Persistent Poverty Counties

The number of counties with high concentrations of poverty has decreased dramatically over the last 30 years. In 1960, a total of 2,083 rural counties had 20 percent or more of their population living below the poverty level. By 1990, the number had shrunk to 765, a decline of nearly two-thirds and an indication of the remarkable reduction of poverty across rural America (note 4).

For 535 of those counties, however, poverty continues to be a long-term problem. The persistent poverty counties discussed here are those in which 20 percent or more of the population were below the poverty level in each of the years 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990. Actual 1990 poverty rates in these counties ranged from 20 to 63 percent with an average of 29 percent, compared with the nonmetro average rate of 18.3 percent. For many of these counties, there has been some reduction in poverty, although their poverty rate is still high enough to keep them in the persistently poor category.

These counties are heavily concentrated in the Southeast, Appalachia, and the Southwest, with others scattered on Native-American reservations in the North and West. The persistent poverty counties (24 percent of all nonmetro counties) contain 19 percent of the nonmetro population and 32 percent (2.7 million) of the nonmetro poor.

Map: Persistent poverty counties are concentrated in the Southeast, Southwest, and Appalachia.

As would be expected, income levels in poverty counties were considerably lower than in other counties. Per capita income in 1989 lagged the nonmetro average by $2,500. Median family income lagged by more than $5,000, placing it, along with earnings per capita, at or near the bottom of all county types.

Unemployment rates in these counties were the highest of the six types examined in this report. The average unemployment rate in 1990 was 8.5 percent, considerably above the 6.6-percent nonmetro average. It is important to note, however, that poverty is not simply a problem of unemployment. Unemployment is only part of the problem. The prevalence of low-skill, low-paying jobs in rural areas means that the wages of many rural workers are not high enough to pull them out of poverty. In fact, the Nation's working poor are more likely to live in rural areas than urban. Twenty-five percent of the Nation's poor live in rural areas; about 30 percent of the poor who are full-time, full-year workers live in rural areas.

While the number of jobs grew by 6 percent in these counties during the 1980s, that rate was just over half the rate for nonmetro counties as a whole (10.6 percent).

Poverty counties tend to have somewhat smaller and less urbanized populations than do other county types. Over half of the counties were not adjacent to a metro area, suggesting limited access for residents to jobs in urban centers, especially since public transportation service is generally lacking and low incomes limit the possibility of private transportation.

Poverty counties have disproportionate numbers of people with characteristics that make them prone to economic disadvantage. On average, these counties have large numbers of people without a high school education--putting them at risk of being unprepared to participate in the economy--and people living in female-headed households. These counties also have higher than nonmetro average proportions of Blacks and Hispanics--groups that historically have had trouble gaining access to economic opportunities. Poverty is not, however, strictly a racial issue. As noted above, education and family status are important factors. Furthermore, nearly 80 percent of the nonmetro poor are, in fact, White. In poverty counties, that figure is 56 percent. Given their share of the population, however, Blacks and Hispanics do make up a disproportionate share of the poor in poverty counties and in nonmetro counties as a whole.

Chart: Family income in poverty counties is only 80 percent of the nonmetro average, 60 percent of the metro average.

Chart: The majority of the rural poor are White, but Blacks and Hispanics make up a disproportionate share of the rural poor.

By definition, the major concern in these counties is that high proportions of their residents live on incomes below the Federal poverty level. Hand in hand with that poverty is often a lack of basic necessities such as health care, good nutrition, education, and essential public services. These needs are different from, but related to economic development needs. Improvements in these basic necessities are essential if people in these counties are to be healthy, educated, productive workers. Likewise, higher incomes from better paying jobs can enable people to obtain these basic services. Resolution of long-term poverty, therefore, requires that both types of needs be addressed.

Go to:

• The next section ... Conclusions
• The previous section ... Federal Lands Counties
• Understanding Rural America ... Table of Contents

Contact: webadmin@ers.usda.gov
Updated: February 11, 1997