
Despite a widespread decline in rural poverty in the 1990s, a quarter of nonmetro counties lost population over the decade. Poverty rates were no higher in these counties than in counties without population loss. We identify remote (from metro areas), thinly settled counties as “frontier” counties, arguing that the lack of access to services and the small labor market sizes in these counties inhibits the inmigration of people and businesses, particularly in the absence of compensating natural amenities. In two of every three low-amenity frontier counties, population loss exceeded 5 percent in 1990-2000. Most of these counties are farming-dependent, less because of their abundance of agriculture than because of their dearth of other economic activities. Some low-amenity frontier counties did gain population in the past decade. We look at these exceptions to see if there are rural development lessons to be learned.
Community/Rural/Urban Development
Community/Rural/Urban Development
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
