Ending the Legacy of Poverty in the Rural South
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 32,2(August 2000):319-329 © 2000 Southern Agricultural Economics Association America's Forgotten People and Places: Ending the Legacy of Poverty in the Rural South Joyce E. Allen-Smith, Ronald C. Wimberley, and Libby V. Morris ABSTRACT This study focuses on the longstanding impoverishment of the rural South and three of its subregions-Appalachia, the Mississippi Delta, and the Black Belt. The poor quality of life in rural Appalachia and along the Mississippi Delta has been publically acknowledged by programs and commissions for improving conditions. However, the more comprehensive Black Belt subregion that links parts of Southern Appalachia and the Southern Delta has not received such regional policy attention. While the South as a whole is more rural and impoverished than other U.S. regions, this is largely due to the poor conditions in the Black Belt. In addition to region and rurality, a third feature of the pattern is race. It is in the Black Belt that the South's poor socioeconomic conditions are most concentrated. Policy and program attention are needed for regional solutions that take rurality and race into account along with demographic and other subregional characteristics. Key Words: Appalachia, Black Belt, Mississippi Delta, policy, poverty, quality of life, rural, South. As we begin a new century, the rural South a group of contiguous counties with relatively continues to struggle with problems that have high poverty rates, and these counties lag be- plagued it through the twentieth century-per- hind the rest of the United States on key in- sistent poverty and uneven development. Geo- dicators of socioeconomic well-being. Living graphic areas of concentrated poverty are scat- in these pockets of poverty diminishes the life tered across the South from Appalachia chances of adults and especially children. As through the Lower Rio Grande Valley and in- Duncan points out, "It is harder to be poor cluding the Black Belt from Virginia to Texas. and harder to escape poverty in depressed Every southern state except Delaware contains communities (p. 131)." The South does not quite have a monopoly on areas with concentrated poverty. Indeed, Allen-Smith is an Associate Professor in the Depart- ment of Agricultural and Consumer Economics at the persistently poor counties and uneven devel- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Wimber- opment can be found in every region. Yet the ley is a William Neal Reynolds Professor of Sociology greatest concentration of poverty is in the at North Carolina State University; and Morris is an South. More than four in ten of the nation's Associate Professor and the Graduate Cordinator in the Institute of Higher Education at the University of poor are southerners (Wimberley and Morris Georgia. 1996, p. 43). Furthermore, the region does not 320 Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, August 2000 share proportionally in the prosperity enjoyed Stereotypical images of Appalachia have by the nation as a whole or in other U.S. re- prevailed since the 1800s. Lewis and Billings gions. note that Appalachia is depicted by scholars, In this analysis we review socioeconomic policymakers, and reporters as "a homoge- conditions for several high-poverty areas of nous region which is physically, culturally, the rural South, examine the characteristics of and economically isolated from mainstream the population in these distressed areas, report America" (p. 16). They concluded that "the factors found to contribute to impoverished creators of the Appalachia myth were not of conditions, and review past policies and pro- the people they described, and what the in- grams to alleviate poverty and promote eco- ventors saw was refracted through their own nomic development. Our focus is on Appala- particular set of cultural and class lenses" (p. chia and the Mississippi Delta along with the 16). Moreover, Lewis and Billings found that larger southern Black Belt subregion that con- generalizations about Appalachia were based nects them. on studies conducted in isolated rural com- munities. They contend that there is a body of Appalachia sound research which indicates, "a much more diverse and dynamic Appalachia than is pre- Appalachia has "symbolized poverty, exploi- sumed to have existed (p. 16)." tation and regional underdevelopment" (Bill- Lewis and Billings' review of the literature ings and Tickamyer, p. 7). The report issued provides some useful insights into the early by the President's Regional Commission in history of the region and its economic evolu- 1964 characterized Appalachia as "a region tion. Although the mountains made travel dif- apart-geographically and statistically." The ficult, a network of roads and pikes along with Commission found that Appalachia trailed the the railroad facilitated access to markets and nation in income and education levels and in enhanced communication beyond the region. population and employment growth and sur- In addition to subsistence farming, early set- passed the nation in poverty and unemploy- tlers engaged in diverse economic activities ment rates. The boundaries for the area offi- including raising livestock such as cattle and cially defined as Appalachia were set by hogs, growing corn, harvesting timber, and Congress and thus reflect political consider- trapping animals for their pelts. Early manu- ations. facturing industries included salt and iron and, Stretching from New York to Mississippi, later, coal mining. Lewis and Billings report Appalachia is a subregion of the Northeast, that two Appalachias emerged before the Midwest, and South. It encompasses 404 twentieth century and noted that counties with counties in 13 states. Three-fourths of these sizable towns (i.e., growth centers) were at the counties are in the South. About 111, or 28 forefront of the economic diversification. percent, of the Appalachian counties are clas- However, "counties without growth centers sified by the Appalachian Regional Commis- failed to develop much commercialization or sion (ARC) as distressed due to low per-capita diversity" (p. 20). The legacy of two Appa- income plus high poverty and unemployment lachias continues. One has poverty rates at or rates. A relatively high proportion of the Ap- below the national level and has a vibrant palachian population lives in rural areas. Us- economy. The other has relatively high pov- ing the last classification of rural and urban erty rates, unemployment rates, and a low ratio geography as found in the 1990 U.S. Census, of jobs to people. 53 percent of the Appalachian people are rural Parts of Central Appalachia-counties in compared to 25 percent nationally (Wimberley West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee-fit the and Morris 1996, p. 13). Important sectors of profile of the "other Appalachia." Indeed, the economy include manufacturing and coal Billings and Tickamyer argue that Central Ap- mining, and-more recently-services and palachia "most closely resembles the stereo- tourism. type of persistent poverty and underdevelop- Allen-Smith, Wimberly, and Morris: Ending Poverty in the Rural South 321 Table 1. Selected Socioeconomic Conditions in Appalachia by Subregion Percentage of Adults with Appalachia Mean Household Unemployment High School Subregion Money Income Poverty Rate Rate Diplomas Central $23,858 25.9 10.2 53 Northern $30,686 14.0 7.3 73 Southern $31,858 14.1 5.7 66 Source: 1990 data from Cushing and Rogers "Income and Poverty," and Isserman, "Appalachia Then and Now: An Update of 'The Realities of Deprivation' Reported to the President in 1964." ment and that consistently has social nonmetro Appalachia had 45 jobs per 100 indicators far below those of other areas of the people in 1992 whereas the rest of the non- country (p. 9)." Notwithstanding, parts of metro United States had 49 and metropolitan Northern and Southern Appalachia are severe- Appalachia had 51. ly impoverished, particularly in some counties Cushing and Rogers provide evidence that of Mississippi and Alabama as well as Ohio educational attainment-a significant deter- in the Midwest. Central Appalachia contains a minant of poverty-is lower in Central Ap- disproportionate number of small nonmetro- palachia than in the rest of the region. For ex- politan counties that tend to be more impov- ample, only 53 percent of those persons of erished compared to metropolitan counties. ages 25 and over in Central Appalachia had Data from the ARC document the disad- completed high school in 1990 versus 73 per- vantaged status of Central Appalachia com- cent in Northern Appalachia, 66 percent in pared to the rest of the United States and the Southern Appalachia and 76 percent in the rest rest of Appalachia. As reported in Table 1, of the United States. mean household income in 1990 averaged Living standards have improved in Appa- only $24,000 in Central Appalachia or 61 per- lachia during recent decades. Rogers and cent of the average for the rest of the United Cushing point out that, "while Central Appa- States. By contrast, mean household income lachia might still be characterized as a 'world in Northern Appalachia averaged 78 percent apart,' even compared with the rest of Appa- of the rest of United States and Southern Ap- lachia, Appalachia as a whole no longer fits palachia averaged 81 percent. In 1990, 13.1 this image (p. 31)." Indeed, Appalachia is on percent of the U.S. population lived in pov- par with the rest of the United States on sev- erty. The poverty rate in Northern and South- eral key indicators of well-being including in- ern Appalachia was slightly higher than the fant mortality rates, home ownership rates, U.S. average while the rate in Central Appa- percent of occupied housing units with com- lachia was nearly double the U.S. average. plete plumbing facilities, and percent of oc- Given the relatively high poverty rates in cupied housing units with a vehicle available. Central Appalachia, it is not surprising that the subregion had a relatively high rate of unem- The Mississippi Delta ployment and low educational levels.