Demographic Trends in Rural and Small Town America
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
www.carseyinstitute.unh.edu REPORTS ON RURAL AMERICA Demographic Trends Building Knowledge for in Rural and Rural America’s Families and Communities in the st Century Small Town America Carsey Institute University of New Hampshire Huddleston Hall 73 Main Street Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3563 KENNETH JOHNSON 603-862-2821 Building Knowledge for Rural America’s About the Carsey Institute Families and Communities in the st Century Building Knowledge for Rural America’s Families and Communities in the st Century REPORTS ON RURAL AMERICA Director: Cynthia M. Duncan Volume 1, Number 1 Associate Director: Priscilla Salant Th e Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire Communications Director: Amy Seif conducts research and analysis into the challenges facing Th e Carsey Institute Reports on Rural America are funded rural families and communities in New Hampshire, New by the Annie E. Casey Foundation and the W.K. Kellogg Executive Committee members: England, and the nation. Foundation. Ross Gittell, Ph.D. James R. Carter Professor and Professor of Management Th e Carsey Institute sponsors independent, interdisciplin- © Copyright 2006 Whittemore School of Business & Economics ary research that documents trends and conditions in rural Lawrence Hamilton, Ph.D. America, providing valuable information and analysis to Carsey Institute Professor policymakers, practitioners, the media, and the general Sociology University of New Hampshire public. Huddleston Hall David Pillemer, Ed.D. Dr. Samuel E. Paul Professor of Developmental Psychology 73 Main Street Th rough this work, the Carsey Institute contributes to Psychology Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3563 public dialogue on policies that encourage social mobility Jan A. Nisbet, Ph.D. and sustain healthy, equitable communities and strength- Director ens nonprofi ts working to improve family and community 603-862-2821 Institute on Disability well-being. Sally Ward, Ph.D. www.carseyinstitute.unh.edu Chair and Professor Th e Carsey Institute was established in May 2002 from a Sociology generous gift from alumna and noted television producer Robert J. Woodward, Ph.D. Marcy Carsey. Forrest D. McKerley Chair Health Economics Investing in Rural America Advisory Committee members: Miriam Shark William O’Hare Dee Davis Savi Horne Th is report is printed on 30% recycled paper (inside) and 50% recycled paper (cover) and printed with soy-based inks. Executive Summary An Overview of Demographic Change itan areas. When no metropolitan center is nearby, counties including “micropolitan” centers with smaller cities are better Historically, rural places have lost population. However, able to retain population and attract new residents compared since the rural rebound of the 1970s, the story of migration into and out of rural areas has become more with more rural counties. complex. For much of the 20th century, most rural communities ex- Changes in Racial and Ethic Diversity perienced population loss as millions of rural residents left Immigration and racial diversity has increased in rural for the opportunities in booming cities. Th e volume of out- places, and will likely continue to increase. migration varied from decade to decade, but the direction of Th e Hispanic population in nonmetropolitan areas grew at the flows did not. More people consistently left rural areas the fastest rate of any racial or ethnic group during the 1990s than came to them. Th is trend ended in the 1970s when ru- and the post-2000 period. At the same time, non-Hispanic ral population gains exceeded those in urban areas. Gains in white growth rates were the lowest of any group and slowed rural areas waned in the 1980s, rebounded in the early 1990s precipitously. While greater than that for whites, the African and slowed again in the later 1990s. Rural growth picked up American growth rate is also quite modest. Racial diversity is again aft er 2001, although recent gains remain smaller than growing across rural America, but on a local level rural com- in the early 1990s. Currently, 17 percent of the population (50 munities do not show much racial diversity. million people) and 75 percent of the land area of the United Recent research suggests immigration to nonmetropolitan States is nonmetropolitan. areas is on the upswing and that the immigrants may be dis- Some 1,458 nonmetropolitan counties—71 percent of the to- persing more widely. While immigrants remain a small per- tal—gained population between 1990 and 2000. Th e gains were centage of the rural population, immigration accounted for a widespread in large areas of the Mountain West, the Pacific disproportionate share of the nonmetropolitan growth since Northwest, the Upper Great Lakes, the southern Highlands and 1990. Between 2000 and 2004, immigration accounted for 31 Piedmont, Florida, and the eastern half of Texas. While such percent of the overall population increase in nonmetropoli- gains slowed in the second half of the 1990s, recent research tan areas. suggests that growth picked up again aft er 2001. In 297 counties, the foreign-born populations exceeded By contrast, population losses were common on the Great 5 percent for the first time in 2000. Many of these counties Plains, where the agricultural economy is employing few work- are nonmetropolitan and cluster on the peripheries of exist- ers because of productivity gains, population density is low, nat- ing regions with large concentrations of foreign-born people. ural decrease is common and young adults have been leaving in Th ere are many isolated counties, especially in the rural Mid- large numbers for generations west, where the foreign-born population recently exceeded 5 A variety of factors have contributed to the growth of some percent. Central North Carolina and northern Georgia have rural areas. Technological innovations in communications also registered recent gains in the percentages of foreign-born and transportation have given people and businesses more population. flexibility to locate in more areas. And the economies of scale and geographic proximity that had long provided a significant New Realities competitive advantage to locating in an urban core have been Farming no longer dominates. Places with high eroded by congestion, high housing costs and densities, land amenities are attracting new migrants into rural areas. shortages and high labor costs. Th ough farming remains important in hundreds of rural More broadly, many Americans prefer to live in smaller counties, nonmetropolitan America is now extremely diverse places that are near urban area, but not in them. Th at is borne with a population, labor force and economy that encompasses out by population growth rates in both the 1990s and the far more than agriculture. Only 6.5 percent of the labor force post-2000 period for counties that were adjacent to metropol- is engaged in farming, while the proportion of the rural la- bor force engaged in manufacturing exceeds that in urban America. In nonmetropolitan America today, areas with significant natural amenities, recreational opportunities or quality of life advantages have new prospects for growth and development. Many nonmetropolitan areas that are seeing significant popu- lation growth benefit from scenic landscapes, mild climates, proximity to rapidly growing metropolitan areas, or a combi- nation of these elements. Th ese counties that off er recreation, amenity or retirement opportunities have consistently been the fastest growing types of counties in nonmetropolitan America. Such coun- ties grew prominently during the 1970s, 1980s, and the 1990s and growth continued from 2000 to 2004, albeit at a reduced pace. In certain nonmetropolitan areas, this type of growth has included an accelerating rate of migration among those in their 50s and 60s. Th is structural shift in migration patterns to recreational counties has significant implications because the ranks of those over the age of 50 are already beginning to swell with the first of 75 million baby boomers. We may be poised to see substantial future population gains in rec- reational and amenity counties. Th is would have significant policy implications because many of these areas are already experiencing considerable growth-related environmental and infrastructure stress. Policy Considerations As policymakers consider responses to the issues being faced in nonmetropolitan areas, it is critical that rural constituencies have a seat at the table. Rural America is not monolithic, so no single policy can address its varying challenges. Farm policy will continue to be critical to many areas, but agriculture is not the only issue of importance to many rural communities. Th e challenges con- fronting nonmetropolitan America will require policymakers to focus on a variety of issues, including: • Th e high child poverty rates in rural areas, which are higher than those in urban areas for every racial and ethnic group. • Th e poor access in many rural areas to health care facilities and providers, as well as to centers that provide government services. • Th e rapid influx of people and businesses into many areas, which creates challenges to education, housing aff ordability, water quality, transportation, energy and Internet availability. Demographic Trends in Rural and Small Town America Kenneth Johnson Loyola University, Chicago A Carsey Institute Report on Rural America Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Preface 6 Introduction 7 Historical Demographic Trends 8 Rural Demographic Trends since 1990 10 Th e Diversity of Rural America