We recently came upon a study conducted by the Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire dealing with trends across America’s rural communities. We find the study to be a fascinating glimpse at the concerns facing modern rural America and a useful tool in understanding real estate patterns in these areas.
The study provides an interesting look at behaviors in rural locations in four socio-economic groups. These are defined as “Amenity Rich” (generally areas with lots of growth and upwardly mobile-young couples moving in), “Declining Resource-Dependent” (communities with periods of economic decline, with low-skill jobs and smaller populations), “Chronically Poor” (an area with generations of decline and lacking in strong infrastructure) and communities with “both Amenity-driven Growth and Resource-based Decline” (these are areas with a mixture of a weakening economy and the potential for growth).
The study is fairly lengthy, weighing in at a whopping 34 pages, so we encourage you to take a look at it for yourselves, but here are some of the highlights and key points covered.
One of the factors that appear to be affecting rural communities across the board is the movement of younger residents. That is, those areas that are declining, amenity-rich but declining, and chronically poor have little to keep young couples or families looking to raise families. They tend to migrate to the amenity-rich areas that have safe environments and rising property values. This leaves a typically aging community in the other three types of rural communities, and as a result many of the businesses close down and publicly funded projects suffer.
The study found that in declining or poor places, only 1 out of every 5 people moved there in the last five years. Between 73 and 76 percent of those taking the survey in these areas had parents who also grew up in that area. In contrast, almost half of the population in amenity-rich neighborhoods has recently moved there. Only 22 percent of those surveyed in these areas had parents from there.
Interestingly, the majority of those surveyed in all four rural categories own their own homes, although as much as 30 percent of homes in amenity-rich areas were second homes. Those moving into amenity-rich areas cite natural beauty as a factor in their decision to move there, while it seems to be a less important factor for those in other regions.
The study also takes a look at how environmental changes are affecting rural lives (this is more of a concern in amenity and amenity-rich declining areas because they tend to be in geographic locals where weather changes are most strongly felt.). Other questions addressed are those of how members of the community get involved and what factors they consider to be most important to the livelihood of their community.
The study itself sums things up nicely:
“By and large, most respondents felt that quality of life, natural beauty, and family – three traditional strengths of rural life – were the most important reasons to stay. Conversely, opportunities for education, jobs and housing – generally the strong points of cities – were reasons for leaving in all counties but chronically poor areas. (pgs. 24-25)”
The study points out that there is no single solution for the problems presented and that each area of study had huge variations in economic and social interests and backgrounds. But it is important to begin to understand what people consider to be important factors in their lives.
All of the information in this article can be found in the study “Place Matters: Challenges and Opportunities in Four Rural Americas” authored by Lawrence C, Hamilton, Leslie R. Hamilton, Cynthia M. Duncan, and Chris R. Colocousis of the Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire.
Download it here: http://www.carseyinstitute.unh.edu/publications/Report_PlaceMatters.pdf
