Duration: 10/01/2002 to 09/30/2007

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

Statement of Issues and Justification

Rural regions and communities are transforming rapidly as a result of increased inmigration, changes in age and ethnic composition, and related social and economic restructuring. The rapidity and magnitude of these changes, and the related changes in the social and economic life of the communities, presents unique challenges to policymakers, businesses, community leaders, and individuals. The research proposes to provide a comprehensive picture of the changing nature of the rural U.S. population and the impact of that change on social and economic opportunities. The project consists of an integrated set of studies that analyze critical demographic trends and draw conclusions about their implications for local economic and social life. Need as indicated by stakeholders Demographic analysis produces critical information on the social and economic conditions of our rapidly changing rural society. Sound public policy requires a clear understanding of how rural areas change and which corresponding programs and services need to be enhanced or modified. Detailed and competent analyses can best assist policy makers and other stakeholders to understand evolving social issues where public intervention might be needed. Rural places in the U.S. are currently experiencing several dramatic demographic shifts. First, the ethnic composition of rural counties is transforming at an accelerated pace that tests local community officials' abilities to respond with appropriate social service policies. In rural areas of the western U.S., for example, the absolute number and relative proportion of Hispanics are increasing more rapidly than in metropolitan areas. In addition, the nature of the Hispanic population itself is changing. Over the past decade, the Latino population in the western U.S. has become proportionately Mexican and increasingly Cuban and Puerto Rican (Berry and Kirschner, forthcoming). Second, the gradual aging of the rural population leaves growing numbers of economically vulnerable rural places with unbalanced age structures that threaten their viability. At the same time, as baby boomers age and move increasingly to rural counties with amenities and to retirement communities, their influence and demands on rural services will significantly increase. Third, the continued rural population rebound, from decline early in the twentieth century to more recent population increases has altered the landscape of rural communities. As these trends continue, their effects will test policy makers', and whole communities, abilities to balance the political and economic demands made by populations competing for scarce resources and whose goals and interests are distinct. New Hispanic residents tend to be relatively young and often in their child-rearing years. Retirees, on the other hand, who historically are among the most politically active citizens, are unlikely to vote for higher taxes to support schools and other social services from which they benefit least. Thus, the migration of Hispanic populations and new retirees into rural counties may present political, economic, and social challenges. In order to anticipate and adapt to change, various stakeholders have more specific interests. Citizen-leaders, officials and agencies that support local or regional planning efforts require general trend analyses for various types of communities. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and other federal and state rural service agencies need insight into the community challenges, changing natural resource needs, and changing land-use patterns that are a result of population redistribution, size, and composition. Many public agencies and civic groups need population change insights and counsel to efficiently support local management efforts and develop strategies tailored to their individual communities. The impact of population change in rural communities will become more dramatic as groups with the largest demographic weight take a growing interest in residing in rural areas. Rapid and substantial changes in rural population size and composition are both a cause and consequence of local economic opportunities and public institutions, and they directly affect the ability of communities to provide essential goods and services. At the same time, current fertility, mortality and migration patterns influence future jobs, services, and infrastructure. Rigorous and systematic analysis of the determinants and consequences of rural population change promotes successful regional and community-level planning and development. Such analysis enables policy makers and other stakeholders to successfully anticipate and adapt to change. Importance of the research and consequences of not conducting it: One of every five Americans lives in one of the 2,285 non-metropolitan counties, which translates into 55 million people living on 83 percent of the Nation's land. Rural residents populate every region of the country from counties bordering suburbs to remote and isolated areas. Rural areas encompass agricultural regions as well as areas where workers depend entirely on manufacturing or tourism. They include prosperous areas with rapidly growing populations as well as chronically depressed locales experiencing population decline. Accordingly, this research plan is national in scope, employs a comparative perspective, and relies on a multidisciplinary research team located throughout the U.S. to ensure its familiarity to diverse rural demographic, social, and economic settings. At the same time, the researchers recognize that the needs of individual groups and regions can differ greatly.Broad patterns of rural and small town population change mask enormous spatial variation among groups and places. These variations have important implications for rural policy development and administration. For example, the relatively slight population gains of Central Plains states have resulted in their loss of congressional representation as increasingly urbanized southern and coastal states gain population at much more rapid rates. Since Central Plains states are far more agricultural, and the coastal states more industrial and service-oriented, federal programs, such as the pending economic stimulus legislation, are likely to place less emphasis on agriculture and more on other industrial sectors. Findings, insights, and implications of this research will be essential for planning, policy-making and program assessments that support sustainable rural communities and promote residents' quality of life. Local, regional, state and federal government and non-governmental organization (NGO) personnel depend not only on current descriptive information on population trends but also on interpretations of such trends (e.g., Are there more or fewer school-age children? Are those children English speaking or might they require English as a second language instruction?) Such information allows for faster understanding and anticipation of present and future public needs. Beyond general guidance for strategic decisions and program design, the need for demographic analysis extends to informing decisions and judgments of direct service providers. These include educational administrators, cooperative extension personnel, law enforcement personnel, medical and welfare workers, journalists, clergy, and others influential in community affairs. Overlapping with such efforts are members of business and public utility sectors that make key contributions to civic well-being and adapt to non-metropolitan demographic shifts using market data, needs assessments, and projections to plan and manage their organizations and enterprises. As a result, some extension and agricultural experiment station work will involve discussion with established stakeholder groups (e.g. project team members interact routinely with advisory committees, farm organizations, county commissioners, and state rural development councils). A sub-group of the project team is preparing funding proposals that would enable a panel of information users to be involves. While public and private decision-makers can benefit from demographic analyses attuned to community conditions and challenges, our research plan also incorporates stakeholders' data needs. A panel of potential information users will be identified, who will then be involved in the research design and interpretation and dissemination of findings. Summary materials and workshops will be developed to prepare users to better identify data needs and sources, interpret available numbers in comparative ways, and assess implications for action in their own contexts. The summary materials and workshops, as well as the large data set from which these materials will be developed, will be guided by this input. It is important to note that this research is national in scope with a fieldwork emphasis in the west because (1) the unique challenges in the west have magnified the importance of understanding the interplay of demographic, social and economic variables and (2) because of the location of project members whose interests are most central to western issues. As already noted, the west is the fastest growing region of the U.S., and it is also becoming more diverse than it has ever been. It is a region with rapidly growing retirement populations, but also with a large influx of young migrants in the childbearing years. Yet the region does not 'stand alone'. Rather, social and economic change in other regions affects the west as much as change in the west influences the rest of the nation. For example, the population and economic growth of the south has meant that, even though the west is increasing more rapidly, the relative political strength of some, particularly rural, parts of the west have declined. Thus, although the project is national in scope, some of the most dramatic population, social and economic change has occurred in the rural parts of the west so that the outcome of this research is most critical to this region. Technical feasibility of the research We foresee few technical obstacles to prevent us from accomplishing the four research objectives outlined herein. The members of the committee have strong research and publication records as well as extensive networks of public and private stakeholders. Many have created or worked with large databases similar to the one we propose assembling in this proposal. Technical feasibility is enhanced by access to many experienced researchers of varied academic disciplines, the resources of affiliated institutes and universities, and access to data from Census 2000, the new American Community Survey, the Bureau of Economic Analysis, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its 1997 Economic Census. The technical feasibility of the research is enhanced by the release of the 2000 Census data, the 1997 Economic Census, and employment and income data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The American Community Survey is also being released and the researchers will be able to take advantage of the newly available data during the last two years of the study. These current data will be merged with earlier census data that will further strengthen the research committee's ability to examine important demographic processes and associate them with changes in local economy and society. The research will include aggregate level, comparative cross-sectional analysis of population change and redistribution. Advantages of doing research as a multi-state effort Rural population analysis is an important, but relatively small, branch of applied demography whose scholars and practitioners are necessarily dispersed throughout the country. By combining the efforts of researchers in a multi-state, multi-disciplinary committee, the obstacle of scholarly fragmentation can be overcome. Researchers and stakeholders familiar with various local/regional contexts across the nation can offer important interpretive insights. The multi-state approach allows each researcher to take advantage of the unique and diverse skills of all committee members and affiliated institutes that from the various regions of the country, particularly Western states. These include the sociology departments and population centers at Colorado State University, Cornell University, Texas A&M University, Washington State University, University of Idaho, University of Wisconsin at Madison, and Utah State University. Geographers with the USDA's Economic Research Service and Northern Colorado's Department of Geography provide the research committee with excellent geographic information systems capabilities. Committee members from Colorado State University, Washington State University, and CSREES, among others, have extension expertise and provide the group with a solid understanding of stakeholder issues and the planning requirements of state, county and regional agencies. Finally, the group enjoys excellent relations with professionals at the Bureau of the Census, including an affiliated collaborator. The multi-state approach will also enhances knowledge of stakeholders who can benefit from research-based demographic information. Scientists from different states and regions will be able to pool their knowledge of public and private decision makers with rural development responsibilities. The resulting listing will help to target educational activities both regionally and at the national level. In other words, the multi-state, multi-disciplinary aspect of the research is key to successfully completing the objectives of the project. Likely impacts from successfully completing work Several outcomes of the work are anticipated. We anticipate producing a series of issue-briefs that will be posted on Internet sites, numerous peer-reviewed journal articles, and perhaps a book-length monograph. We will ensure that potential users of the information, identified in the research design phase, will be actively involved in the interpretation and dissemination of our findings. In addition, we will develop summary materials and workshop procedures that prepare stakeholders to understand basic demographic processes, better identify their own data needs and sources, interpret data in multiple ways, and assess implications for action in their own contexts. Without the inclusion of an extension segment, the research loses much of its power. The stakeholders must guide the researchers to the types of data most needed by those same stakeholders. Thus, one impact of the research will be increased communication between stakeholders and researchers. Another will be the development of sets of materials that will be very useful to stakeholders. Each of these, as well as those noted above, will enhance the research process and will enhance policy planning by stakeholders and potential users.

Related, Current and Previous Work

Linkages between demographic change and rural community development have long been an area of investigation for researchers in the social sciences. Empirical studies on rural population change cover a lot of ground; one computer search of the CRIS database, for example, found 208 studies produced since 1990 that included ?rural population? in their titles. Because rural population trends differ so widely across the U.S., most studies cannot produce ?one-size-fits-all? explanations that are adequate for all regions and circumstances (Rayer and Brown 2001). Recent issues of the journal Rural America (formerly Rural Development Perspectives) focused separately on the unique demographic and economic conditions affecting communities in the Great Plains (Rowley 1998), the West (Cromartie 1999), and the South (Gibbs 2001). In contrast to national-level studies, this regional perspective more effectively connects individual community circumstances with larger economic, social, and demographic developments, and bolsters the case for a comprehensive project that involves persons in various regions who are sensitive to local conditions. Early on, the theoretical foundations of rural demographic research were established using both neoclassical economic theory (Sjaasted 1962, DaVanzo 1983) and the human ecology framework (Hawley 1968, Frisbie and Poston 1978). The former emphasizes individual decision-making and the role of human capital, while the latter places greater emphasis on the role of community in the migration process. Economists view migration as an attempt on the part of individuals to maximize their human capital, moving from low-income to high-income regions and benefiting the whole economy as a result (Greenwood 1981). Human ecologists conceptualize migration as a communal response to organizational, environmental, and technological pressures, as both a cause and an outcome of local community organization (Brown 2002). In recent years, both approaches have been used to study several aspects of rural demographic change, including the impact of migration on the demographic structure of rural communities (Fuguitt and Heaton 1995, Fuguitt, et al. 1998, Johnson and Beale 1998); amenity-based migration in the West (von Reichert and Rudzitis 1992, Vias 1999); rural poverty and migration (Nord et al., 1995); the economic impacts of population decline on various economic sectors, including wholesale trade and services (Johnson 1985, Adamchak et al. 1999); and other aspects of rural need, including changes in the farm sector and rural health care (Glasgow 2000, Thompson et al. 2000). In his presidential address to the Rural Sociological Society, Brown (2002) encouraged the adoption of a broader theoretical framework that views migration and other demographic events in the context of the social relationships and institutional structures in which persons are embedded. The connections between rural population change and community well being are better understood when individuals are seen as embedded in households, households in communities, communities in regions, and so on (Goldscheider 1987, Massey 1990). For instance, the decision to move to or from a rural community, and the choice of a specific destination, is not likely to be an individual matter, but to occur within a family and to involve some degree of collective decision-making (Stack 1997). This proposal and its four objectives stems in part from integrated work on rural population change and community development that was produced by the WCC-084 committee and its predecessor, W-118 (Brown and Wardwell 1980, Jobes et al. 1992, Wardwell and Copp 1997, Cromartie 1999). These publications are examples of the type of policy-relevant, contextual analysis described by Brown (2002) that should form the basis for social policy. For instance, the experience of local areas with population turbulence was a major focus of Population Change in the Rural West: 1975-1990 (Wardwell and Copp 1997). The nine studies examined factors outlining costs and benefits of population change in rural western areas over 15 years at the individual, community, and regional level. Economic change in the Pacific Northwest, for example, showed that both adjacent and nonadjacent nonmetropolitan counties grew in population, and yet they experienced economic restructuring differently (Cook 1997). The proposed research, through its multistate, multidisciplinary approach, coupled with substantial stakeholder input, will broaden this regional perspective to the current demographic situation and to other parts of the U.S.

Objectives

1. Describe the recent redistribution of population between rural and urban areas, examine the dynamics of these changes (births, deaths, internal and international migration), and investigate their social and economic determinants, paying attention to areas of persistent out-migration, rapidly developing areas, and the urban-rural interface.
   
2. Examine the effects of changes in official classification schemes (including newly created micropolitan areas and urban clusters) on the validity of commonly used rural definitions (e.g., nonmetropolitan), and consequently on the changes in the size and composition of the rural population.
   
3. Analyze the growth and decline of at-risk populations in rural America, including the elderly, the working poor, immigrants, and racial and ethnic minorities.
   
4. Investigate the impacts of changes in population size and composition on local quality of life, economic security, and access to essential goods and services.
   
5. 
   

Methods

Methods - General: All four objectives share methodological approaches and strategies for joint planning and data sharing. The research primarily consists of aggregate-level, comparative, and cross-sectional analyses of population change and redistribution using data from Census 2000, previous censuses, the American Community Survey and other sources. Most studies will be carried out at the county level or an aggregation of counties. Committee members will collaborate to build a single database that all members can access. Some aspects of the research may incorporate other levels of geography such as data for places, census tracts, or block groups. These data building efforts will be coordinated to avoid duplication of efforts. In addition, these current data will be merged with earlier data to further strengthen the research committee's ability to examine historical demographic processes and associate them with significant local economic and social changes. Each collaborator will pursue research in their area of expertise (e.g., migration, fertility, aging, community change, economic restructuring) using similar sets of measures, timelines, geographic breakdowns, and statistical tools whenever possible. For instance, analysis of the "working-age population" might consistently focus on 25-64 year olds. The committee will establish a shared time frame, including a comparison of trends in the 1980's and 1990's. Regional breakdowns will use the four U.S. Census regions or an alternative scheme that also separates the Great Plains from the Corn Belt or the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific Northwest from the Western Region. Using this uniform framework, we will produce a set of core outputs that will provide basic, synoptic information about rural-urban population change during the last two decades of the 20th Century. Where appropriate, survey research, case studies, focus groups, and other types of analyses will elaborate the information obtained from the aggregate level demographic analysis. These more intensive approaches will strengthen and deepen explanations and provide additional, localized meaning to the aggregate, more quantitative information. In addition, committee members will be encouraged to engage in other rural demographic studies using other data sources and methodological approaches to extend the research beyond the descriptive framework. Methods - Specific: Objective 1: Compile and link data sets, in conjunction with the needs of data users groups. Describe the changing distribution and composition of the rural population, the analyses will use a set of uniform demographic accounting methods, including rates and ratios, standardization, and group and subgroup decomposition (e.g. race and age categories, standard industrial codes). Objectives 2 and 3: In the field of rural demography and in general studies of rural economic and social conditions, county-based analysis has dominated research to the extent that "nonmetro" has evolved as the standard classification scheme for studying rural and small town issues. Indeed, in this document, as elsewhere, "nonmetro" and "rural" are used interchangeably for convenience, although they are in reality quite different, overlapping concepts. With the introduction of micropolitan areas and urban clusters, the Office of Management and Budget and the U.S. Census Bureau have enlarged the range of rural definitions in ways that improve our understanding of economic trends and better target clients for rural-based programs. Both are expansions of the existing concept of an urban hierarchy to cities and towns of less than 50,000. Under this objective we will examine the validity of these new conceptions of rurality and analyze how they relate to each other and to previous official definitions. This will result in a consistent and possibly improved definition of rural and urban, which may allow research by various committee members to be integrated in a study of geographic variability of rural population dynamics. However, it most likely will spawn complementary studies using different geographic building blocks and methodological approaches. We will use geographic information technology (GIS) to visualize and explore the geographic variability of demographic and socioeconomic phenomena. As noted above, demographic change varies significantly across and within regions. One of the most important uses of GIS is to clarify these spatial differentials and to suggest ways that geographic problems might be ameliorated. A second use of GIS will be to be to highlight the ways that spatial differences between places affect demographic change. Objectives 1,3,and 4: Exploratory data analysis and multivariate statistical techniques will be employed to investigate the determinants and consequences of changes in the size and composition of rural populations. Aggregate level analysis is frequently affected by spatial autocorrelation; we will use the emerging tools of spatial regression analysis to ensure that parameter estimation is carried out with models specified to account for autocorrelation in the data.

Measurement of Progress and Results

Outputs

• The committee is uniquely situated to produce the first comprehensive, book-length monograph on the demography of rural America at the turn of the century. The monograph will contain basic analyses on how the rural U.S. population has grown and changed during the last two decades of the twentieth century. The anticipated book will help to frame rural development policy at the national and regional levels by identifying the main directions of change, where such changes are occurring, and their implications for the well being of rural people and communities. By providing a structure for more targeted, issue-specific studies, our research will outline an agenda that will serve as an essential starting point for future research on rural demographic change and rural areas in general. Core topics to be included, in depth will be population distribution, changing patterns of fertility, mortality and migration, age-sex composition, race and ethnicity, household structure, labor force composition and employment, education, the farming population, and income and poverty and other emerging issues.
• To make this information quickly and easily accessible to policy makers, stakeholders, and others responsible for managing rural development, we will publish policy-related "issue briefs" that derive from our research. These shorter pieces will be disseminated widely and will be posted on the Committee's own website.
• A synthesis of the short articles, from Result 2, will be published as a chart book on rural population change, including maps, graphs, and other visual representations of demographic data and analysis.
• We anticipate producing a large number of articles in refereed journals covering specific substantive issues related to the causes and consequences of rural demographic change. The members of this committee have strong records of scholarly publication; as a result we anticipate that the results of the research will be disseminated widely.

Outcomes or Projected Impacts

• Demographic analysis is essential for effective public policies and development practices in rural communities. The research proposed here does not evaluate the operation of particular public policies or practices. Rather, it provides information about the social and economic context within which public policy operates in our changing rural society. Economic development policy provides a clear example. Information on rural residents' changing income sources invariably draws attention to growing (or declining) industries, and as a decreasing share of rural residents continue to be employed in the agricultural sector, demographic research implies that rural economic development must consider a broad range of non-agricultural industries.
• In contrast, research on particular regions such as the Great Plains indicates greater farm dependency, suggesting that agricultural development policy can act as an effective economic strategy. The demographic analyses provided by this research provides contextual information that will help public policy makers and local residents to appreciate the need for programs to address important social problems and indicates where such public intervention is most needed.

Milestones

(2003): Successful accomplishment of the project's overall objectives first relies upon discussions with stakeholders and the design of a linked database accessible to all committee members via the Internet as discussed in our first objective. Both tasks are estimated to be completed at the end of the first grant year.

(2004): The Census Bureau's forthcoming classification system of metropolitan and nonmetropolitan places will be evaluated relative to previous definitions of urban and rural to learn whether it more accurately differentiates between areas. Based on the success or failure with this new system, the most appropriate classification schema will be adopted and applied uniformly throughout our research. The evaluation of these classification systems will occur after discussions and preliminary analyses. Completion of this piece of the analysis is anticipated concurrently with the development of the database. This is estimated for completion in late 2004.Initial issue briefs will be prepared.

(2005): Identify area and issue-specific studies to be undertaken using the initial descriptive and comparative analyses of growth and change of rural populations at the national and regional levels. This will serve as a foundation for our monograph and issue-briefs.

(2006): The following three years, from 2004 through 2006, we expect committee members will conduct a series of core demographic studies, as outlined in the Outputs section above, which will appear as issue briefs and manuscripts for peer-reviewed journals. Later studies will take advantage of the American Community Survey that will begin providing data on smaller population areas in 2006. The production and coordination of the proposed book-length monograph will begin at the early stages of the grant and will extend through the five-year period. Later studies will take advantage of the American Community Survey that will begin providing data on smaller population areas in 2006.

(2007): Workshops conducted to facilitate data use by practitioners will occur at the end of the grant period. The final year will also include the wrap up of the monograph, short paper series, and chart book.

(0):0

Projected Participation

View Appendix E: Participation

Outreach Plan

At the outset of the project, representatives from a nationwide selection of stakeholder groups will be invited to attend a series of working sessions with project researchers. These stakeholders will include state, regional and local government personnel and private sector decision-makers, non-governmental rural development professionals, and cooperative extension professionals. They will offer insights and identify their groups' needs for new information. Some may affiliate with the research partnership. The input from these working sessions will help the committee to formulate practical research questions to focus project analyses. Stakeholder affiliates may be invited to meet again near the end of the grant period to review and discuss findings, offer contextual insights, and suggest further analytical needs. The constituent groups will be able to focus the framing of several issue briefs to be co-written by teams of project researchers and interested stakeholder affiliates. Methods of dissemination will include mailings, website publication, use of listservs and website dialogue sessions, professional forums, and, possibly, professional development workshops. Books, articles, publications, and coordinated presentations at academic conferences (e.g. Rural Sociological Society, Association of American Geographers, Population Association of America, etc.) will be utilized to disseminate the research to scholars. Interaction with government associations, such as the National Association of Counties, will disseminate our research findings to people most able to effectively use the information. Finally, we will utilize extension services to disseminate information using many of the above stratagems.

Organization/Governance

Our technical committee will be organized according to the current structure of the WCC-084. Currently a Chair and Vice Chair are elected annually from attendees at the annual project meeting. The Chair coordinates the activities of the project and facilitates general meetings. The Vice Chair serves in this capacity when the chair is unable to do so. A Program Coordinator organizes the committee's annual meetings and conducts educational sessions for the group. A listserv, based at Colorado State University and supervised by a listserv administrator, facilitates interaction among committee members. During the week of September 11, 2001, when the committee was forced to cancel its annual meeting, the listserv acted as the substitute "site". Thus, it is already functioning as the principal venue of discourse among committee members in lieu of face-to-face interaction. A Local Arrangements Coordinator is responsible for the planning of each annual meeting. A web master will be designated to coordinate the planned project's website. All officers are to be elected for at least two-year terms to provide continuity. Administrative guidance will be provided by an assigned Administrative Advisor and a CSREES Representative.

Literature Cited

Adamchak, D. J., L. E. Bloomquist, K. Bausman, and R. Qureshi. 1999. ?Consequences of population change for retail/wholesale sector employment in the nonmetropolitan Great Plains, 1950-1996.? Rural Sociology 64(1): 92-112. Berry, E.H. and A.R.Kirschner. 2002. The Changing Face of the West: The Rapid Growth of Latinos in Western States. Western Rural Development Center, Changing Face of the West Series. Logan, UT. Brown, D. L. and J. M. Wardwell, eds. 1980. New Directions in Urban-Rural Migration: The Population Turnaround in Rural America. New York: Academic Press, Inc. Cook, A. K. 1997. ?Population and economic change in the Pacific Northwest? in J. Wardwell and J. Copp (eds.) Population Change in the Rural West: 1975-1990. Md.: University Press of America. Cromartie, J. B., ed. 1999. Rural Development Perspectives: Special Issue on the Rural West 14 (2). DaVanzo, J. 1983. "Repeat migration in the United States: Who moves back and who moves on?" Review of Economics and Statistics 65: 552-559. Frisbie, W. P. and Poston, D. L. 1978. Sustenance Organization and Migration in Nonmetropolitan America. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press. Fuguitt, G. and T.B. Heaton. 1995. ?The impact of migration on the nonmetropolitan population age structure.? Population Research and Policy Review 14: 215-232. Fuguitt, G., C. Beale, J. A. Fulton, and R. M. Gibson. 1998. ?Recent population trends in nonmetropolitan cities and villages: from the turnaround, through reversal, to the rebound? Research in Rural Sociology and Development 7: 1-21. Gibbs, R. M., ed. 2001. Rural America: Special Issue on the Rural South 15 (4). Glasgow, N. 2000. ?Rural/Urban patterns of aging and caregiving in the United States.? Journal of Family Issues 21(5): 611-31. Goldscheider, C. 1987. "Migration and social structure: Analytic issues and comparative perspectives in developing nations." Sociological Forum 2 (4): 674-696. Greenwood, M. 1981. Migration and Economic Growth in the United States. New York: Academic Press. Hawley, A. 1968. ?Human ecology?. In International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, D. Sills (ed.), pp. 328-32. New York: Macmillan. Jobes, P. C., W. F. Stinner, and J. M. Wardwell, eds. 1992. Community, Society, and Migration: Noneconomic Migration in America. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. Johnson, K. M. 1985. The Impact of Population Change on Business Activity in Rural America. Rural Studies Series. Boulder CO: Westview. Johnson, K. M. and Calvin Beale. 1998. ?The rural rebound.? Wilson Quarterly 12 (Spring): 16-27. Johnson, K.M. and G.V. Fuguitt. 2000. ?Continuity and change in rural migration patterns, 1950-1995.? Rural Sociology 65(1): 27-45. Massey, D. 1990. "Social structure, household strategies, and the cumulative causation of migration." Population Index 56 (1): 3-26. Nord. M., Luloff, A. E., and Jensen, L. 1995. Migration and the spatial concentration of poverty. Rural Sociology 60: 399-415. Rayer, S. and D. L. Brown. 2001. ?Geographic diversity of inter-county migration in the United States, 1980-1995.? Population Research and Policy Review 20: 229-52. Rowley, T. D., ed. 1998. Rural Development Perspectives: Special Issue on the Great Plains 13 (1). Sjaasted, L. A. 1962. "The costs and returns of human migration." Journal of Political Economy 70: 80-93. Stack, C. B. 1996. Call to Home: African Americans Reclaim the Rural South. New York: Basic Books. Thompson, N. A.D., J. Dunkelberger, J. L.Johnson, and Q. Rosser. 2000. ?How Alabama compares with the Southeast and the U.S.? Highlights of Agricultural Research 47(3): 22-24. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station. Vias, A. C. 1999. ?Jobs follow people in the rural Rocky Mountain West.? Rural Development Perspectives 14:14-23. Von Reichert, C. and G. Rudzitis. 1992. "Multinomial logistic models explaining income changes of migrants to high-amenity counties." Review of Regional Studies 22: 25-42. Wardwell, J. M. and J. H. Copp, eds. 1997. Population Change in the Rural West: 1975-1990. Md.: University Press of America.

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

CO, ID, MO, ND, NH, NV, NY, PA, UT, WA, WI

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

Economic Research Service (ERS), Middlebury College, other, other:LA, University of Montana, USDA/ERS