View
217
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Poverty in Rural Poverty in Rural America: America: What do we What do we know and what do we know and what do we
need to know?need to know?Bruce WeberBruce Weber
RUPRI Rural Poverty Research CenterRUPRI Rural Poverty Research Center
In the Shadows of Poverty: In the Shadows of Poverty: Strengthening the Rural Poverty Strengthening the Rural Poverty Research Capacity of the SouthResearch Capacity of the South
A Conference co-sponsored by A Conference co-sponsored by Southern Rural Development Center andSouthern Rural Development Center and
RUPRI Rural Poverty Research CenterRUPRI Rural Poverty Research Center
July 21, 2004 Memphis, TN.July 21, 2004 Memphis, TN.
Road MapRoad Map Some stylized facts about poverty and Some stylized facts about poverty and
placeplace Poverty rates across the rural-urban continuumPoverty rates across the rural-urban continuum
Persistent poverty countiesPersistent poverty counties
High poverty census TractsHigh poverty census Tracts
What do we know? A Selective Review What do we know? A Selective Review
Toward a Rural Poverty Research Agenda Toward a Rural Poverty Research Agenda RPRC: a collaboration to build a rural poverty RPRC: a collaboration to build a rural poverty
research agendaresearch agenda
New Rural Poverty Research InitiativesNew Rural Poverty Research Initiatives
Some Stylized Facts Some Stylized Facts about Poverty and Place: about Poverty and Place:
The Rural VersionThe Rural Version
Poverty rates have historically Poverty rates have historically been higher in nonmetropolitan been higher in nonmetropolitan countiescounties
Poverty rates are highest in the Poverty rates are highest in the most remote rural countiesmost remote rural counties
Poverty rates by residence, 1959-2001
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1959
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
Year
Pe
rce
nt
Nonmetro
Metro
RUPRI Rural Poverty Research Center
Poverty Rates Along the Rural Urban Continuum
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Rural Urban Continuum CodeSource: U.S. Census Bureau and ERS, USDA
Metro Counties Nonmetro Counties
Persistent Poverty Persistent Poverty CountiesCounties
There were 382 Persistent Poverty There were 382 Persistent Poverty Counties in 2000. (These counties Counties in 2000. (These counties poverty rates of 20% or higher in poverty rates of 20% or higher in each decennial census between each decennial census between 1960 and 2000)1960 and 2000)
Persistent Poverty Counties are:Persistent Poverty Counties are: Geographically concentrated Geographically concentrated Overwhelmingly rural (95 Overwhelmingly rural (95
percent)percent)
Persistent Poverty Persistent Poverty CountiesCounties
Counties with poverty rates >20 % in 1959, 1969, Counties with poverty rates >20 % in 1959, 1969, 1979, 1989, 19991979, 1989, 1999
RUPRI Rural Poverty Research Center
Percent of Counties in each UrbanPercent of Counties in each UrbanInfluence Code in Persistent PovertyInfluence Code in Persistent Poverty
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Urban Influence CodeSource: U.S. Census Bureau and ERS, USDA
Metro Counties Nonmetro Counties
Persistent Poverty Persistent Poverty Dynamics:Dynamics:
Persistent Poverty Persistent Poverty LeaversLeavers
189 counties were “persistent poverty 189 counties were “persistent poverty leavers”: they left persistent poverty leavers”: they left persistent poverty status between 1990 and 2000status between 1990 and 2000
The The metrometro counties were counties were more likelymore likely to beto be leaversleavers than nonmetro counties than nonmetro counties
Nonmet adjacent countiesNonmet adjacent counties were were more more likelylikely to be leaversto be leavers than nonmet than nonmet nonadjacent countiesnonadjacent counties
Persistent Poverty Persistent Poverty DynamicsDynamics
Persistent Poverty LeaversPersistent Poverty Leavers
Source: U.S. Census Bureau andEconomic Research Service, USDAMap prepared by RUPRI
Persistent Poverty Leavers:Left Persistent Poverty Status between 1989 and 1999
Metro (17)Nomet Adjacent (73)Nonmet Nonadjacent (99)
Percent of Counties in each Urban Percent of Counties in each Urban Influence Category that Left Influence Category that Left
Persistent Poverty StatusPersistent Poverty Status
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
Large Metro Small Metro Nonmetro: Adjacentto Large Metro
Nonmetro: Adjacentto Small Metro
Nonmetro:Nonadjacent
Urban Influence Category
Per
cen
t of
Cou
nti
es
Source, U.S. Census Bureau and ERS, USDA
High Poverty Census High Poverty Census TractsTracts
Poverty rates of 30% or more in Poverty rates of 30% or more in 19901990 7,030 tracts – 11.7 percent of all 7,030 tracts – 11.7 percent of all
tractstracts Geographically dispersedGeographically dispersed
ERS Rural-Urban Commuting ERS Rural-Urban Commuting Area CodesArea Codes High poverty most prevalent in core High poverty most prevalent in core
area tracts and remote rural areasarea tracts and remote rural areas
High Poverty Census Tracts, High Poverty Census Tracts, 19901990
Percent of Tracts in eachPercent of Tracts in eachRUCA Code in High PovertyRUCA Code in High Poverty
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
RUCA CodeSource: U.S. Census Bureau and ERS, USDA
Core Tracts Commuting Tracts Remote Rural Tracts
Poverty Rates by RUCA CodePoverty Rates by RUCA Code
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
RUCA CodeSource: U.S. Census Bureau and ERS, USDA
Core Tracts Commuting Tracts Remote Rural Tracts
Alternative Rural Urban Continuum:Alternative Rural Urban Continuum: Central City to Remote Rural CountyCentral City to Remote Rural County
Figure B. Poverty Among Single Mother Families, by Residence: 1992 and 1998
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
central city balance of metro nonmetro adjacent counties nonmetro nonadjacentcounties
Place of residence
Per
cen
t (%
) b
elo
w l
ow
-in
com
e le
vel
1992 1998
Poverty Among Single Mother Familiesby Residence, 1992 and 1998
Stylized Facts about Stylized Facts about Poverty and Place Poverty and Place
Revisited Revisited Poverty rates are highest and Poverty rates are highest and
most persistent in most persistent in urban cores and urban cores and remote rural placesremote rural places
Persistent poverty became Persistent poverty became increasingly concentrated in increasingly concentrated in large urban counties and remote large urban counties and remote rural counties in the 1990srural counties in the 1990s
What do we know about…What do we know about…
rural poverty and its causes?rural poverty and its causes?
reducing rural povertyreducing rural poverty
policies to reduce poverty?policies to reduce poverty?
Articles published in Articles published in Rural SociologyRural Sociology onon
poverty and/or welfare receipt, 1936-poverty and/or welfare receipt, 1936-20032003
012345678
1936 1966 1996
Number per year 3 per. Mov. Avg. (Number per year)
“The People Left Behind”
1967
Gene Summers’ RSS Presidential Address
1991
RSS Poverty
Taskforce Volume
1993
Journal first published at the end of the depression
Welfare
Reform
1996
What Have We Learned What Have We Learned About … About …
rural poverty and its rural poverty and its causes?causes? Qualitative Research: Ethnographic Qualitative Research: Ethnographic
StudiesStudies Quantitative Research: Community Quantitative Research: Community
level studies level studies Counties/tracts are units of analysisCounties/tracts are units of analysis County/tract poverty rates are explained by County/tract poverty rates are explained by
county/tract characteristicscounty/tract characteristics Quantitative Research: Contextual Quantitative Research: Contextual
studiesstudies Individuals/ households are units of Individuals/ households are units of
analysisanalysis Odds of being in poverty are explained by Odds of being in poverty are explained by
individual and community characteristicsindividual and community characteristics
Qualitative researchQualitative research Provides insight into the experience of poverty Provides insight into the experience of poverty
(Rank)(Rank) Having to make Having to make significant compromises regarding significant compromises regarding
daily necessitiesdaily necessities: food, rent, heat, healthcare: food, rent, heat, healthcare
StressStress of living under threat of not being able to of living under threat of not being able to
afford necessities if, for example, car breaks downafford necessities if, for example, car breaks down
Stunted development Stunted development
Provides insight into the underlying social and Provides insight into the underlying social and
economic processeseconomic processes (Duncan)(Duncan) How social class affects economic outcomesHow social class affects economic outcomes
How race affects economic outcomesHow race affects economic outcomes
““Community” StudiesCommunity” Studies
County poverty rates are affected County poverty rates are affected by:by: industry structure, industry structure, individual and family demographics, individual and family demographics, labor market conditions, and labor market conditions, and metro/nonmet residence metro/nonmet residence
Potential for ecological fallacyPotential for ecological fallacy
Contextual Studies of Rural Contextual Studies of Rural PovertyPoverty
8 contextual studies of rural poverty 8 contextual studies of rural poverty
6 studies of impact of living in rural 6 studies of impact of living in rural
area on odds of being in poverty area on odds of being in poverty
(McLaughlin/ Jensen; Brown/Hirschl; (McLaughlin/ Jensen; Brown/Hirschl;
Haynie/Gorman; Lichter et al.; Kassab et al.; Haynie/Gorman; Lichter et al.; Kassab et al.;
Cotter)Cotter)
2 studies of impact of living in rural 2 studies of impact of living in rural
area on poverty dynamics (odds of exit area on poverty dynamics (odds of exit
and entry into poverty) and entry into poverty) ( both by ( both by
Jensen/McLaughlin)Jensen/McLaughlin)
Contextual Studies of Rural Contextual Studies of Rural PovertyPoverty
Dependent variableDependent variable: log-odds of individual : log-odds of individual /household being poor or entering/exiting /household being poor or entering/exiting povertypoverty
Individual CharacteristicsIndividual Characteristics: age, race, : age, race, education, disability status, family structure, education, disability status, family structure, number of children, employment status of number of children, employment status of head/spousehead/spouse
Community Characteristics: Community Characteristics: tightness of tightness of labor market, industrial/occupational structure labor market, industrial/occupational structure of economy, demographics of labor marketof economy, demographics of labor market
Contextual Studies of Rural Contextual Studies of Rural PovertyPoverty
Different levels of “community context”Different levels of “community context”
Rural dummy variable only: 3 studiesRural dummy variable only: 3 studies Rural plus U.S. region: 2 studiesRural plus U.S. region: 2 studies Rural plus U.S. region plus Rural plus U.S. region plus
economic/social structure of labor economic/social structure of labor
market variables : 3 studiesmarket variables : 3 studies
Contextual Studies of Rural Contextual Studies of Rural Poverty:Poverty:
Estimates of “Rural Effect”Estimates of “Rural Effect”Contextual Contextual ControlsControls
Odds ratio Odds ratio
for “rural” variablefor “rural” variable
Rural onlyRural only 1.5 (1989)1.5 (1989)
Rural plus U.S. Rural plus U.S. RegionRegion
1.66-1.68 (1979)1.66-1.68 (1979)
2.12-2.30 (1989)2.12-2.30 (1989)
Rural plus U.S. Rural plus U.S. Region plus Local Region plus Local Labor MarketLabor Market
1.5-2.7 (1985)1.5-2.7 (1985)
1.43 (1989)1.43 (1989)
1.19 (HLM, 1989)1.19 (HLM, 1989)
Contextual Studies of Rural Contextual Studies of Rural Poverty:Poverty:
Effects of Community Effects of Community CharacteristicsCharacteristicsCommunity Community
CharacteristicCharacteristicEffect on individual Effect on individual odds of being poorodds of being poor
Local unemployment Local unemployment raterate
High rate increases High rate increases oddsodds
Job share in Job share in manufacturing manufacturing sectorssectors
High share reduces High share reduces oddsodds
Share of population Share of population without high school without high school degreedegree
High share High share increases oddsincreases odds
Contextual Studies of Rural Contextual Studies of Rural Poverty:Poverty:
Rural InteractionsRural InteractionsInteractionInteraction EffectEffect
Employment Employment statusstatus
Having a job reduces Having a job reduces poverty risk less in poverty risk less in rural areas (3 of 4 rural areas (3 of 4 studies)studies)
Additional Additional hours workedhours worked
Working additional Working additional hours reduces poverty hours reduces poverty risk less in ruralrisk less in rural
Local Local Unemployment Unemployment RateRate
Higher unemployment Higher unemployment rates increase poverty rates increase poverty risk more for rural risk more for rural womenwomen
Major Conclusions from Major Conclusions from Contextual StudiesContextual Studies
People living in a rural area have People living in a rural area have higher odds of being poor, controlling higher odds of being poor, controlling for measured individual and for measured individual and community characteristicscommunity characteristics
Local labor market conditions account Local labor market conditions account for half of the difference in poverty for half of the difference in poverty odds between rural and urban placesodds between rural and urban places
Having an education and a job and Having an education and a job and working more hours has less poverty-working more hours has less poverty-reducing impact in rural areasreducing impact in rural areas
What Have We Learned What Have We Learned About… About…
Reducing Poverty Rates? Reducing Poverty Rates?County level analysis County level analysis (Rupashinga and Goetz, 2003)(Rupashinga and Goetz, 2003) What contributed to What contributed to greater reductions in greater reductions in
poverty ratepoverty rate between 1990 and 2000: between 1990 and 2000: Higher employment rates, greater female labor Higher employment rates, greater female labor
force participation, higher shares of high school force participation, higher shares of high school graduates, higher shares of self-employed, greater graduates, higher shares of self-employed, greater social capitalsocial capital
What contributed to What contributed to smaller reductions in smaller reductions in poverty ratepoverty rate between 1990 and 2000: between 1990 and 2000: Being a small remote rural county (Beale code 7 and Being a small remote rural county (Beale code 7 and
9), having a high share of population under 18 years 9), having a high share of population under 18 years of age and having a high share of non-Black of age and having a high share of non-Black minority populationminority population
What Have We Learned What Have We Learned About… Reducing About… Reducing
Poverty Rates?Poverty Rates? Tract level analysis Tract level analysis (Crandall and (Crandall and
Weber, 2004) Weber, 2004) What contributed to What contributed to greater reductions in poverty rate greater reductions in poverty rate between 1990 and 2000between 1990 and 2000
• Higher employment growth rateHigher employment growth rate• Higher shares of high school graduatesHigher shares of high school graduates• Higher shares of college graduatesHigher shares of college graduates• Greater social capitalGreater social capital
What contributed to smaller reductions in What contributed to smaller reductions in poverty rate between 1990 and 2000poverty rate between 1990 and 2000• Being surrounded by other high poverty tractsBeing surrounded by other high poverty tracts
What Have We Learned What Have We Learned About … About …
Policy Impacts? Policy Impacts? Quasi-Experimental Research Quasi-Experimental Research on on
welfare policy changes in 1990’s welfare policy changes in 1990’s (McKernan et al., Weber et al.)(McKernan et al., Weber et al.) Both studies find positive policy Both studies find positive policy
impacts on impacts on employmentemployment; one study ; one study found met/nonmet differences found met/nonmet differences (impact in nonmet is greater)(impact in nonmet is greater)
Weber et al. find no policy impact Weber et al. find no policy impact on on povertypoverty in either met or nonmet in either met or nonmet
What Have We Learned What Have We Learned About … About …
Policy Impacts?Policy Impacts?
Experimental Research:Experimental Research: Minnesota Minnesota Family Independence Program Family Independence Program Experiment (Gennetian et al.)Experiment (Gennetian et al.) Impacts of MFIP (welfare reform) on Impacts of MFIP (welfare reform) on
employment and earnings larger in employment and earnings larger in metropolitan countiesmetropolitan counties
Toward a Rural Poverty Toward a Rural Poverty Research AgendaResearch Agenda
Good research requires Good research requires passion,passion, rigor, and a rigor, and a
supportive communitysupportive community
Passion Passion focuses research on the right focuses research on the right
questionsquestions
Rigor Rigor supports getting the right answerssupports getting the right answers Theoretical and Methodological ChallengesTheoretical and Methodological Challenges Data ChallengesData Challenges
A community of scholars and practitioners A community of scholars and practitioners keeps the passion alive and enforces the keeps the passion alive and enforces the rigorrigor
Rural Poverty Research Rural Poverty Research CenterCenter
A community of policymakers, A community of policymakers, practitioners and researchers seeking practitioners and researchers seeking to understand how policy and practice to understand how policy and practice can reduce poverty across the rural-can reduce poverty across the rural-urban continuum. urban continuum.
Co-located inCo-located in RUPRI in the Truman School of Public RUPRI in the Truman School of Public
Affairs, Affairs, University of MissouriUniversity of Missouri The Department of Agricultural The Department of Agricultural
Resource and Economics at Resource and Economics at Oregon Oregon State UniversityState University
Collaboration with the Regional Collaboration with the Regional Rural Development CentersRural Development Centers
RPRC ResearchRPRC Research RPRC projects: 2004-05RPRC projects: 2004-05
““Neighborhood Effects” in Rural Neighborhood Effects” in Rural Communities: Concentrated Poverty Communities: Concentrated Poverty and Employment Outcomesand Employment Outcomes
What Reduces Poverty in What Reduces Poverty in Persistently Poor Rural Areas?Persistently Poor Rural Areas?
Sentinel Communities: Tracking Sentinel Communities: Tracking and Explaining Community and Explaining Community Capacity in Rural PlacesCapacity in Rural Places
Material Hardship in Rural and Material Hardship in Rural and Urban PlacesUrban Places
Small Grants Program 2004-05Small Grants Program 2004-05
Research ConferencesResearch Conferences National Agenda Setting Conference : National Agenda Setting Conference : The The
Importance of Place in Poverty Research and Importance of Place in Poverty Research and Policy Policy March 3-4, 2004 in Washington DCMarch 3-4, 2004 in Washington DC
North Central Regional Research Conference: North Central Regional Research Conference: Culture, Governance and Rural PovertyCulture, Governance and Rural Poverty (w/NCRCRD) May 25-27, 2004 Chicago(w/NCRCRD) May 25-27, 2004 Chicago
Southern Regional Research Conference: Southern Regional Research Conference: In In the Shadows of Povertythe Shadows of Poverty (w/ SRDC) July 21-23, (w/ SRDC) July 21-23, 2004 Memphis2004 Memphis
Northeastern and Western Regional Research Northeastern and Western Regional Research Conferences: Winter 2005Conferences: Winter 2005
RPRC MentoringRPRC Mentoring
Postdoctoral Research Fellowships Postdoctoral Research Fellowships
Rural Poverty Dissertation Rural Poverty Dissertation FellowshipsFellowships
Undergraduate Leadership ProgramUndergraduate Leadership Program
Professional Development Travel Professional Development Travel FundFund
RPRC DisseminationRPRC Dissemination
Quarterly Newsletter: Quarterly Newsletter: Perspectives Perspectives on Poverty, Policy and Placeon Poverty, Policy and Place
Working Paper SeriesWorking Paper Series
Research BriefsResearch Briefs
RPRC UPDATE (quarterly email)RPRC UPDATE (quarterly email)
RPRC websiteRPRC website
What do we need to What do we need to know?know?
What are the What are the individual processesindividual processes & & community/ neighborhood processescommunity/ neighborhood processes & & institutional mechanismsinstitutional mechanisms that that generate and maintain poverty?generate and maintain poverty?
What What community strategiescommunity strategies have been have been most successful in reducing poverty, most successful in reducing poverty, and how does this vary across and how does this vary across community types?community types?
How does policy interactHow does policy interact with these with these community-level processes to affect community-level processes to affect poverty?poverty?
Macro-economy
Policies
Individual characteristicsAgeEducationGenderOccupationMarital Status# childrenEmployment status
Community Characteristics•Structural composition
%U%Professional%HS grads%Mfg%Single FH householdsghetto (>40% poverty)
•Social Organization/Institutional Influences•Cultural Processes
Rural
Employment process
Marital Process
Public
Assistance
Process
Family Formation
Process
Poverty Status
New Rural Poverty New Rural Poverty Research InitiativesResearch Initiatives
Long-term multi-method studies Long-term multi-method studies
in rural placesin rural places of low-income of low-income
family, social-safety-net and work family, social-safety-net and work
dynamics: a “multi-rural-dynamics: a “multi-rural-
community study of poverty and community study of poverty and
inequality”inequality”
Policy experiments in diverse Policy experiments in diverse
rural placesrural places
““Musical Chairs” Musical Chairs” HypothesisHypothesis
Our economic system is a game of Our economic system is a game of musical chairs: no matter how much musical chairs: no matter how much we increase people’s agility and we increase people’s agility and speed in getting into a seat, there speed in getting into a seat, there will never be enough chairs for will never be enough chairs for people to sit in.people to sit in.
The implication is that we need to The implication is that we need to increase the number of chairs increase the number of chairs and/or change the rules so and/or change the rules so everybody doesn’t need a seat to everybody doesn’t need a seat to live well.live well.
Implications for Rural Implications for Rural Poverty ResearchPoverty Research
Researchers have spent a lot of time Researchers have spent a lot of time trying to show that there are fewer trying to show that there are fewer chairs in rural areas. chairs in rural areas.
We need to spend more effort figuring We need to spend more effort figuring out out how communities in urban and rural places how communities in urban and rural places
can build more chairs, and can build more chairs, and how national policy can be changed so how national policy can be changed so
people can get by when they can’t find a people can get by when they can’t find a chair.chair.
““Think of every piece of Think of every piece of research you do as a research you do as a
political activity. political activity. Research should Research should movemove
the conversationthe conversation, not just , not just inform it”inform it”
(Stauber)
Rural Policy Research InstituteRural Policy Research InstituteRural Poverty Research CenterRural Poverty Research Center
www.rprconline.org
Core funding for RPRC is provided by the Core funding for RPRC is provided by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE)
of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Servicesof the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
RUPRI Rural Poverty Research Center is one of three RUPRI Rural Poverty Research Center is one of three Area Poverty Research Centers funded by ASPE/HHSArea Poverty Research Centers funded by ASPE/HHS
www.rprconline.orgwww.rprconline.org
Recommended