Researchers and policy makers depend on two federal systems when defining urban and rural. One, designed by the U.S. Census Bureau, separates the territory of the nation into urban and rural. Its intent is to differentiate urban and rural. The other, designed under the leadership of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), focuses on the integration of urban and rural within metropolitan and micropolitan areas. Forgetting the distinction between separation and integration is dangerous, for example, when (mis)using the OMB system as if it differentiated between urban and rural. At stake is the misunderstanding of rural conditions, the misdirection of federal programs and funds, and a breakdown of communication that confuses people. This article presents two alternatives that can strengthen the foundations of research and policy and uses one of them to analyze rural distress and prosperity. Much can be gained by using these better rural definitions to replicate important research to see whether key findings hold true and to review eligibility requirements and funding procedures to determine whether government programs are reaching the rural people and places they are intended to serve.

No abstract

No abstract

Rural North America has undergone a major economic transformation over the past century due to labor-saving technological progress, reductions in transport costs, and rising household incomes. The results are greater rural economic diversity, selected rural population decline, increased rural-urban interdependence, emergent exurban areas, and amenity-led rural growth. We summarize key research insights and provide a selected review of the economics literature over the past 100 years with a focus on this economic transformation of rural places, its implications for rural communities, and key modeling innovations and applications. The many important contributions by agricultural economists are highlighted.

More than 300 rural counties are more prosperous than the nation. Each has lower unemployment rates, lower poverty rates, lower school dropout rates, and better housing conditions than the nation. Prosperous counties tend to have more educated populations, more diverse economies, more private non-farm jobs, more farmers and government farm payments, more creative class occupations, and more equal income distributions. They have fewer African-American, American Indian, or Hispanic residents and fewer recent immigrants. Some findings support what many rural people believe to be true: civically engaged religious groups and other identities that bind people together can really matter. Other results contradict conventional wisdom. For instance, climate and distances to cities and major airports, are relatively unimportant. Focusing on prosperity, instead of growth or competitiveness, provides new insights into rural conditions and prospects.