Rural-Urban Research and Extension Programs: An Integrating Proposal

Abstract

H ISTORICALLY a dichotomous rural-urban philosophy has characterized the United States social, economic and political environment. This traditional framework serves as a basis for contemporary rural and urban research and extension programs. But in many ways this dichotomous framework has hampered past research and extension programs in both the rural and urban sectors and promises to hamper future efforts even more. The underlying premise here, contrary to this philosophic framework, is that problems of economic efficiency can best be . viewed in terms of the interactions between these sectors. It follows that public research and extension efforts should be problem, rather than sector, oriented.With the land-grant college system and the cooperative extension service, an elaborate institutional structure has developed in the rural sector. The benefits to the agricultural sector from these institutions are wellknown and need not be detailed here. On the other hand, because the importance of allocating research resources to urban problems has been recognized only more recently, public urban research is relatively new. Consequently, the urban sector lacks an institutional framework for developing and implementing a comprehensive program to deal with urban problems.Yet the need is increasing for urban institutions oriented toward research and extension in such areas as adult education and retraining, city-county planning, and consumer marketing information and protection. Currently some of these needs are not being adequately met while others are fulfilled by various unrelated-and often uncoordinatedagencies. A single coordinated institution, however, could fulfill the needs of a variety of urban programs, such as home management services, urban safety programs and those listed above, much as the agricultural extension service now serves the rural sector.This paper discusses the implications of the traditional urban-rural philosophy for public research policy, suggests means of reconciliation o The authors are grateful to the faculty and graduate students of the Department of Agricultural Economics and H. Struck of the Department of English, Michigan State University, for helpful criticisms and suggestions durmg the development of this paper. J. N. UHL AND G. E. ROSSMILLER are graduate research assistants in agricultural economics, Michigan State University.

Some Aspects of Rural-Urban Interdependence: Economic-Geographical View

“…In the 1950s, communities (urban and rural) according to Patrick (2010) citing research Uhl and Rossmiller (1964) and Bradshaw (2000) indicates that were seen to be detached from their neighbors. The economies of rural and urban communities were separate and distinct.…”