Search Results

Showing results 1 to 6 of approximately 6.

(refine search)
SORT BY: PREVIOUS / NEXT
Author:Henry, Mark 

Journal Article
The rural economic policy choice
AUTHORS: Drabenstott, Mark; Henry, Mark; Gibson, Lynn
DATE: 1987

Journal Article
A changing rural America
AUTHORS: Drabenstott, Mark; Henry, Mark; Gibson, Lynn
DATE: 1986

Journal Article
Where have all the packing plants gone? : the new meat geography in rural America
The meat industry is an economic powerhouse for rural America---accounting for roughly one of every 16 rural manufacturing jobs. Moreover, this rural powerhouse is adding jobs at a fast clip, with recent growth of 8.5 percent a year versus just 1.2 percent a year for all rural manufacturing industries. Finally, rural America has captured a commanding 52 percent of all meat industry jobs, far above the level of a decade ago.> While all these figures are welcome news to rural areas eager to expand employment, geographic shifts under way in the industry raise fresh doubts over which rural communities will land new meat plants. Once concentrated in midwestern urban centers like Chicago, the meat industry is now most often found in rural towns and hamlets---and often far from the Midwest. Poultry-processing has moved to the Southeast. Beef packing plants have moved to the Great Plains. And pork packing plants have begun moving out of the Corn Belt to the Southeast and Great Plains, but where they go next is highly uncertain, with the future location of hog production itself very much in question.> What geographic shifts lie ahead for the meat-processing industry? And what do the shifts in this powerhouse industry mean for the future of the rural economy? Drabenstott, Henry, and Mitchell review some critical trends in the meat industry by examining for the first time a special database on the industry, the Longitudinal Research Database (LRD) maintained by the Bureau of the Census. They conclude that the meat industry is likely to concentrate geographically even more in the future, promising a new source of economic growth for some rural communities while leaving many others behind. Yet even in areas where the industry does locate, a sharp drop in industry wages raises new questions about its local economic impact.
AUTHORS: Mitchell, Kristin; Henry, Mark; Drabenstott, Mark
DATE: 1999

Journal Article
Changes in urban and rural employment in the 1980s
AUTHORS: Henry, Mark; Miller, Glenn H.
DATE: 1986

Journal Article
Innovative activity in rural areas: the importance of local and regional characteristics
Innovation, supported by a developed and active entrepreneurial system, long has been recognized as critical to regional economic competitiveness. Innovation also plays an essential role for rural economic development as these regions respond to the challenges of competing in the global economy. Barkley and Henry identify assets that contribute to nonmetro innovation ?hot spots.?
AUTHORS: Lee, Doohee; Henry, Mark; Barkley, David L.
DATE: 2006

Journal Article
A new micro view of the U.S. rural economy
Rural areas are thought to have two salient features, remoteness and small scale, that tend to inhibit economic growth. These features have explained at least partially why economic growth in the nation's rural areas has often trailed that in metropolitan areas. However, the rural economic turnaround in the 1990s, while not uniform, suggests that some rural communities may have found ways of overcoming their remoteness and small scale. Put simply, some rural areas appear to have an advantage over others in terms of economic growth rates.> How have rural economies been performing and why have some been able to perform better than others? Accurate answers to these questions are hard to come by. Typically, the performance of the nation's rural counties is compared with the performance of metropolitan counties, and then a summary comparison is drawn. But such an aggregate approach has drawbacks. One conceptual weakness is that rural places usually compete for economic activity with the metropolitan area at the center of their economic sphere, not with all metropolitan areas. In short, the usual macro view of the rural economy may overlook critical micro information and linkages.> Henry and Drabenstott use a new micro-region approach to measure and explain rural economic performance. They measure rural economic performance by assessing performance within a framework of multicounty economic regions, each of which has a metropolitan center and a surrounding area. Their analysis reveals that rural counties in a surprising number of micro-regions throughout the nation are adding jobs at a faster rate than their neighboring metropolitan area. The authors further consider the factors that appear to explain why some rural places have been enjoying solid job growth, and they discuss the implications of these micro-level findings for public and private decisionmakers.
AUTHORS: Drabenstott, Mark; Henry, Mark
DATE: 1996

PREVIOUS / NEXT