institute Columbia Missouri February 2

2001

31 Ibid

32

Todd Wilkinson ldquoHow small-town Americahandles rural homelessnessrdquo The Christian

Science Monitor Boston Massachusetts

March 16 1999

33 National Center on Rural Justice and Crime

Prevention ldquoRural Liferdquo from the Internet

site virtualclemsonedugroupsncrjrlifehtm

accessed on September 23 2003

34 United States Department of Agriculture ldquoRural

Homelessness - What Can Be Donerdquo as cited

in NCH Rural Homelessness Fact Sheet

13 National Coalition for the Homeless

Washington DC March 1999

35Carmen Sirianni and Lewis Friedland ldquoSocial

Capitalrdquo The Civic Dictionary Civic Practices

Network from the Internet site wwwcpnorg

toolsdictionarycapitalhtml accessed on

Tuesday October 29 2003

36 US Census Bureau Current Population Survey

2002 and 2003 Annual Social and Economic

Supplements US Department of Commerce

Washington DC

37 J Zimmerman ldquoThe Bottom Line of Welfare

Reform in the Rural Southrdquo as cited in Jill

L Findeis et al Welfare Reform in Rural

America A Review of Current Research

Rural Policy Research Institute Columbia

Missouri February 2 2001

38 George Rucker Status Report on Public

Transportation in Rural America as cited inWelfare Reform in Rural Areas a brieng book

created by the Rural Policy Research Institute

Columbia Missouri 1998


Prevention ldquoRural Crime Factsrdquo from the

Internet site virtualclemsonedugroupsncjr

rcrimehtm accessed September 23 2003

40 Bonnie Coblentz ldquoLocked Doors Replace Trust

in Rural Areas rdquo Mississippi State University

Community News Mississippi State

Mississippi August 23 1999

41 Ibid

42 Joseph F Donnermeyer Crime and Violence in

Rural Communities North Central Regional

Education Laboratory from the Internet site

wwwncrelorgsdrsareasissuesenvrnment

drugfreev1donnerhtm accessed on October

14 2003

43 Judith Hackett ldquoState Rural Development

Policies An Emerging Government

Initiativerdquo in The Rural South in Crisis

Challenges for the Future Westview Press

Boulder Colorado 1988



This Regional Resource was prepared for the Agriculture amp Rural Development Committees of the SouthernLegislative Conference (SLC) by Jonathan Watts Hull SLC Regional Representative

The SLC is a non-partisan non-prot organization serving Southern state legislators and their staffs Firstorganized in 1947 the SLC is a regional component of The Council of State Governments a national organization

which has represented state governments since 1933 The SLC is headquartered in Atlanta Georgia

southern legislative conference bull po box 98129 bull atlanta georgia 30359 bull ph 404633-1866 bull fx 404633-4896 bull wwwslcatlantaor

slc




as counties with small populations near tourban areas or small towns completely outsidemetropolitan areas When possible this reportuses the USDA denition of ldquoruralrdquo in order tofocus most directly on those areas which aremost rural

Snapshot of Rural America

The 2003 Rural Forum took place againsta backdrop of rising worries over the viabilityof rural places particularly those most rural parts of the country and a sense that thetime for a comprehensive coordinated rural policy may be nigh Political leadership inWashington DC and state capitals is heavilyinvested in rural areas and rural issues are being heard on a broader stage than in the past decade The challenges facing ruralAmerica also are increasingly daunting butthe agencies and organizations working on the problems facing rural communities and citizens

are showing renewed vigor for integrativesolutions

While the issues facing rural America areinterrelated and complex there are several keyareas that stood out to participants of the 2003SLC Rural Forum What follows is a briefoverview of these areas

DemographicsIn many ways rural areas are dened by

their demographics Rural population losshas been a major contributing factor to thedecline in rural political clout over the past few

decades It also has made providing servicesmore costly limited the opportunities for private investment and depleted the capacityof rural areas to drive their own developmentforward The rural population is aging aswell with the percent of rural Americans 60years of age and older growing from 177 percent in 1980 to 197 percent in 2001 The percent of residents of metropolitan areas thisage remained relatively unchanged over thissame time period1 Part of this growth can beattributed to the rise in non-metro counties asretirement destinations Another contributingfactor is the continuing drain of young peoplefrom rural areas to metropolitan centers tond employment This growth in the ruralelderly has signicant consequences for rural policy Even as retiree immigrants bring withthem new tax revenue and family income andsustain local businesses and institutions therising elderly population adds to strains on analready overburdened service infrastructurein parts of the country where transportation

challenges a paucity of service providers andlow population density contribute to highercosts and lower availability

Rural America is not just getting olderit is diversifying at a remarkable rate Thegrowth rate in the non-metro population forwhites was a modest 85 percent between 1990

and 2000 roughly equivalent to the rate formetro areas All non-metro minority groupsincreased over the same period both in termsof absolute numbers and as a proportion ofthe population Hispanic population growthfor the same period was at 704 percent 10 points higher than in metro areas with black population growth registering at 122 percent75 points below metro areas The median ageof minorities in rural areas is also far lowerthan for whites meaning that not only is thewhite population not growing as quickly andaging more but whites are being replaced

by minorities primarily African Americansand Hispanics Rural minority families alsohave higher percentages of young people thanwhite rural families2 The impact these shiftswill have is considerable Because minoritiesoften have lower incomes than whites theshifting balance in population points toincreased challenges for overcoming povertyand a continuation of the drain of capital held primarily by whites from rural areas This also points to a rise in demand for bilingual servicesas the number of residents for whom English isnot their rst language increases Schools will

face a greater number of students with parentswith lower educational attainment rates thanin the past and in most cases lower functionalEnglish skills

Employment is an uneven demographicindicator for rural areas Employment in ruralareas has been under a long-term transitionfrom industries such as agriculture mining andmanufacturing to services construction andsocial and government services Professionaland managerial employment also has risenalbeit more slowly for rural residents over

time In general occupational attainmentimproved during the 1990s although thesegains began to erode by the decadersquos endImportantly while unemployment in rural areaswas uneven on a regional basis rates for muchof the rural South score consistently above thenational average

As the economies of rural areas haverestructured and created more low-wagelow-skill jobs in the service sector an inux






Infrastructure









































































































































































































































































Healthcare


Housing


Welfare Reform











































television

























































2nd Quarter 2003






14 2003






8 Ibid


















20 2003





2003




1 March 2000






2003











2000












20 Ibid















2002
















October 6 2003









1996







2001

31 Ibid

32



March 16 1999


















Washington DC



















41 Ibid






14 2003












slc






Infrastructure









































































































































































































































































Healthcare


Housing


Welfare Reform











































television

























































2nd Quarter 2003






14 2003






8 Ibid


















20 2003





2003




1 March 2000






2003











2000












20 Ibid















2002
















October 6 2003









1996







2001

31 Ibid

32



March 16 1999


















Washington DC



















41 Ibid






14 2003












slc
































































































































































































































































Healthcare


Housing


Welfare Reform











































television

























































2nd Quarter 2003






14 2003






8 Ibid


















20 2003





2003




1 March 2000






2003











2000












20 Ibid















2002
















October 6 2003









1996







2001

31 Ibid

32



March 16 1999


















Washington DC



















41 Ibid






14 2003












slc



































television

























































2nd Quarter 2003






14 2003






8 Ibid


















20 2003





2003




1 March 2000






2003











2000












20 Ibid















2002
















October 6 2003









1996







2001

31 Ibid

32



March 16 1999


















Washington DC



















41 Ibid






14 2003












slc
























































2nd Quarter 2003






14 2003






8 Ibid


















20 2003





2003




1 March 2000






2003











2000












20 Ibid















2002
















October 6 2003









1996







2001

31 Ibid

32



March 16 1999


















Washington DC



















41 Ibid






14 2003












slc








2002
















October 6 2003









1996







2001

31 Ibid

32



March 16 1999


















Washington DC



















41 Ibid






14 2003












slc







slc

A Rural Policy for the 21st Century

Documents

Transcript of A Rural Policy for the 21st Century