|
Overview: Favorable Rural Socioeconomic Conditions Persist, but Not in All Areas
The socioeconomic climate of rural areas remained favorable in the late 1990's, according to the most current economic and population indicators. Unemployment rates continued to fall, and population, employment, and income remained on the rise, albeit more slowly than earlier in the decade. At the same time, favorable economic performance did not benefit all rural people and areas equally. About 27 percent of rural workers, mostly women or minorities, held low-wage jobs in 1999. Furthermore, low-wage employment was clustered in counties in the Great Plains and South. These counties tended to have small populations, locations remote from urban centers, and less diversified economies.
For more information, contact: Peggy J. Cook, pcook@ERS.USDA.gov or Robert M. Gibbs, rgibbs@ers.usda.gov.
Overview: Favorable Rural Socioeconomic Conditions Persist, but Not in All Areas, 529 kb
Rural Low-Wage Employment Rises Among Men
In 1999, nearly one-fourth of the rural wage and salary workforce over 25 earned low wages. A large share of these workers are the sole or main wage earner in the household. Rural low-wage workers are more likely to be employed in service and retail trade industries. But within a given industry, low-wage workers tend to be employed in less-skilled occupations requiring less education. Although low-wage rural workers continue to be overwhelmingly women and minorities, the share of White men in low-wage jobs has grown since 1979. For more information, contact: Robert Gibbs, rgibbs@ERS.USDA.gov or Timothy Parker, tparker@ers.usda.gov.
Rural Low-Wage Employment Rises Among Men,, 53 kb
Low-Wage Counties Face Locational Disadvantages
Rural counties with the largest share of jobs in low-wage industries are typically less populated and more remote from urban centers. These locational attributes coincide with fewer job opportunities in industries, such as manufacturing, that typically pay high wages. Yet most of the difference between low-wage and other rural counties is rooted in lower wage scales across all industries. Although adults in low-wage counties have less education and labor force participation overall, the role played by these forces varies by region. For more information, contact: Robert Gibbs, rgibbs@ERS.USDA.gov or John B. Cromartie, jbc@ers.usda.gov.
Low-Wage Counties Face Locational Disadvantages, 1,035 kb
Nonmetro Population Growth Rate Recedes in a Time of Unprecedented National Prosperity
Despite very favorable national trends in income and employment, the nonmetro population growth rate has steadily dropped since it momentarily exceeded the metro level in 1994-95. By 1998-99, the rate of population growth in nonmetro areas was less than half of that elsewhere, as the net inflow of newcomers from metro places dwindled. For more information, contact: Calvin L. Beale, cbeale@ERS.USDA.gov.
Nonmetro Population Growth Rate Recedes in a Time of Unprecedented National Prosperity, 560 kb
Nonmetro Migration Drops in the West and Among College Graduates
The nonmetro population continued to increase from net migration but at a much lower rate than in previous years. After leading other regions in the first half of the 1990's, the nonmetro West experienced a substantial drop in net migration during 1996-99. Metro-to-nonmetro migration among college graduates also dropped substantially, though not to the level of the rural brain drain of earlier decades. Net migration rates were higher for low-wage workers despite lower rates of in- and outmigration combined. For more information, contact: John B. Cromartie, jbc@ERS.USDA.gov.
Nonmetro Migration Drops in the West and Among College Graduates , 39 kb
Nonmetro Employment and Unemployment Trends Remain Favorable
Nonmetro employment continued to expand in 1999, although the nonmetro employment growth rate lagged behind the metro rate as it had since 1995. Unemployment rates continued to fall in both nonmetro and metro areas. These trends held consistently across the different regions of the country over the past several years. Employment growth in low-wage nonmetro counties was generally lower than in other nonmetro counties, although this trend was reversed in the early 1990's. Unemployment rates in low-wage counties have remained modestly above the nonmetro average. For more information, contact: Lorin Kusmin, lkusmin@ERS.USDA.gov.
Nonmetro Employment and Unemployment Trends Remain Favorable, 626 kb
Almost Half of Hired Farmworkers 25 Years and Older Earn Poverty-Level Wages
The demographic characteristics of hired farmworkers have changed little during the 1990's. These workers continue to earn about 58 percent as much as all wage and salary workers. About 45 percent of all hired farmworkers 25 years and older are low-wage earners who earn less than the poverty threshold for a family of four. Over one-third have annual family incomes of less than $15,000. For more information, contact: Jack L. Runyan, jrunyan@ERS.USDA.gov.
Almost Half of Hired Farmworkers 25 Years and Older Earn Poverty-Level Wages, 23 kb
Rural Nonfarm Earnings Increase in 1997, but Lag Urban Earnings Growth
During 1997, real earnings per nonfarm job grew more slowly in rural than in urban areas. Earnings per job grew slightly faster in low-wage rural counties than in other rural counties, but low-wage counties still have jobs that average far lower earnings in every major industry group. For more information, contact: Linda M. Ghelfi, lghelfi@ERS.USDA.gov.
Rural Nonfarm Earnings Increase in 1997, but Lag Urban Earnings Growth, 25 kb
Skills Training and Manufacturing Innovations Are Key to Raising Rural Workers' Wages
Manufacturing innovations, such as new technologies and work organization practices, have generally been linked to higher wages in both rural and urban areas. These innovations have also been linked to increased training and higher skill levels and needs, particularly in the areas of interpersonal, problem-solving, and computer skills. Low-wage workers, who tend to be more concentrated in rural areas, are less likely to receive training than are higher wage workers. Thus, an emphasis on and encouragement of training and skills enhancement among more vulnerable low-wage workers is important and may enhance these workers' future earning capabilities. For more information, contact: Jennifer C. Olmsted, jolmsted@ERS.USDA.gov or Peggy Cook pcook@ers.usda.gov.
Skills Training and Manufacturing Innovations Are Key to Raising Rural Workers' Wages, 30 kb
Rural Poverty Rate Declines, While Family Income Grows
The poverty rate for rural persons declined from 1997 to1998, and rural median family income rose in 1998. The family income of persons in poor families declined considerably, while it grew or changed little for persons in the higher income groups. A sizable share of the rural poor families had at least one worker. Poor rural workers often worked part-time, tended to live in female-headed families, and seldom had more than a high school education. Rural working poor families relied more on benefits from assistance programs and less on family earnings income than working nonpoor families. For more information, contact: Elizabeth M. Dagata, edagata@ERS.USDA.gov.
Rural Poverty Rate Declines, While Family Income Grows, 30 kb
Food Stamp and Family Assistance Benefits Sharply Decline in the Post-Welfare-Reform Era
Influenced by a robust economy, growth rates in overall per capita transfers slowed from about 5 percent per year in the early 1990's to 2-3 percent annually in metro and nonmetro areas between 1994 and 1997. The patterns of growth and decline differed across program categories and individual programs, especially the income maintenance category. Per capita transfers for family (cash) assistance and food stamp benefits sharply declined in both metro and nonmetro areas. Food stamp benefits declined more rapidly in metro than nonmetro areas, while benefits for family assistance declined more rapidly in nonmetro than metro areas. In 1997, government transfer programs accounted for 21 percent of nonmetro personal income, compared with 14.7 percent of metro personal income. For more information, contact: Peggy J. Cook, pcook@ERS.USDA.gov.
Food Stamp and Family Assistance Benefits Sharply Decline in the Post-Welfare-Reform Era, 469 kb
Unique Housing Challenges Face Rural America and Its Low-Income Workers
Compared with typical urban housing, housing in rural America is inferior in physical quality and size. While rural households spend a smaller share of their income on housing, they less often live in crowded conditions, and are more satisfied with their home and neighborhood. Low-income rural households that depend on employment earnings for most of their income are more likely to have housing difficulties. For more information, contact: James Mikesell, pcook@ERS.USDA.gov or George Wallace, gwallace@ers.usda.gov.
Unique Housing Challenges Face Rural America and Its Low-Income Workers, 23 kb
Prevalence of Hunger Declines in Rural Households
The proportion of rural households in which people were hungry at times because there was not enough money for food declined somewhat from 1995 to 1998. However, the proportion that were food insecure--that is, they were not consistently and dependably able to get enough food for an active and healthy life--was about the same in 1998 as in 1995. Single-parent families and racial and ethnic minorities had rates of food insecurity and hunger higher than the national average. For more information, contact: Mark Nord, marknord@ERS.USDA.gov or F. Joshua Winicki, jwinicki@ers.usda.gov.
Prevalence of Hunger Declines in Rural Households, 31 kb
|
Download 
