Dennis M. Brown
Agriculture Information Bulletin Number 795
January 2005
Rural transportation has undergone significant changes
over the last 15 years. The booming economy of the mid-
to late 1990s, partly driven by expanded trade, has placed
strains on the domestic transportation infrastructure.
Deregulation and expanded State and local responsibilities
for surface transportation have affected all areas of
rural transportation—highways, passenger service
(including public transportation, intercity bus, passenger
rail, and passenger air), trucking, inland waterways,
and rail freight. The recent recession and heightened
security concerns have disrupted air transportation and
necessitated costly security provisions.
Although deregulation has lowered prices for passengers
nationwide, its effect on rural America has been mixed.
Increased Federal funding and greater State/local control
over those funds improved rural roads and expanded public
transportation in rural America. Under current legislation,
$217.9 billion was authorized for all Federal surface
transportation programs (highways, highway safety, and
public transportation) between 1998 and 2003, a 40.3-percent
increase over the prior 6-year period. Additional funding
for rural public transportation services is available
from various Federal agencies, with the Federal Coordinating
Council for Access and Mobility working to coordinate
services. Even so, in remote nonmetro areas, air service
quality has declined in recent years, with fewer flights
and reduced jet service. And cutbacks in bus service have
reduced the number of rural communities served by intercity
bus.
Rural Roads and Bridges Improve
in Quality
The 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency
Act (ISTEA) largely devolved Federal highway planning
to the States, which, along with local governments, own
the vast majority (97 percent in 2002) of roads. The 1998
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21)
reinforced many of the State and local transportation
roles laid out under ISTEA. Under ISTEA and TEA-21, largely
led by a booming national economy, traffic increased sharply.
Aided by increased Federal highway funding, the quality
of rural roads and bridges also generally improved.
The quality of roads in rural America generally increased
during the 1990s, with interstate highways improving the
most. The share of rural interstates (as measured by miles)
rated by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) in
poor or mediocre condition decreased from 35 percent in
1993 to 12.3 percent in 2002.
- Rural traffic grew by 29.8 percent (as measured by
vehicle miles traveled) from 1990 to 2002. During this
time, the national road network increased in length
by only about 2.6 percent, indicating that travel demand
is generally growing faster than the supply of highways,
especially in rapidly growing exurban areas.
- Overall, rural roads are in better condition than
those in urban areas. While less than 14 percent of
rural roads (as measured by miles) were in poor or mediocre
condition in 2002, some 29 percent of urban roads were
so classified. During the 1990s, rural bridges also
improved in quality. In 1993, 32.8 percent of the 456,000
rural roadway bridges in the Nation were rated by DOT
as deficient, compared with just 26 percent in 2003.
- States with the largest percentages of deficient
rural bridges are mostly clustered in and around the
Mississippi River and its tributaries and in parts of
the East Coast, where the bridge infrastructure is among
the oldest in the Nation.
Car Ownership Rates Are Higher in Rural Than in Urban
Areas
- Overall, 92.7 percent of rural households had access
to a car in 2000, compared with 88.9 percent of urban
households. However, a larger proportion of rural counties
are characterized by a high rate of “carlessness”
(at least double the average rate of carlessness) than
urban counties.
- More than 1.6 million rural households do not have
cars, with the proportion of carless households highest
in the South, Appalachia, the Southwest, and Alaska.
Highly carless rural communities are characterized by
persistent poverty and have high concentrations of Black,
Hispanic, or Native American residents.
- Nationwide, over 90 percent of individuals on public
assistance do not have a car. Rural residents without
access to cars are particularly dependent on public
transportation, especially in high poverty areas.
Rural America Has Gaps in Passenger
Transportation Network
During the 1990s, helped by increased Federal funding
provided under TEA-21, rural public transportation services
grew, with nonmetro providers offering 62 percent more
passenger trips, 93 percent more miles traveled, and 60
percent more vehicles (vans and buses) available. Still,
less than 10 percent of Federal funding for public transportation
goes to rural areas.
- Public transportation is available in 60 percent of
rural counties, with 28 percent of about 1,200 systems
offering only limited service (less than 25 trips taken
each year per carless household). With many Federal
programs for the disadvantaged contingent on public
transportation, rural areas without transit may be at
a disadvantage in addressing the mobility needs of the
elderly, handicapped, and poor.
- About two-thirds of rural systems operate in single
counties or are city/town in scope; only one out of
four rural transit providers operates in a multi-county
area. About 60 percent of rural providers are public
agencies, and roughly a third are nonprofit groups;
less than 5 percent are private companies or tribal
entities.
- Recognizing the particular need for public transportation
in poor places, the Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC)
grant program was implemented in 1998 to encourage development
of new transit services and expand existing routes for
low-income individuals seeking access to jobs. From
1998 to 2003, $750 million was authorized for JARC,
with $150 million allocated for rural areas.
- In 2000, 62 percent of rural public transportation
users were female, 31 percent were elderly, and 23 percent
were disabled.
- In recent years, local governments and nonprofit agencies
have developed strategies to address the limited mobility
options for low-income individuals in rural areas. One
popular approach has been the “Wheels to Work”
program, which offers low-income individuals the opportunity
to purchase cars through attractive auto loan financing
options.
Rural Intercity Bus Service Is Widespread Despite Cutbacks
- The number of rural communities served by long-distance
bus service declined sharply in the years following
deregulation in 1982. The intercity bus industry currently
serves about 4,300 locations, down from over 15,000
prior to deregulation, with many of the service discontinuations
concentrated in rural communities. Still, 89 percent
of the rural population is served by long-distance bus
service, the dominant mode of scheduled intercity passenger
transportation for most rural residents.
- States with the least rural access to bus service
(as measured by the number of rural residents residing
within the coverage area) are mainly in the Great Plains.
- Under TEA-21, the Federal Government requires that
each State spend at least 15 percent of its annual nonmetro
public transportation funding to support rural long-distance
bus service.
Rural Rail and Air Service Face Challenges
- Although the national rail network (run by Amtrak
and supplemented by the Alaska Railroad) stretches across
47 States, the majority of rural residents (almost 6
in 10) live outside of its service area. Of those rural
residents with any type of scheduled passenger service,
fewer than 1 percent have access to only rail (no bus
or air service).
- During the 1990s, with financial concerns mounting
at Amtrak, further cutbacks were made in the Nation’s
passenger rail network. Currently, fewer than 200 nonmetro
places are served by passenger rail service.
- Following September 11, 2001, the airline passenger
industry suffered a downturn, with smaller communities
especially hard hit. Overall service (as measured by
the number of flights) to small, non-hub airports dropped
19 percent between 2000 and 2003, with the Northeast
and Midwest suffering the largest declines as service
fell by about a third. Rural air service declines were
the smallest in the West (falling 9 percent).
- Following airline deregulation in 1978, the Federal
Government has supported passenger air service to some
smaller and more isolated communities through the Essential
Air Service (EAS) program, which provides subsidies
directly to airlines and to selected rural communities.
EAS currently serves about 135 rural destinations, mostly
in the West (including communities in Alaska).
States with the lowest coverage
of rural long-distance bus service, 2004 |
|
State |
Rural population |
Number of rural
residents with
bus service |
Percent of rural
residents with
bus service |
|
North Dakota
Nebraska
South Dakota
Montana
Wyoming
Kentucky
Iowa
Kansas |
343,379
685,274
481,959
506,692
259,459
2,191,907
1,548,051
1,066,777 |
|
169,161
404,462
288,663
333,314
181,837
1,544,441
1,166,380
804,784 |
|
49.3
59.0
59.9
65.8
70.1
70.5
75.3
75.4 |
|
Note:
Alaska and Hawaii not included. |
Booming Economy, Deregulation, and
Expanded Trade
Drive Freight Traffic
Deregulation in the rail freight and trucking industries,
combined with the Nation’s vibrant economy, led
to sharply increased freight traffic throughout the country
during the 1990s. Rail, trucking, and waterways have all
been affected, creating additional strains on the Nation’s
transportation infrastructure.
- Between 1990 and 2001, freight transport on the Nation’s
major railroads increased by nearly 45 percent. At the
same time, national rail system mileage decreased by
18 percent—largely the result of rail industry
consolidations. Consequently, rail capacity has been
severely strained in recent years, most notably during
a series of high-profile rail disruptions in the late
1990s, such as the service slowdowns resulting from
the 1996 Union Pacific-Southern Pacific merger. Agriculture
was among those industries most hurt by rail disruptions.
- Trucking industry deregulation in 1980, combined
with the strong economy of the 1990s, increased freight
demands on the Nation’s road network. Between
1990 and 2001, freight shipments moved by intercity
trucks increased 43 percent.
- International trade is also behind increased freight
shipments. U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico reached
a record high of $7.3 billion by 2002, a doubling in
value since passage of the 1994 North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Growth in north-south highway
traffic has created additional strains on the Nation’s
road network.
- Changing transportation demands have affected the
U.S. inland waterway system, a low-cost, efficient network
of 26,000 miles of navigable inland rivers and coastal
waterways, 275 locks, and over 9,100 commercial waterway
facilities (piers, wharves, and docks).
- In recent years, agricultural producers and barge
operators have voiced concerns about the poor state
of the locks and dams on the Upper Mississippi and Illinois
River systems. These systems were mostly constructed
between 1930 and 1950. Upgrading this infrastructure
will be costly, and no consensus currently exists on
how these costs will be met or how environmental concerns
can be addressed.
Definitions
and sources |
ERS Research on Transportation
For more information, go to the ERS Web site’s
briefing
room on Rural Transportation. For general
information about rural America, visit the Rural
Emphasis page. Other ERS briefing rooms of
interest include:
Measuring
Rurality
Race
and Ethnicity in Rural America
Rural
Income, Poverty, and Welfare
Rural
Industry
Rural
Labor and Education
Rural
Population and Migration
What Is Rural?
Data reported in this publication are based on
the metropolitan and nonmetropolitan definitions
provided by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) in 1993. Metropolitan areas contain: (1) core
counties with one or more central cities of at least
50,000 residents or with a Census Bureau-defined
urbanized area (and a total metro area population
of 100,000 or more), and (2) fringe counties that
are economically associated with core counties.
Nonmetropolitan counties are located outside the
boundaries of metro areas and have no cities with
50,000 or more residents. In 2003, OMB released
new metropolitan and nonmetropolitan definitions
based on the 2000 Census, but most data sources
used in this report have not yet incorporated these
definitions. The terms “rural” and “urban”
are used interchangeably with nonmetropolitan and
metropolitan.
Data Sources
This report draws upon the research of the Food
and Rural Economics Division of ERS. Data on individual
modes of transportation come from the U.S. Department
of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation
Statistics and the Federal Transit Administration.
The 2000 Census of Population provides information
on the rate of rural car ownership.
|
|