v AN ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN' THE AGE STRUCTURE AND SEX COMPOSITION OF THE RURAL-FARM POPULATION AND ' DISTANCE FROM STANDARD METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS Thesis for the Degree of M. A. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY John Edwin Stoeckel 1964 THESIS LIBRARY Michigan Stan University ABSTRACT AN ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE AGE STRUCTURE AND SEX COMPOSITION OF THE RURAL-FARM POPULATION AND DISTANCE FROM STANDARD METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS by John Edwin Stoeckel The general problem of this thesis falls into the area of population and ecology and consists of two parts, the first descriptive and the second analytical. The first part is concerned with a description of the age- structure and sex composition of the rural-farm residence category as of 1960. The second part considers the relationship between the rural—farm age structure and sex composition. and distance from Standard MEtropolitan Statistical Areas. The general findings for the first part were as follows: 1. Youth under 20 years of age comprised slightly over two-fifths of the Nations white rural farm population and exceeded the proportions of youth in the white urban population by almost five percent. 2. Those in the economically active segment (between the ages of 20 and 44)equaled one-half of the white rural- farm population of the Nation. However, those in the economically active segment of the urban white population John Edwin Stoeckel of the Nation had higher proportions (5 percent) than those in the white rural farm. 3. The proportion of aged persons (65 and older) in the white rural-farm population reached almost ten percent, a slightly higher proportion (0.3) than aged persons in the white urban population. 4. YOuth and aged dependency was higher in the white rural-farm population of the Nation than in the white urban population. 5. The white rural—farm population of the Nation had higher proportions of males than females while the urban white population had higher proportions of females than males. In the second part of the thesis, the hypotheses tested were generated from the theory of metropolitan dominance. This theory holds that the large urban center or metropolis exerts an organizing and integrative influence on the population of the hinterland. Further, the influence that the metropolis exerts will decrease as distance from the metropolis increases. Distance was operationalized by classifying the population of all the counties in the United States by one of six concentric SO—mile zones that were drawn around all the SMSAs in the Nation. Using distance as the independent variable and age and sex composition as dependent variables, nine hypotheses were tested. Seven of these were supported by the following John Edwin Stoeckel results for the white rural-farm population of the Nation and regions (and for nonwhites in the South): 1. There is a direct relationship between proportion of persons under 5 years of age and distance from an SMSA. 2. There is a direct relationship between proportions of persons between 5 and 14 years of age and distance from an SMSA. 3. There is an inverse relationship between proportions of persons from 45 to 64 years of age and distance from an SMSA. 4. There is a direct relationship between proportions of persons 65 years and older and distance from an SMSA. 5. There is a direct relation between youth dependency and distance from an SMSA. 6. There is an inverse relation between aged dependency and distance from an SMSA. 7. There is a direct relation between the number of males per 100 females and distance from an SMSA. The two findings that were inconsistent with the hypotheses were: 1. There is a direct relation between proportions of persons from 15 to 19 years of age and distance from an SMSA. 2. There is an inverse relation between proportions of persons from 20 to 44 years of age and distance from an SMSA. Two factors have been proposed as a possible John Edwin Stoeckel explanation for these unexpected results. They were occupational composition and size of cities within the distance bands. AN ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE AGE STRUCTURE AND SEX COMPOSITION OF THE RURAL-FARM POPULATION AND DISTANCE FROM STANDARD METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS BY John Edwin Stoeckel A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Sociology and Anthropology 1964 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express sincere appreciation to the members of my guidance committee for their interest and constructive criticisms. These members were Drs. J. Allan Beegle, Chairman, William Form, and Jay Artis. A special acknowledgement of deep appreciation and gratitude must be extended to Dr. Beegle. At no time during the preparation of the thesis was he too busy to provide help for my problems. Without the most generous offering of his valuable time and suggestions, this thesis could never have been completed. Lastly, to my wife who labored patiently through many typings and provided me with moral support and under— standing, I am deeply grateful. ii Chapter I. II. III. VI. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . . The General Problem and Its Significance The Focus of the Description and Analysis Objectives and Hypotheses Methods and Procedures A DESCRIPTION OF THE RURAL-FARM.AGE-SEX STRUCTURE FOR 1960 O O O O O O O O O O O O The The The The The The Population Population Population Population Population Population Over YOuth and Aged under 5 Years of Age 5 to 14 Years of Age 15 to 19 Years of Age 20 to 44 Years of Age 45 to 64 Years of Age 65 Years of Age and Dependency in the Rural—Farm Population The Sex Composition of the Rural- Farm Population ' THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE AGE AND SEX COMPOSITION OF THE RURAL-FARM POPULATION AND DISTANCE . SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . LITERATURE CITED . . . . . APPENDIX iii Page 12 15 20 25 25 26 27 28 29 30 32 33 35 58 67 69 Table LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES Percent distribution of white rural- farm and urban populations by broad age groups in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South), 1960 . . . . Differences between the percent distri- bution of the white rural—farm and urban populations by broad age groups in the nation and regions (and non- white for the South), 1960 . . . . . . . . Sex ratios of the white rural-farm and urban populations in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South), 1960 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Youth and aged dependency ratios for the white rural-farm and urban populations in the nation and regions (and non- white for the South), 1960 . . . . . . . . Indexes for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm populations in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Youth and aged dependency ratios of the white rural-farm population in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 . . Sex ratios of the white rural-farm population in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 . . iv Page 70 71 71 72 73 76 76 Figure 1. LIST OF FIGURES Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 (age group < 5) . . . . . . . . . . Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 (age group 5-14) . . . . . . Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 (age group15—l9) . . . . . . . . . . . . Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 (age group 20-44) . . . . . . . . . Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAS, 1960 (age group 45-64) . . . . . . . . . . . . Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 (age group 65 >) . . . . . . . . . . . . Youth dependency ratios of the white rural- farm population in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 37 39 41 44 47 50 52 Figure 8. Page Aged dependency ratios of the white rural- Sex farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 ratios of the white rural—farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 vi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The General Problem and Its Significance The general problem of this thesis falls into the area of population and ecology and consists of two parts, the first descriptive and the second analytical. The first part is concerned with a description of the age structure of the rural-farm residence category as of 1960.1 The second part considers the relationship between the rural- farm age structure and distance from large urban centers. The description of the age structure of the rural—farm white population will be carried out at the national level and then on the basis of the four geographic regions of the United States--the NOrtheast, North Central, South (white and nonwhite) and West. Comparisons and variations in the age structure will be pointed out between lThe rural-farm population was defined in 1960 as follows: the population which consists of persons "living in rural territory (farms) on places of ten or more acres from which sales of farm products amounted to $500 or more in 1959 or on places less than ten acres from which sales of farm products amounted to $250 or more in 1959." united States Bureau of the Census, United States Department of Agriculture Series Census: AMS (P-27) No. 29 "Estimates of the Rural-Farm Population of the United States April 1960." (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1961), p. 5. the four regions. To aid in this undertaking the percentage deviations of the rural—farm age groups from comparable urban age groups of the Nation and regions will be utilized. These deviations will be discussed more fully under pro— cedures. The second part of the problem, the analytical, is concerned with analyzing the rural-farm population in 2 of the Nation. terms of different distances from the SMSAs In order to delineate distance units of the rural-farm population, all counties of the United States were cate— gorized by drawing six concentric circles (bands) each with a 50 mile radius from the other around all of the SMSAs of the United States. A more detailed discussion of the mechanics involved in assigning counties to the band values will be found under methods and procedures. The analytical portion follows the basic format of the descriptive portion of the thesis. The age structure of the rural—farm population will be con- sidered in band values for the Nation as well as for the four regions. Comparisons and variations between the bands will also be pointed out. It should be made explicit at this point that this study is concerned only with one residence category. 2Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area is defined as one or more contiguous counties containing at least one city of 50,000 or more (or a pair of contiguous twin cities of at least this joint size) and having a generally metropoli— tan character based on the county's social and economic integration with the central city. For more detailed dis— cussion see U.S. Census of Population, 1960. V01. PC (1) 1B, U.S. Summary. the rural-farm population. It should also be made explicit that there are only three major variables under consider- ation, namely, the age structure, the sex composition, and the distance of this population from the nearest SMSA. In presenting the significance of the problem the rural- farm residence category as well as the aforementioned variables will be discussed separately. The rural—farm population has long been of interest to demographers for its dynamic character.3 With the increased urbanization of the United States, the rural-farm population has decreased from 34.9% of the National total in 1910 to 13.5% in 1955. By 1960 the farm population dropped to 7.5%, which in part, resulted from a new definition of the classification.4 Apart from the dynamism of the rural—farm ' population, this aggregate represents a rather distinct segment of American society in relation to the urban 3Dynamic character here merely refers to the high degree of change in the size of the rural-farm population that has taken place over the last five decades. 4The new definition of rural-farm for 1960 was based upon a criteria of land acreage and value of farm products sold. Formerly (1920-1950), status was determined on the basis of the respondents opinion as to whether his house was on a farm or a ranch. The shift in definition was largely stimulated by the fact that an increasing number of families whose livelihood is not gained from agriculture are now living in the open country. Hence, the effect of the new definition is to lower the level of the farm popu- lation (2.37) by removing from the total the type of families that sell little or no farm produce. United States Bureau of the Census,'Estimates of the Rural-Farm Population of the United States."Apri1, 1960, op. cit., p. l. population. As T. Lynn Smith comments, "Outstanding in rural Society is the preponderance of the agricultural occupation, low density of population and a high degree of ethnic and cultural homogeneity."5 The first of these characteristics, agricultural occupation, is supported by the fact that about three fifths (60.2%) of the total rural-farm population is engaged in some kind of agricultural pursuit. While other occupations are represented in the farm population, this residence category includes most persons who are related to agriculture. Only one percent of the urban population is engaged in agricultural pursuits. The second characteristic, "ethnic homogeneity," is also supported. Even though the percentage of non- whites in the urban and rural-farm population of the Nation is identical, a regional breakdown reveals that 93% of rural-farm nonwhites live in the South. Hence, the South proves an unusual case when compared with the Northeast, North Central and West where nonwhites comprise very low proportions of 0.4%, 2.0%, 4.6%, respectively. The proportion of urban nonwhites, with the exception of the South, is greater than the proportion of rural-farm nonwhites in each of the remaining regions. The greatest difference occurs in the North Central (20.8%) followed by the Northeast, (17.4), and West (7.2). Further evidence in support of ST. Lynn Smith, Fundamentals of Population Study (New York: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1960), p. 75. ethnic homogeneity is that in 1960 the percentage of foreign— born in the urban population of the Nation was over twice that in the rural population; the percentage of foreign stock in the urban and rural-farm populations were 22.7 and 9.5 percent, respectively. The last significant characteristic mentioned by Smith, density,6 provides the sharpest contrast with the urban population. The density of the urban population in the Nation is over eight times greater than that of the rural-farm population. On the regional level the highest rural-farm density occurs in the NOrtheast and South where there are only seven persons per square mile, while the urban population of the same regions have a density of 47.0 and 37.0 respectively. The greatest contrast in density between the rural-farm and urban occurs in the NOrth Central and West, where the rural-farm equals 6.0 and 1.0, and the urban 219.0 and 19.0, respectively. In addition to the points made above, the rural- farm residence category has been recognized by the Bureau of Census since 1920 and has been utilized in much demo- graphic research. While it has been equated with the farming population and at times does equate with it, it is by no means synonomous with it. Since 1920, the census has used the rural-farm (and the other two categories) as major classifications and over time has by virtue of 6Density is defined as the number of population per square mile of land area. this created a "real" group with well known characteristics and trends. Our focus on age structure for instance, derives from the known selectivity of migrants from this population. The variable of age is fundamental to demographic analysis and is a variable which touches all social sciences. This importance assumes dual significance with regard to the life cycle. The first is physiological and refers to the process of bodily growth, maturation, decline in activity, and eventual death. Although the physiological capacity places limits on the range of expectations for those in each age grade of the society, it does not specify the full content or mode of expressing these expectations. The second point of significance regarding the life cycle pertains to the definitions of expected behavior in terms of the social and economic status assigned to members of the society at each of a series of chronological stages. For example, the appropriate age to enter the labor force, to end formal schooling, to marry, or to retire from the labor force.7 It would appear that almost any aspect of human behavior, from attitudes and sentiments to objective characteristics such as income, home ownership, occupation, or group membership may be expected to vary with age. This suggests that the age structure or composition of a society 7D. J.,Bogue, The Population of the United States (Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1959), pp. 92-93. plays an important role in its form and functioning. A society with a high proportion of its members in the younger age groups, for example, may be expected to differ in its outlook and mode of life from a society that has a high proportion of older members. Also, extensive changes in the age composition of a society may result in adaptive changes in many areas of its behavior. An example of this would be the high level of the birth rate over the past decade. Attention is now being given the consequence for school enrollments and the size of the labor force, with resulting appeals for federal aid to education, and state and local legislative action in this area. Consequently, the age structure of a population is an important and significant aspect of population study. Like age, sex composition has cultural as well as biological implications, and therefore is of basic significance for social science. Women differ from men with respect to the age at which they marry, the period of time they remain in the labor force, the kinds of jobs they hold, the incomes they earn, and the attitudes they have toward many social and economic issues. In ascertaining the significance of the distance variable it is first necessary to consider the concept of metropolitan dominance. Some of the earliest work dealing with metropolitan dominance was undertaken by N. S. B. Gras 8Ibid., p. 167. in An Introduction to Economic History and R. D. McKenzie in The Metropolitan Community. However, one of the best attempts at a complete empirical study of dominance was carried out by Bogue in 1949 in The Structure of the Metropolitan Community. In this study Bogue formulates the hypothesis that "the metropolis or modern large and complex city, exercises an organizing and integrative influence on the social and economic life of a broad expanse of territory far beyond the civil boundaries, and thereby dominates all other communities within this area."9 Bogue's rationale for the theory of dominance rests upon the following two characteristics of the metropolis: first, the metropolis is able to assemble cheaply a varied array of raw materials and products from all parts of the world; and second, it possesses a large number of specialized components and skills required in the production of goods. With these conditions, Bogue reasons, that since up to a certain point the efficiency of machine production will vary directly with the scale of operations, and that business enterprises gain mutual benefits from being located in close proximity to each other, the metropolis is able to produce and distribute more goods and services than the small city. Hence, if the goods are more specialized 9D. J. Bogue, The Structure of the Metropolitan Community, A Study of Dominance and Subdominance (Ann Arbor: Rackham School of Graduate Studies, University of Michigan, 1950), pp. 5-6. and amenable to mass production, the greater the industrial and commercial advantages of the metropolis.10 It is with this theory of dominance that the signifi- cance of the distance variable becomes evident when used in connection with the age and sex structure of the rural- farm population. In essence, the distance that the rural- farm population aggregate is from the nearest SMSA in part determines the extent or degree of influence the SMSA exerts over the population. For example, Duncanll found in a study of urban influence on rural population that those segments of the rural-farm population under the immediate influence of urban centers differed markedly from those segments more remote from the centers. This difference Was best illustrated in the age-structure where high proportions of rural-farm persons 65 and older and low proportions of rural-farm youth were found in areas of close proximity to the urban centers. In the rural-farm areas more remote from the urban center the proportions of older persons declined while the proportions of youth increased. A later work by Duncan and Reiss,12 pointed out that lOIbid., p. 6. 11O. D. Duncan, "Gradient of Urban Influence on the Rural Population,” Midwest Sociologist, Vol. 18 (1956), p. 29. 12O. D. Duncan and A. J. Reiss, Social Characteristics of Urban and Rural Communities, 1950 (New York: Wiley and sons. Inc.' 1956): p0 168. 10 any blanket characterization of the rural population would tend to be inaccurate to the degree that the rural population falls into the area of dominance of urban centers. In the same vein, Martin13 in his study of ecological change in satellite rural areas concludes that the amount of urban influence exerted on the rural population varies inversely with distance from the urban center. In 1929 R. Park14 conducted a study of dominance of Metropolitan areas in terms of newspaper circulation. He found that there is a gradient character to newspaper circu— lation and to traffic and trade, and that the extent of the areas of dominance are nearly the same. He also points out that it is very difficult for a daily newspaper in competition with the major metropolitan dailies to maintain itself within fifty miles of a metropolis. Approximately 12 years later, Hiller15 in a study of the effects of urban characteristics on rural areas, quantified distance in terms of five concentric zones, each with a six mile radius from the other extending from the central cities. These cities were located in Illinois, I 13W. T. Martin, "Ecological Change in Satellite Rural Areas," American Sociological Review, Vol. 22 (April, 1957), p. 183. 14Robert Park, Human Communities (Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1952), p. 210. 15H. T. Hiller, “Extension of Urban Characteristics into Rural Areas," Rural Sociology, Vol. 6 (Sept., 1941), pp. 256-57. 11 Indiana, Missouri, Iowa and Wisconsin. His unit of analysis was the townships included in the concentric zones. Hew- ever, the population that he was analyzing was an agglomer- ation of urban and rural. Consequently, no generalization regarding the variables under consideration (sex ratio, density, or middle age) could be made relevant to the rural- farm population. Several of these studies have stated and tested the relationship between the metropolis and its hinterland population using distance. However, few have attempted to quantify the distance or deal with the influence of distance on the total age structure. Only the study by Hiller attempted quantification. The selection of the fifty mile radius for the con- centric circles used in the present study was essentially arbitrary. Hewever, various general assumptions aided in this selection. Fifty miles is assumed to approximate the maximum distance which an individual will travel to work on a regular basis. Also, local TV stations do not have broadcast beams of much greater length than fifty miles, and few newspapers excluding those of the very large SMSAs have coverage beyond this distance.1 It is assumed that the distance bands will serve as one of many possible indicators of the degree of 16J. A. Kinneman, "Newspaper Circulation from Small Metropolitan Centers,“ American Sociological Review, Vol. 11 (April, 1946), p. 155. 12 17 and illuminate the effect of metro- "rural-farmness," politan dominance on the rural-farm population. Conse- quently, the significance of the distance variable revolves around its importance as a measure of metropolitan dominance or of rural-farmness, and the effect this has on the age and sex structure of the rural-farm population. Finally, the justification of the first section of the thesis, the descriptive, is that an extensive description of the age structure of the rural-farm population has not been done for 1960. Furthermore, such description is necessary as a basis for the analysis of the rural-farm age structure by distance. The significance of this analysis is twofold. First, the paucity of past research on the variables under consideration here warrants further study. Second, the analysis offers still another perspective with which to view the age and sex structure of the rural— farm population. The Focus of the Description and Analysis To escape the onerous task of describing each five year age category separately, the age structure has been condensed into six age groupings. The first three groups, persons less than 5, 5 to 14, 15 to 19, represent the youth l7By rural—farmness is meant that certain character— istics of the rural-farm age structure that are peculiar to it (for example, High BR, High percentage, aged, low percentage of 19—24, etc.) will be more intense as the distance from the SMSA is increased. 13 in a population. The following two groups, persons 20 to 44 and 45 to 64, are viewed as the economically productive portion of the population, and the final group, persons 65 and over, represents the oldest portion of the population. In addition,to illustrate further the effects of distance from SMSAs on the age structure, youth and aged dependency ratios18 will be computed at the National and regional levels (and for nonwhites in the South). The six age groupings viewed separately can be viewed in terms of their general characteristics and in terms of their socially perscribed roles. Children under 5 years of age represent the newly-born and pre-school children and reflect birth rate levels of the immediate past. Bogue19 in his life cycle analysis refers to this group as representing "infancy and early childhood." The age group 5 to 14 include those entering school, those attending elementary school, and those graduating into high school. The final two years of this age span and the remaining category of youth (15 to 19) represent a period in which adolescents are labeled teenagers. Teenagers are often viewed as a distinct sub-culture with its own norms 18Youth and aged dpendency ratios are generally viewed as an indicator of the proportion of youth and aged that is dependent upon the economically active segment of a population (age 20 to 64). A rather detailed discussion of the meaning and computation of this ratio will be found below under Methods and Procedures. 19Bogue, The Population of the United States, qp. cit., p. 96. 14 and behavioral expectations. Some of the more common are ”driving fast cars," "having wild parties,f and being "addicted to rock and roll music." In addition to the label of teenager, those 15 to 19 years of age comprise those in the final years of high school. Persons in the ages 18 and 19 are eligible for the draft and military service. This age span is also inclusive of college freshmen and sophomores and persons entering the labor force. Finally, this age span represents the ages at which the incidence of migration is great. The first age category of the economically productive portion of the population, those 20 to 44, have the follow- ing characteristics: it represents the younger portion of the labor force; it includes the age (21) at which adult- hood is perscribed in American society; it has a higher proportion of marriages than any other segment of the age structure; and it has a high proportion of persons in college and military service. The older segment of the labor force, persons age 45 to 64, include women that have reached the end of their child bearing period. Hence, most of the families of persons in this age group have reached their maximum size. Another characteristic of persons age 45 to 64 pertains to health. Recent findings indicate that higher rates of heart trouble, cancer and other major diseases are found in this age group than for those in the younger ages. 15 The final grouping, persons 65 and over, represents those that have reached a termination of work in the labor force and have reached retirement. This category is considered as representing old age and generally includes the more politically conservative segment of the population. In sum, these age categories will be used in describing and analyzing the rural-farm population. Proportions of the rural-farm white population in each of the age groupings will be computed for the Nation and each region (including nonwhite population in South only). Such pro- portions will also be computed by distance for the same units. In addition, sex ratios and dependency ratios will be computed and utilized both at a descriptive and analytical level. Objectives and Hypotheses The primary objective of this study is to determine the effects of distance from the nearest SMSA on the age— sex structure of the rural-farm population. The over— all outlines of the age-sex structure of the rural-farm and urban populations are well known. The age conformation of the farm population results from ”dominance" in the sense that urban areas have the power to draw from the farm population those age and sex groups for which there is greatest employability. waever, what is not known is the differential effect of the urban pull upon the farm popu- lation as distance increases. Sociological and ecological 16 theory provide at least two general points bearing upon this problem: 1. The general impact of the city--its norms, oppor- tunities, ways of life, etc.-—diminishes with increasing distance. This is due to the range of radio, television, and newspapers as well as the interaction rate of rural and urban people. 2. Increasing distance itself is a barrier to migration. T. Lynn Smith20 points out that the more urban an area the lower the fertility of the population, and the more rural an area the higher the rate of reproduction. He also maintains that the rate of reproduction is very low in the larger urban centers, and that they exert a depressing effect upon the birth rates of the population in the rural areas surrounding them. Due to little or no migration in the youth category the latter age groups should reflect birth rates of 10 and 15 years prior. Logically, then it would follow that, the proportion of youth in the rural- farm population will increase with increasing distance from an SMSA. Selective migration would appear to play a very important role for the economically active segment of the rural farm age—sex structure. As mentioned above the greater employment opportunities of the urban areas prove 20Smith, op. cit., p. 309. 17 to be of great influence in attracting this segment of the population to the larger cities. Brunner and Hallenbeck21 have pointed out that this migration affects females to a greater degree than males. They found that in cities there is a higher proportion of males married than females, and that the reverse is true on the farm. One reason for this is the laCk of economic opportunity for women in farming areas. There is then a proportionately higher migration of females from farming communities than of males. It should follow then that the proportion of economically active in the rural-farm will decrease with increasing dis- tance from SMSAs. Also, the proportion of males to females should increase with increasing distance. Those in the older age categories of the rural- farm population also may be affected by migration. As mentioned above, Duncan,22 in his study of the gradients of urban influence, found that the age structure for the rural-farm population near large urban centers had relatively high proportions of older adults (65 and over), when com— pared with the age structure for the rural-farm population in the least urban areas. The later study by Duncan and Reiss23 furnished further evidence of an inverse relation 21E. Brunner and W. C. Hallenbeck, American Society: Urban and Rural Patterns (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1955), p. 195. 22Duncan, op. cit., p. 30. 3 . Duncan and Reiss, op. c1t., p. 157. 18 between proportions of older rural-farm adults and proximity to large urban centers. It would follow then that the pro- portion of older persons in the rural—farm population will decline with increasing distance from an SMSA. In the foregoing discussion it has been reasoned that the youth of the rural-farm will increase with distance, while the economically active and older persons will de- crease. From this reasoning it would be expected that the youth dependency load will increase with distance, and the aged dependency load will decrease with distance. The major hypotheses of this study, therefore, may be specified as follows: 1. The relative proportion24 of white persons under 5 years of age in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each Region (and for nonwhite persons under 5 years of age in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. 2. The relative proportion of white persons age 5 to 14 in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each region (and for nonwhite persons age 5 to 14 in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. 24Relative proportion here refers to an age index which represents the extent to which a particular age segment of the rural-farm population in a distance band was proportion- ately greater or lesser than the corresponding age segment of the urban SMSA population. A detailed discussion of the computations involved for the index will be included under Methods and Procedures. 19 The relative proportion of white persons age 15 to 19 in the rural—farm population of the Nation and of each Region (and for nonwhite persons age 15 to 19 in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. The relative proportion of white persons age 20 to 44 in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each Region (and for nonwhite persons age 20 to 44 in the South) will vary inversely with distance from the nearest SMSA. The relative proportion of white persons age 45 to 64 in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each Region (and for nonwhite persons age 45 to 64 in the South) will vary inversely with distance from the nearest SMSA. The relative proportion of white persons age 65 and over in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each Region (and for nonwhite persons age 65 and over in the South) will vary inversely with distance from the nearest SMSA. The youth dependencylratio of white persons in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each Region (and for nonwhite persons in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. The aged dependency ratio of white persons in the rural—farm population of the Nation and of each 20 Region (and for nonwhite persons in the South) will vary inversely with distance from the nearest SMSA. The sex ratio of white persons in the rural—farm population of the Nation and of each Region (and for nonwhite persons in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. Methods and Procedures The major procedural problem of this study was assigning the distance value to all the counties of the U.S. 25 1. The following outlines the steps in this procedure: Locate the central city of each SMSA on a map which includes the state and county boundaries as well as the locations of SMSAs. Using the central city of each SMSA as the center, draw concentric rings around each SMSA. The first or innermost circle will have a radius of 50 miles: the second circle will have a radius of 100 miles; the third circle will have a radius of 150 miles; etc. This creates bands around each SMSA, each band being 50 miles wide. 25The sourcesof the data for this thesis were the Rural America Printouts. The programming for the printouts was done from the U.S. Bureau of Census PC-LCD summary records (General Social and Economic Characteristics) for 1960 and computed at the Armour Company in Chicago. This also included the assignment of the counties of the Nation to the various band values, which was accomplished prior to this writers involvement in the project. 21 3. Assign the value "1" to the first band; i.e., the band formed bytzhe area of the innermost circle. 4. Assign the value "2" to the second band; i.e., the band formed by the area between the first and second circles. 5. Assign the value "3" to the third band; i.e., the band formed by the area between the second and third circles. 6. Continue assigning values to bands. Each band is assigned one more than the value of the preceding band. 7. The major portion of each county will be covered by one or more bands. (A county will be covered by more than one band only in cases where the bands from two or more SMSAs overlap.) Determine for each county the band or bands which cover it. 8. (a) If only one band covers the county, assign the value of that band to the county. (b) If more than one band covers the county, assign the value of the lowest valued band to the county. After the initial assignment of band values it became evident that on the regional level the distance values exceeding 150 miles would pose a problem. It was found that in the South the rural-farm population beyond 150 miles fell below 1,000, and in the Northeast there was no rural—farm population in the fifth band. Due to small 22 population numbers, then, the final three bands of the Nation and regions were aggregated to form the final distance value of 150-300 miles. The deviation used in the description is the dif— ference between the percentage of the rural-farm population in the various segments of the age structure and comparable segments in the urban age structure of the Nation and regions. It is computed simply by subtracting the urban percentage from the rural farm percentage. Hence, the deviation is negative when the urban value is greater, and positive when it is lesser. The index used in the analysis presents for each band value the extent to which the particular age segment of the rural-farm population was proportionally greater or lesser than the corresponding age segment of the Urban SMSA population. This index was computed for the rural-farm white population of the Nation and regions (and nonwhite South) for each of the six age categories. The following formula was used: .P.._b_ = _P_s 100 X ' where Pb equals the percent that the selected age group in the base population (the Urban SMSA) is of the total base population, and Ps equals the percent that the correspond- ing age group in the subpopulation (rural-farm) is of the total population. The resultant is an index of the rural- farm age group raised to an Urban SMSA base of 100. 23 The dependency ratios as used in this study take two forms, the youth and the aged. The youth dependency ratio is computed by dividing the total number of males and females in the age group 0 to 19 by the total of males and females in the age group 20 to 64. Similarly the aged dependency ratio is computed by dividing those persons in the age group 65 and over by those in the age group 20 to 64. One of the more satisfactory explanations of this technique is given by D. J. Bogue.26 He maintains that the dependency ratio provides a rough indication of the average number of dependents which each 100 adult persons would be required to support if the load were equally divided among the adult population, and if all persons under 20 and over 64 were dependent. Obviously, neither of these conditions is met completely, and the degree to which they are approximated varies over time. Nevertheless, since more detailed information is not available to estimate actual dependence, this ratio proves useful for making general comparisons. Consequently, the dependency ratio will be used here for comparing and describing hypothetically the youth and aged dependency load of the rural farm population for the band values of the Nation and regions. The sex ratio is computed by dividing the total number of males by the total number of females in the 26 p. 101. Bogue, The Population of the United States, op. cit., 24 population times 100. The result of this computation gives an index of the extent to which the proportion of one sex exceeds the other. CHAPTER II A DESCRIPTION OF THE RURAL-FARM AGE-SEX STRUCTURE FOR 1960 This chapter describes the age structure and sex composition of the rural-farm population of the United States and component regions in 1960. Although the general outlines of the age-sex composition of the farm population of the United States of the past are welleknown, a detailed investigation of the newly defined rural-farm population of 1960 has not been made. Furthermore, it is not clear as to what extent the farm population remains a differentiated sub-group of American society under conditions of urbani- zation, metropolitanization, and spread of mass media. This chapter is organized into the following two sections: (1) A description of the age structure including youth and aged dependency ratios of the rural-farm white population for the Nation and regions, and for rural-farm nonwhites in the South: and (2) a description of the sex composition of the rural-farm white population for the Nation and regions, and for rural-farm nonwhites in the South. The Population under 5 Years of Age Those in the age group under 5 account for 9.3 percent, or slightly less than 1 person in 10 in the 25 26 rural—farm white population of the United States in 1960. The percentage of rural-farm white population is lowest in the South, 8.0 percent. waever, the proportion of rural-farm nonwhites in the South (14.8 percent) is higher than the rural-farm whites of all regions. The proportions of rural—farm whites under 5 in the remaining regions ranges from 9.6 percent in the Nertheast to 10.0 and 10.1 percent in the west and North Central,respectively. Contrary to the age patterns and differentials of the past, the proportion under 5 years of age in the urban white population was considerably higher than that of the rural-farm population in the Nation as a whole and in each of the four regions. This difference amounted to 1.5 percentage points for the Nation. Among the regions, the margin of difference was greatest in the South (3.1 per- cent). However, the reverse was true for nonwhites in that the percentage among urban nonwhites was 0.5 lower than among rural-farm nonwhites. The smallest difference occurred in the Northeast (0.2 percent) while the North Central and West were identical (1.2 percent). The Population 5 to 14 Years of Age Those in the age group 5 to 14 make up a little more than one fifth (21.7 percent) of the total rural— farm white population of the United States. Of the four regions, the West has the highest proportion of persons 5 to 14 (23.0 percent) followed closely by the North Central 27 (22.2 percent) and Northeast (21.2 percent). The South has the lowest proportion of rural-farm whites (20.8 per- cent). The proportions of nonwhite persons 5 to 14 in the rural—farm South (29.9 percent) exceed the proportions of whites in the South and the other three regions. The high birth rate in the rural—farm population of the late 1940's and early to middle 1950's is reflected in the considerably higher proportions of those aged 5 to 14 in the rural-farm white population than in the urban white population for the Nation and regions. The difference in the Nation amounts to 3.1 percent. Of the four regions, the difference was greatest in the Northeast (3.9 percent), followed by the West and North Central with 3.6 and 3.4 percent, respectively. The smallest margin of difference occurred in the South (1.8 percent). Hewever, the margin of difference for the rural—farm nonwhites (7.3 percent) in this region far exceeded the differences of the rural- farm whites of the other regions. The ngulation 15 to 19 Years of Age Persons in the age category 15 to 19 comprise almost one tenth (9.1 percent) of the Nation's white rural—farm population. Of the four regions, the South has the highest proportion among whites (9.8 percent) and an even higher proportion among nonwhites (11.9 percent). Proportions of rural-farm whites in the NOrtheast and west are identical (8.8 percent) while the lowest proportion is found in the North Central region (8.6 percent). 28 As in the late 1940's and early 1950's, the birth rate of the rural-farm white population of the early 1940's was higher than the birth rate of the urban white population. This is reflected in the differences in the proportions of rural-farm whites and urban whites at ages 15 to 19. On the National level this margin of difference amounted to 2.1 percentage points. The greatest difference for the regions was a high of 2.4 percent in the South (the dif- ference between the urban nonwhite and rural-farm nonwhite of the South amounted to 4.2 percent). The rural-farm whites of the Northeast ranked second behind the South with a difference of 2.1 percent, followed by the West (1.8 percent) and North Central (1.7 percent). The Population 20 to 44 Years of Age Those in the age category 20 to 44 represents slightly over one fourth (25.9 percent) of the total rural-farm white population of the Nation. Of the regions, the West has the highest proportion (26.8 percent), followed closely by the Northeast (26.7). Of the remaining two regions, the North Central has a proportion of 26.1 percent, while the South (25.4 percent) has the lowest proportion of all regions. Unlike the previous three age categories, the proportion of rural-farm nonwhites 20 to 44 years of age in the South falls below the proportion of rural-farm whites in the South and the other regions. 29 In contrast to the age categories 5 to 14 and 15 to 19, the proportion of rural-farm whites aged 20 to 44 is less than the proportion of urban whites of the same age category for the Nation and regions. This difference amounts to 7.1 percentage points for the United States as a whole. The highest margin of difference among the regions was in the South (9.1 percent). However, the rural—farm nonwhites of the South had a higher difference, 9.9 percent. The rural-farm whites of the West (6.8 percent) and North Central (6.3 percent) rank second and third behind the South, while the Northeast (5.6 percent) had the lowest margin of difference. The Population 45 to 64 Years of Age In the Nation the proportion of rural-farm white persons in the age category 45 to 64 (24.3 percent) is comparable to the proportion of those age 20 to 44 (25.9 percent) in that each comprise about one-fourth of the total white rural-farm population. At the regional level, the highest proportion is found in the South (25.5 percent). The proportion of rural-farm nonwhites (15.7 percent) falls well below that of rural-farm whites. Of the remaining regions, the proportion of rural-farm whites aged 45 to 64 in the North Central (23.6 percent) ranks second to the South, followed closely by the West (23.3 percent) and Northeast (23.0 percent). 30 For the Nation as a whole there was a larger pro- portion of white persons in the ages from 45 to 64 in the rural-farm than in the urban population. This difference amounted to 3.2 percentage points. Three of the four regions also showed higher proportions of whites aged 45 to 64 in the rural-farm. The South ranked first with a difference of 5.9 percent, followed by the West (4.5 percent) and North Central (2.3). However, whites of the Northeast and the nonwhites of the South have greater proportions in the Urban than the rural-farm population. This difference amounted to 0.5 percent and 1.8 percent, respectively. The Population 65 Years of Age and Over Persons 65 years of age and over represent about one tenth (9.8 percent) of the rural-farm white population of the United States. Ranking highest of the four regions is the Northeast (10.7 percent), followed closely by the South (10.5 percent). waever, the proportion of rural— farm nonwhites aged 65 and over in the South (6.2 percent) is well below the proportion of rural-farm whites for any region. The remaining regions, North Central (9.5 percent) and west (8.1 percent), have the lowest proportions of rural— farm white persons 65 and over. In the Nation the proportion of rural-farm white persons 65 and over is greater than the proportions in the urban population. The margin of difference is a relatively small 0.3 percentage points. Two regions, the South and 31 Northeast also have greater proportions of white persons 65 and over in the rural-farm population. These differences are 2.1 percent and 0.2 percent respectively. The West and North Central, however, have higher proportions in the urban, which amount to differences of 0.9 percent and 0.3 percent, respectively. Urban proportions of persons 65 and older are also higher than the rural-farm in the non- white population of the South. The margin of difference in this instance is 0.3 percent. The age structure of the rural-farm population may be summarized as follows: 1. The three age categories of youth (under 5, 5 to 14, and 15 to 19), make up a little over 40 percent of the rural-farm white population of the United States. The latter two age categories of white youth show greater pro- portions in the rural-farm than in the urban population: the reverse is true for the youngest age group. This is true at the National and regional levels. On the other hand, nonwhite rural—farm youth in the South show greater proportions than the urban population for all three age categories. 2. Those in the economically active segment, defined as 20 to 44 and 45 to 64, comprise about one-half of the total rural—farm white population of the United States. For the Nation, regions and nonwhite South, there is a greater proportion of persons at ages 20 to 44 in the urban 32 than in the rural-farm population. In contrast, those in the age category 45 to 64 show greater proportions in the rural—farm white population of the Nation, North Central, South and West. Only the white population 45 to 64 of the Northeast and nonwhite of the South have greater proportions in the urban population. 3. The aged portion of the rural-farm white population (65 and over) makes up approximately 10 percent of the Nation's total. The Nation, Northeast and South, show higher proportions of white persons 65 and older in the rural—farm population than in the urban population, while in the North Central and West the opposite occurs. Pro- portions of nonwhites 65 and older in the rural-farm South were lower than the proportions in the urban South. Youth and Aged Dependency in the Rural—Farm Population In the past decades youth and aged dependency has been higher in the rural-farm than in the urban population of the United States. The decade 1950 to 1960 illustrates a continuation of this trend. At the National level in 1960, the youth and aged dependency ratios for the rural- farm white population are 79.9 and 19.5 respectively, while in the urban white population they are lower, 67.0 and 17.6, respectively. In all of the regions the youth dependency ratios are higher in the rural—farm white population (and nonwhite population in the South) than in the urban population. The 33 same holds true for aged dependency ratios with the exception of the West, where the urban ratio (17.0 percent) is a fraction higher than the rural-farm ratio (16.3 percent). Youth dependency in the rural-farm white population was found to be highest in the West (83.8), followed closely by the North Central (82.6), Nertheast (79.8), and South (75.8). Aged dependency was highest in the Northeast (21.6), followed by the South (20.5), Nerth Central (19.0), and West (16.3). Youth dependency in the nonwhite rural-farm population of the South (151.8) exceeded the ratio of the rural-farm white population in each of the regions. The aged dependency ratio for the nonwhite rural- farm South was an exceptionally low 16.5. The Sex Composition of the Rural-Farm Population Traditionally the sex ratio in the United States has been higher in the rural areas than in the urban. In 1960 this relationship also held true with a sex ratio of 108.0 for the rural-farm white and 94.3 for the urban white population. At the regional level the contrast between rural-farm and urban was also apparent. All four regions showed higher sex ratios for the rural-farm than the urban population. The West had the highest rural-farm white sex ratio (110.8). While urban whites in the West had a sex ratio of 96.5, the sex ratios of urban whites for the remaining regions were all below 95.0. Following 34 the West was the rural-farm white population of the North Central (109.6), Northeast (109.6), and South (105.1). The higher farm than urban sex ratios also holds true for the nonwhites of the South. In this case, the sex ratio in the rural-farm population is 101.2 while the urban ratio is only 89.4. CHAPTER III THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE AGE AND SEX COMPOSITION OF THE RURAL-FARM POPULATION AND DISTANCE This chapter is devoted to testing hypotheses dealing with the relationship between age and sex character— istics of the rural-farm population and distance from Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas. The demographic measures, the age index, sex ratio, and dependency ratios, are viewed as the dependent variables while distance from the nearest SMSA is viewed as the independent variable. The hypotheses presented in Chapter I will be tested utilizing data for the Nation as a whole and for each of four regions in 1960. Hypothesis I: The relative proportion of white persons under 5 years of age in the rural—farm population of the Nation and of each Region (and for nonwhite persons under 5 years of age in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. The proportions of white children under 5 years of age in the rural—farm population of the Nation do not conform to the hypothesized expectations. The index for white rural-farm persons under 5 decreases from the SMSA to the 50 to lOO-mile distance band. From this point the 35 36 index increases through the 150 to 300—mile distance band, resulting in a u shaped pattern.(See Appendix Table 5 and Figure 1.) Within the regions of the Nation, however, the anti- cipated increase in proportions under 5 years of age with increasing distance from an SMSA is generally supported. The relationship is without exception among whites in the North Central region and nonwhites in the South where the indices from the SMSAs to the final distance band range from 81.8 to 106.3 and from 93.6 to 110.2, respectively. Among whites in the South and West, a general pattern of increase in age proportions with increasing distance from an SMSA is found. The only exception to a perfect pattern in these regions occurs in the less than 50-mile distance band where the index falls below that of the SMSA. The remaining distance bands show the expected increase in proportions of persons under 5. In the white rural-farm population of the Nbrtheast no relationship between the two variables can be observed. The indices rise and fall in an erratic pattern with distance. (See Appendix 5 and Figure 1.) In sum, the direct relationship between rural— farm white persons under 5 and distance was generally supported. The pattern for rural-farm whites of the North Central and West regions, rural-farm whites and nonwhites of the South, conformed to expectation, while the pattern for the Nation and NOrtheast supplied little support to the hypothesis. Figure 1. Nation 37 Age Group < 5 120 fi ' 115‘“l ' 110 d 105 4 100 95 4 90 1 85 1 80 d 70" 65 i . SMSA SMSA-50 50-100 100-150 150-300 Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960. Northeast - 1 North Central - 2 South (White) — 3 South (Nonwhite) - 3 West - 4 1 [/3 15m-..“- ._.___ _ (“'1 T “1 P.’ .J‘ .. (U (D _ S E 4 .1 T 'W"*"““"*"‘1 1 I 003—081 031—001 wrl—ca 08—A.N3 AZMB 91in; adj 3o a=~€rr ova Evowi adj moi . ' -- r_ - _ _. '. ‘ :I ' ' . _ f 1' . ... 1-. . amurn~1 sun r..3«, 9:3 Hf fiw!jf:'fTH m‘ mowf (V 1L3 j D‘vj vrsk'V 38 Hypothesis II: The relative proportion of white persons age 5 to 14 in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each Region (and for nonwhite persons age 5 to 14 in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. The hypothesized relationship between rural-farm white persons 5 to 14 years of age and distance from an SMSA is supported by the data for the Nation. The proportions of white persons 5 to 14 in the Nation's rural- farm population increase steadily with distance from an SMSA. The index in the SMSA counties is at a low of 115.3 and climbs without exception to a high of 130.6 in the final distance band.' (See Appendix 5 and Figure 2.) The data for the four regions of the Nation also support the proposed relationship. In the Northeast the index increases from 120.9 in the SMSA counties to 141.8 in the 150 to 300-mile distance band, and in the North Central the indices range from 115.4 to 129.9. Pro— portions of rural-farm whites and nonwhites aged 5 to 14 in the South rise from 105.9 and 127.9, respectively in the SMSA counties, and rise to 117.3 and 140.8, respectively in the 150 to BOO-mile distance bands. In the remaining region, the West, the hypothesized pattern of relationship between persons 5 to 14 and distance from an SMSA generally holds true. Hewever, this is the only instance where the direct relationship does not proceed without exception. ‘ ’V . h " ' -——-—__ 4 _‘¥ 5 I- I Y . h \ O O 7 O \ 9 v ‘ n FiQUre 2. Nation 39 Age GrOuP 5‘14 145- b 140 . /I/ 0’.” P / a... 135 ‘ / u» 5 130‘ " 3’ . 2 . a” ’ ml”, ’ " 35' ”I ,, 125 . x’ . . b r 0.. ’M q 1 III-IIIII-IIIIIIIIIIII... P 120 aiagfl‘vdf‘ ' " ’ 1154 NE\ ‘/” . \ ’/ 110 ‘ r”"”' - ‘4’ ,d’ 105 q 3 ’ - 100 95. b 90- b I r ' 1 ‘ SPEA smA-so 50-100100-150 150-300 Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural—farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960. Northeast _ 1 North Central - 2 South (White) — 3 SOUth (Nonwhite) - 3 West - 4 1 L[_(_ (f'. .1 .. /‘1 1 o -e A PCS]; ”("IL “801 C ('2 I >— Cf) '¥ I I i I T (ITS—OBI U-E'fIHOUl (iOI-JJE (Iii-.411“?! '3 5'3 Ax'n ILA . ‘r _ F‘jf . 12'. F: (If) LII.“ "T mow '1' ‘1." I! '. 1. .. 11- ' 1-1"." [Kn-(HI (I‘jg‘i—f: En; J “Iflj ejjriiwon . C l . .13-“. -‘ I: N: ‘f (adj 23C 31 E 9'? 1. f'z'iI m": 1". T? -‘ [.F'lfi‘l I". 1'! r‘. ) 6117' .i. "1 (T1 173"” 1 H .i - 12': 40 The exception occurs in the less than 50—mile distance band where the index falls below that of the SMSA. From the less than 50—mile band on, the index increases 'without interruption to 124.1 in the final distance band. (See Appendix 5 and Figure 2.) The hypothesis concerning rural-farm persons at ages 5 to 14 in relation to distance is borne out. The direct relationship between the proportions in the age category and distance from SMSA is supported conclusively by the data for the Nation as well as the four regions. Hypothesis III: The relative proportion of white persons age 15 to 19 in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each region (and for nonwhite persons age 15 to 19 in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. The anticipated relationship between rural-farm persons 15 to 19 years of age and distance from SMSA is not found at the National level. The only semblance of a direct relationship occurs in the first three distance bands where the index rises from 129.9 in the SMSA counties to 133.7 and 135.5 in the less than 50 and 50 to lOO-mile bands, respectively. However, the indices of the remaining distance bands decline to 134.9 and 127.8, respectively. (See Appendix 5a and Figure 3.) At the regional level only the Northeast and South have the expected general patterns of relationship 41 Age Group 15—19 1.99‘731 I ‘\\ T \ 113" ‘\x p 1"! L 145 "1 )- )- /".’.’.\ /‘ w , . ,- 3 " /”\.X..’.’ L N1 anal/slmu-l'. \ P 2 ~’——_-- 4 r- L )- )— - T ‘T T Sill SMSA-50 50-100 100-150 150-300 fiv—fr Figure 3. -Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960. Nation _ Northeast - 1 North Central - 2 South (White) - 3 South (lenwhite) - 3 West - 4 l 91—51 Cgrior'.) 9.13/1. '1"- E «r- 661 In ' . ). cri \ 17‘ Vin-am EOE-OBI OBI-(CI CCI~OB OB~£TK3 ACNE IJJ H . m (D H 1.] s‘a'f'rriw rzr'ij o s‘fih‘rp eggs Enaviaf adj “.103 serif-5 em; 1.31:1: time f?CIj‘f'."."I 93H 31%. no 1:15:11:ch rnf;.r1— 6.1:: V nun-1' caviar—.jszib yd (,“Iju‘.-x'3 5M?) ‘1071 silty'rzorr Ens", .(-.~‘-.w.'l .aazyvt: I - JCS-.1173 11'.-.- u "" (:i’JLlll) 21.4,‘r'. I. E - (raj Mix-11c ,1) 17:311-? ('0 V) Ix —.' 9.) up I - [bl’jf-iv') xiii-'7," 42 between rural-farm white persons 15 to 19 and distance from the SMSA. The pattern of the indices is interrupted in one distance value for each of the regions. In the Northeast the index for the less than 50-mile band proves an exception with an index that falls slightly below that of the SMSA, while the anticipated pattern is maintained in the remainder of the distance bands. In the South the exception occurs in the 100 to 150-mi1e band where the index falls below that of the 50 to lOO-mile distance. The data for the remaining regions (North Central, nonwhite South, West) do not support the proposed hypothesis. Up to the 100 to lSO-mile distance for the rural-farm white of the NOrth Central (and for nonwhites of the South) the dif- ferences between the indices within each region are negligible. In the North Central the indices of the remaining two bands increase and decrease, respectively, while the index of the remaining band in the nonwhite South decreases. The West exhibits the most erratic pattern. In no instance is there two consecutive increases or decreases in the indices. (See Appendix 5a and Figure 3.) The data as a whole do not provide a confirmation of the hypothesis that proportions of rural-farm persons age 15 to 19 will vary directly with distance from SMSA. The rural-farm whites in the Northeast and South are the only regions that exhibit a general pattern in support of the hypothesis. The Nation, NOrth Central, nonwhite South, and West do not conform to the anticipated relationship 43 between distance from SMSA and rural-farm persons ages 15 to 19. Hypothesis IV: The relative proportion of white persons age 20 to 44 in the rural—farm population of the Nation and of each region (and for nonwhite persons age 20 to 44 in the South) will vary inversely with distance from the nearest SMSA. On the National level the relationship between the proportions of rural-farm white persons 20 to 44 years of age and distance from SMSAs does not conform to the hypothesized eXpectations. The index begins in the SMSA at 78.0 and dips to a low of 76.4 in the 50 to lOO-mile distance band. Hewever, the decline is not maintained and the indices for the remaining bands rise to 77.6 and 82.0 respectively. (See Appendix 5a and Figure 4.) Among the regions of the Nation, only two approxi- mate the hypothesized relation, the Northeast and the non- white rural-farm South. In the Northeast there is a gradual decline in index from 83.9 in the SMSA to 78.9 in the final distance band. One slight deviation occurs in the pattern at the 100 to 150-mi1e distance where the index increased 0.1 over the index for the previous band. The pattern for the nonwhite South also declines gradually from the SMSA through the 50 to 100-mile distance band. waever, at the 100 to lSO-mile band an increase in index occurs. This proves the only exception to the otherwise inverse pattern. 44 Age Group 20—44 120 4 115 ‘ 110 A 105 ‘ 100 95 ‘ 90 s 85 ‘ 1’ 1 ""-u-..u.....-....- / 80 4 2 --—--—_—as-Issslunsuo% 4 N.\ l 75 4 4 ‘~ lpl' 3'n- 1-37—.~._-~1 ‘70 J * / 3f 1" 65“ “‘*~—.~_h‘fl,¢v' T 1 l T I SMSA SMSA-50 50-100 ICE-150 150-300 Figure 4. Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from biation SMSAs, hqortheast - l IGorth Central P 2 SSouth (White) - 3 ESouth (Nonwhite) VVest - 4 3 1 1960. I CCIIDI COL-C7 C?->" T 1 1 T" -1. L I - "I I .w” W f 'ir #1031 93 i. J ”-0-“, Li M a, (a t; I I I' -(","1 In"; 0': f‘. J-_. "T": FTC) TI .- II. . b\.-:\. ‘- aefiiEflI '- {City}: Inn) \ Ron-w! . ‘. >~ 45 Unlike the Northeast and nonwhite South, the patterns of the North Central, white South, and West do not support the hypothesis. The indices of the North Central show only a negligible difference between the SMSA and 50 to lOO-mile band, while the indices of the remaining two bands decrease and increase, respectively. The pattern in the white South shows a consistent increase in the indices through the 50 to lOO-mile band. waever, the index of the 100 to 150 mile band provides an exception to this pattern by decreasing. The indices and the distance values in the West also illustrate no consistent relationship. The index for the SMSA begins at 77.2, declines in the less than 50-mile band and increased through the 100 to lSO—mile band. The index in the final band terminates the rather erratic pattern by falling below that of the previous band. (See Appendix 5a and Figure 4.) The data analyzed adds little in way of support to an expected inverse relation between rural-farm white persons 20 to 44 years of age and distance from SMSA. Only the Northeast and nonwhite South conform to the hypothesized expectations, while the Nation, North Central, white South, and West do not support the hypothesis. Hypothesis V: The relative proportion of white persons age 45 to 64 in the rural—farm population of the Nation and of each region (and for nonwhite persons age 45 to 64 in the South) will vary inversely with distance from the nearest SMSA. 46 The pattern of indices for those rural-farm white persons 45 to 64 in the Nation generally supports the pro- posed hypothesis. The index for the SMSA is at 114.6 followed by a decline in the less than 50-mile band (113.1). The single exception to the inverse pattern occurs in the next distance value (50 to 100 miles) where the index rises to 116.4, but the decline continues in the remaining two bands with indices of 110.7 and 101.5, respectively. (See Appendix 5b and Figure 5.) Of the regions, the nonwhite rural-farm South pro- vides the only instance of an inverse relation between the indices and distance from the SMSA that proceeds without exception. The index of the SMSA is highest at 100.4 and =dec1ines steadily to a low of 80.0 in the final distance band. Of the remaining regions the patterns of the North- east, North Central, and white South conforms to the hypo— thesized relationship between proportions of rural-farm white persons 45 to 64 and distance from SMSA. The Nbrth- east and North Central provide an interesting comparison. The patterns of indices are identical in that the exception to the inverse relation occurs in the same distance value for each of the regions. In both regions the index for the less than 50-mile band is higher than the SMSAs while 'the indices for the remaining distance bands decline through ‘ the 150 to BOO-mile bands. The configuration of indices for the rural—farm white South begins with 136.3 in the SMSA and declines to a low of 128.4 in the 50 to lOO—mile band. ‘0 135‘ 130‘ 135% 120‘ 115q 47 Age Group 45-64 7 0.. O .(uIIIlIIIIIII-J ‘\ g \ 2 WM~~ 1’ / Figure 5. T 1 I . I *T SMSA SMSA-50 50—100 100-150 150-300 Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from 1960. Nation SMSAB' Northeast 9 1 North Central - 2 South (White) —.3 South (Nonwhite) West - 4 31 a 1 b ”091 -~ ,_ .w m , . ‘ 5011 u PPUI (T) 001 T T— r T 1 COB-021 OFT—COL COL—OE CF~A”F2 A?NS ejjdw eflj in ewvown 9?? Esovd sfij 303 sovihnl .E eqnfiq aneirmm fins noijefl s43 mt whijffrqoq mVEi-lslvt nnwxi ermtej;.iia {d (Hj1m~?. stat 1(fii scitfimrufin f1'1?) . (IIPQ’I L ‘12—.[1'lr‘lti flcijffi 1 — jaridjjrw - injj;U£D Adieu (sjihfl) hjroa E — (9,,,«-.,.,.—.(_..;,;) ri:+.r.-.«::< h - 323w 48 However, the inverse pattern is not maintained since the index of the 100 to 150-mi1e distance increases to a high of 139.8. Of all the regions, the West adds the least in support to the hypothesis. The index in the SMSA is 121.7 followed by an increaseto 132.8 in the 50-mile or less distance. From this band value through the 100 to 150-mile distance, an inverse pattern of indices with distance occurs. waever, the pattern is terminated with an increase in the index of the remaining band. (See Appendix 5b and Figure 5.) The data analyzed above, generally supports the hypothesized relationship between the proportions of rural farm white persons age 45 to 64 and distance from SMSA. This was true at the National level and at the regional level with the exception of the West. Hypothesis VI: The relative proportion of white persons over 65 years of age in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each region (and for nonwhite persons over 65 years of age in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. The index pattern for rural—farm white persons 65 and over in the Nation generally lend support to the contention that proportions in this age category will vary inversely with distance from an SMSA. The only exception to the inverse pattern occurs in the less than 50-mile distance band where the index is higher than that of the SMSA.. ' From the less than 50—mile band on, however, the indices 49 form a decreasing pattern. (See Appendix 5b and Figure 6.) Regionally,the expected relationship between pro- portions of rural—farm white persons 65 and older and distance from SMSA is generally upheld. In the North Central is found the only inverse pattern of variation between the indices and distance from SMSA that proceeds without interruption. The index begins in the SMSA at 115.9 and decreases through the remaining distances to a low of 66.6 in the 150 to 300-mile band. In the South the patterns of indices of the rural-farm white and nonwhite populations are identical. In each case the index for the less than 50-mi1e band increases slightly over the index of the SMSA, while the indices of the remaining bands continue in a pattern of decline. The patterns of indices of the Northeast and West lend least support to the expected relationship between proportions 65 and older and distance from SMSA. Although the differences are rather small the indices of the Northeast show an increase through the 50 to lOO-mile distance, while the indices of the last two bands show consecutive decreases. The pattern in the West begins with an index in the SMSA that is lower than the index of the less than 50-mile band. From this band through the 100 to 150-mile distance, the indices decrease. However, the inverse pattern is not maintained since the index of the last distance band rises above that of the 100 to 150- mile band. (See Appendix 5b and Figure 6.) 50 Age Group 65 > -p q- 135 - .z".\. - 23" ‘\ 130 + ‘ \, I \ 125 ‘1 \ - .20 - . \. - 2 l \ \ 115 - 5......» .. 31 \ \ 110 4 N I " - / 2 105 : ”nun-"he ‘. . T 1 can: \ \‘x \ r / \ - \ 4 1 3 A - ' . - 85 d . . P l - 80 - ‘ ' ’\\ F I_ T r l j SHEA SMSA-50 50-100 100-150 150-300 Finre 6. Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAS , 1960 . ‘Nat5i~n lfigurtlleasst - 1 Smith Central —- 2 Sou 1::Jbl (White) - 3 Wes t:;]b1-(§onwhite) - 3l ~ 521 - 0:1 3 *- 611 I “VI - 0.11 501 .4 II I , .1 f __ (01 .d' . j A d F ' h — (7‘. J I- (in 1" f / '1 l r— (39 ( ....L-.........- .1--.1.,.1w-,__. ..,.._- I I‘ I T I DUE-051 051—001 COL-b? 02—ABM3 A‘Nfi ejiru ‘ 4 a: a vo-t ‘r: fizord fifj 16% 395153 kai H! l-n Irjir. c J 1 noijsluqoq mari-lnlw £7". ' 'I .1 '1' t. 1.} 7 f,...-, EJ‘V‘il'.‘ .fiéil 93' on 51 In sum, the inverse relationship between proportions of rural-farm white persons 65 years and older and distance from SMSA holds true. This is substantiated by the data for the Nation and the following regions: North Central, white and nonwhite South. Results for the Northeast and West do not support the hypothesis and are inconclusive. Hypothesis VII: The youth dependency ratio of white. persons in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each region (and for nonwhite persons in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. The pattern of the youth dependency ratio for the Nation and regions affords rather convincing evidence that there is a direct relation with distance from the SMSA. At the National level the ratio begins in the SMSA at 77.6 and increases uninterrupted to 89.8 in the final distance band. All of the regions with the exception of the North Central have patterns of youth dependency ratios that vary directly (without exception) with distance from SMSA. In the North Central the only exception to a direct relation- ship occurred in the 50 to lOO-mile distance band where the ratio decreased 0.1 from the ratio in the previous band. Other than this exception the ratio showsa pattern of increase with increasing distance. (See Appendix 6 and Figure 7.) Hypothesis VIII. The aged dependency ratio of white persons in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of 52 Youth Dependency Ratio 154 162 q- A '- A 140- 133w 3 130. 125d 120* 115‘ 110‘ 90-1 a”. 85* ’ L 80'I SMSA SMSA-50 50—100 100—150 150+ Figure 7.’ Youth dependency ratios of the white rural—farm population in the Nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs. . 1960. Nation Northeast - 1 North Central - 2 W South (White) 4 3 South (NOnwhite) - West - 4 3 l .1/3 . '- If.) M1 L ~ J m V ,A CD S 'O“V¢~:uu‘ .[ 7 8 EA n I 1 1 1 ' 1081 Gui—001 001-05 03-ARMB A.N8 mini—151nm siifiv efij 3o aoijzj voufhnotob dflmoY .V E ii) alxnir'em Erna rufiijwafi olki {It xugi;lsij.qc*q ngJWB monl e nsvaib yd (njuoa enj 301 ejldwmon o (- 6'“. I. S - [5111.9 n E - (“$11.13) E -» (ojlrhnv H) l 53 each region (and for nonwhite persons in the South) will vary inversely with distance from the nearest SMSA. The pattern of aged dependency for the Nation exhi- bits an inverse relation with distance from SMSA. This inverse pattern is interrupted only in the less than 50- mile band where the ratio reaches 21.0 following a ratio of 20.3 in the SMSA. Through the remaining bands the ratios decline to a low of 13.8 in the final distance, 150 to 300-miles. (See Appendix 6 and Figure 8.) Among the regions of the Nation. the North Central and white and nonwhite South. add support to the hypothesized expectation. In the NOrth Central the aged dependency ratio begins in the SMSA at 21.0 and declines without exception to a low of 12.3 in the final distance band. The patterns of ratios for the white and nonwhite South are identical. In each region the aged dependency ratio for the less than 50-mile distance increases slightly over the ratio of the SMSA. However, this is the only exception to the pattern of decline and the ratios of the remaining bands decrease consecutively. The patterns of the remaining regions. Northeast and West, do not conform to expectations. The ratios of the Northeast increase through the 50 to 100 mile distance and then decrease in the remaining two bands. In the west the ratio in- creases through the second distance band (less than 50- miles). The ratio in the fifth and final band rises above Figure 8. Nation 54 Aged Dependency Ratio 35 d 30 “ 15 ‘ 10 ‘ L ‘ I I' I ‘ SMSA SMSA-50 50-100 100—150 150+ Aged dependency ratios of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and regions (and non- white for the South) by distance from SMSAs. 1960. Northeast - 1 North Central — 2 South-(White)‘—~3 South (Nonwhite) - 3 West - 4 l I") \ 0117 V“; T 3' I T ‘i +051 OPI—OOL GUI—OE OE-AELB AsN? m1Bi-157Uj edifw srj 5o aoffirl WfHQEWTVQE Eorfi .8 97“Tiq —mow f «2) a_w.bjmu F wizi ii 'I snj r11 neighalrucmj .- ""‘4 .. ~-»' h .,-—L-. -\ '0: l'-‘. ~r' —" IL,‘ — . z-v \ 21,?“ u’ .A I’M-3 A I if" ‘43-.) ‘..f. I.) Val (11-3%th 91:3 J\/j c: j Li W 0‘-’~-l’[. _v 55 that of the fourth band to complete the inconsistent pattern. (See Appendix 6 and Figure 8.) The hypothesized relation between the aged dependency ratio of the rural—farm white population and distance from SMSA has been substantiated. This was evidenced by the data for the Nation and regions (exclud- ing the Northeast and West). Hypothesis IX: The sex ratio of white persons in the rural-farm population of the Nation and of each Region (and for nonwhite persons in the South) will vary directly with distance from the nearest SMSA. The general pattern of the sex ratio for the rural- farm white population of the Nation with one exception varies directly with distance from the SMSA. This exception occurs in the 0 to SO-mile distance band where the proportion of males to females drops slightly to 106.5 from 107.5 in the SMSA. The sex ratios in the remaining distance bands continue in a pattern of increase reaching a high of 112.8 in the 150 to 300-mile band. (See Appendix 7 and Figure 9.) 0n the whole the patterns of the sex ratios of the regions conform to the hypothesized expectation. The only exception is found in the rural-farm nonwhite population of the South. where the ratio begins in the SMSA at 100.5, increases to 102.7 in the less than 50—mile band, but then declines through the remaining two distances to 56 Sex Ratios .. .. 1304* - 1sz 1 120 '1 I. +- 1 1 5 "1 4 ’A . ..":”:.:r: 1 r- _ 110 1 2 /’__M::;A‘;ar;‘/‘='-" N - 105- N; :mEHMm—J-J- - 100 4—313 ’"fl‘: ~ ”mg: A 95 J ’ b 90 4 ‘1. 8545 L 1, r so - 3 . 75 1 - AI ’ t I T I SMSA SMBArSO 50-100 100-150 150+ Figure 9. Sex ratios of the white rural-farm population in the Nation and Regions (and nonwhite for the , South) by distance from SMSAs. 1960. Nation Northeast - 1 North Central - 2 South (White) - 3 South (Nonwhite) - 3 West - 4 l [I L -' . —- f — A r _.. —-‘ :3 --- - I r- r - | ' s‘ F h nOIjLLm“’% m «_~T~znt sjlfln not 30 aori-T men 9nd ing; EfiL,¢~¢g' (my?) an0£;u¢1 Ens {Kltjffl emf! .8‘ L ." “7 movi a mcjaib Vfi (disc? 051 NJ 091 (“.1 .2; C8 \ Rh v_.. 1‘2- .1! A. .— 57 a low of 99.8 in the final band. The only pattern of direct variation without exception between sex ratios and distance from SMSA occurs in the Northeast. Here the ratio has a value of 107.0 in the SMSA and rises steadily to 114.0 in the 150 to 300—mile distance. The patterns of the sex ratios for the rural-farm white South and North Central are identical. In each region the exception to the direct relation between sex ratio and distance occurs in the less than 50—mi1e distance band, where the ratios fall below those of the SMSAs. From the 50 to lOO-mile band on the sex ratios increase, though this increase is rather slight. In the West, the exception to the hypothesized expectation occurs in the 50 to 100- mile band, where the ratio falls below that of the less than 50-mi1e band. Beginning in the 50 to lOO-mile distance. the sex ratios increase through the final distance category. (See Appendix 7 and Figure 9.) In summary, the pattern of sex ratios in relation to distance for the rural-farm white population of the Nation, Northeast. North Central, South, and West conform to the hypothesis. The sex ratio pattern for the nonwhite rural-farm population of the South does not conform to expectations. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The problem of the thesis has been twofold. The first was to describe the age structure and sex composition of the rural-farm white population of the United States in 1960, including each of four regions, and rural—farm nonwhite population in the South. The second was to ascertain the influence of distance from an SMSA on the age structure and sex composition of the rural-farm popu- lation. The general findings for the first part of the problem are as follows: 1. YOuth under 20 years old comprised slightly over 40% of the total rural—farm white population of the United States in 1960. With one exception, the proportions of rural-farm whites in each of the three age groups under 20 exceeded the proportions of urban white youth in the Nation. This exception occurred in the age group under 5 years of age in which the proportion in the urban white population was a fraction higher than in the white farm population. The proportions of rural-farm white youth within the regions ranged from a high of 41.8 percent in the West to a low of 39.6 percent in the Northeast; the North 58 59 Centra1.(40.9 percent) and South(38.6 percent) were inter- mediate. A marked contrast to the usual proportions of rural-farm white youth was provided by the rural-farm non- white youth of the South where the proportion under 20 was a high 56.6 percent. In each of the regions, there were greater proportions of rural-farm than urban white youth under 20 years of age. Among the age groups of the youth category, however, the proportions of those under 5 proved an exception, with greater proportions in the urban than in the rural farm population of each region. Nonwhite youth showed higher proportions in the rural-farm than the urban population. 2. The economically active segment of the rural- farm white age structure (20 to 44 and 45 to 64) accounted for almost 50 percent of the total white rural-farm population of the Nation in 1960. The proportions in the age group 20 to 44 was larger in the urban white population than in the rural—farm white population; the proportion in the age span of 45 to 64, however, was larger in the rural-farm than urban white population. Differences in the proportions of economically active persons in the rural-farm population of the regions were not great. The South had the highest proportion of economically active (50.9 percent) while the West (50.1), Northeast (49.7) and North Central (49.7) followed in order. The proportions of the rural-farm nonwhite population in 60 the South in the economically active ages was a low 37.2 percent. The economically active segment as a whole showed higher proportions in the urban white population than in the rural-farm white population. The two age groups of 'this category, however, differed markedly. Those age 20 to 44 had higher proportions in the urban white population than the rural—farm white population for all regions, while those age 45 to 64 had higher proportions in the rural- farm white population with the exception of the Northeast. The nonwhite population of the urban South showed higher proportions than the nonwhite rural-farm population for both age groups. - 3. The aged portion (65 and older) rural—farm white population of the United States in 1960 amounted to a little over 10 percent. The proportion of persons 65 and older was greater in the rural-farm white population than in the urban white population of the Nation. . The highest proportion of rural-farm white persons 65 and over occurred in the Northeast (10.7) and the lowest proportion occurred in the farm population of the West (8.1). The South and North Central regions fell within this range, with proportions of 10.5 and 9.5 respectively. The proportion of nonwhite persons 65 and over in the South (6.2) proved to be lower than the proportion of white aged for each of the regions. 61 The proportions of urban white persons 65 and over were greater than the proportions of rural-farm white in this age group for all regions except the Northeast. The nonwhite rural-farm aged of the South showed higher pro- portions than the urban nonwhite aged. 4. Youth and aged dependency ratios for the rural— farm white population of the Nation were found to be higher than the ratios for the urban white population. This generally held true for the regions. The one exception occurred in the West where the aged dependency ratio of the urban white population was slightly higher than the ratio for the rural- farm white population. Youth and aged dependency ratios of the nonwhite rural-farm South were higher than the urban nonwhite ratios. Youth dependency in the rural-farm white population was highest in the West and lowest in the South: ratios in the North Central and Northeast were intermediate. Aged dependency was highest in the Northeast followed by the South, North Central, and West. 5. The sex ratios for the rural-farm white population of the Nation and all regions were higher than the ratios for the urban white population. The rural- farm nonwhite population of the South also had a higher sex ratio than the urban nonwhite population. The highest sex ratio in the rural—farm white population was found in the west, followed by the 62 North Central, Northeast and South. The second part of the problem of this thesis was devoted to an analysis of the effect of distance upon the age structure and sex composition of the rural-farm white population for the Nation and four regions (and for non— whites in the South). Of the nine hypotheses tested, seven were supported by the data. The findings of these seven hypotheses will be summarized. The remaining two hypotheses will be discussed in detail with an attempt to present possible alternative reasoning to account for the unexpected results. The findings generally supported the following for the rural-farm white population of the Nation and regions (and for nonwhites in the South): 1. There is a direct relationship between proportion of persons under 5 years of age and distance from an SMSA . 2. There is a direct relationship between proportions of persons between 5 and 14 years of age and dis- tance from an SMSA. 3. There is an inverse relationship between proportions of persons from 45 to 64 years of age and distance from an SMSA. 4. There is a direct relationship between proportions of persons 65 years of age and older and distance from an SMSA. 5. There is a direct relation between youth dependency and distance from an SMSA. 63 6. There is an inverse relation between aged dependency and distance from an SMSA. 7. There is a direct relation between the number of males per 100 females and distance from an SMSA. The first hypothesis that lacked data of a supportive nature stated that the index for those between 15 and 19 years of age in the rural—farm white populations (and rural— farm nonwhites in the South) would vary directly with distance from an SMSA. It will be remembered that only among whites in the Northeast and South was a pattern found corresponding to the stated direction in the hypothesis. The initial line of reasoning stated in effect that those aged 15-19, among the most migratory segment of the popu- lation, would be more numerous in areas farthest from the SMSA since distance was viewed as a barrier to overcome in migration. Another line of reasoning, however, may be more appropriate here. Perhaps distance is being overemphasized and with modern and efficient means of transportation is not as important as initially thought. If this would be the case, a pattern of inverse variation would be more likely expected since the economic pull of the SMSA would draw this age group from the farthest band to the urban centers. This line of reasoning does not appear entirely adequate since there is not an inverse variation in the age index with distance. However, a commonality between the data for the farm whites in the Nation, North Central, South and farm nonwhites in the South exists which 64 may add a partial explanation. (See Appendix Table 3.) In the 100-150 mile bands a noticeable decrease in the age index occurs, and for the Nation and North Central the decrease continues through the 150 to 300-mile band. This leads to conjecture regarding the extent to which the SMSA is dominant. Perhaps this dominance extends only to the 100 to 150-mi1e distance, and that other less populous centers exercise influence in this band. By less populous centers is meant that counties containing cities of 30 and 40 thousand, for example, may also have dominant effects on those aged 15 to 19 in the more distant bands. Ascer— taining the extent to which cities of this size are located in the 100 to 150-mile band would obviously be an aid in the explanation. The other hypothesis that failed to be supported conclusively concerned the age group from 20 to 44 years of age. It was hypothesized that the index for those 20 to 44 would vary inversely with distance from an SMSA. However, the data provided very little contrast or dif- ference between the distance bands within the Nation or the regions. (See Appendix Table 5a). A general overview indicates simply that this age category is distributed rather evenly throughout the distance bands. As mentioned in Chapter I, those between 20 and 44 years of age are a relatively stable portion of the age structure of the rural—farm population. The younger portion of this age 65 category would generally encompass those entering marriage and beginning a family, while generally the entire age- category represents the most economically active segment of the farm population. These factors may play a part in reducing the likelihood that this age group would be migratory. A further explanation can be gained by considering the total age structure of the rural—farm white population. The proportion in the younger age groups (under 14) equals approximately 31.0 percent of the Nation's total while those in the older age groups (45 and older) have a comparable percent of 34.1. Since the results of the analysis supported the contention that the youth would vary directly, and the aged inversely, and since the percentage of the population in the youth and aged are almost equal, there should be a stable portion of the population remaining (35 percent). In other words, where one segment of the rural-farm population increases another will of necessity decrease. Two important points should be considered in amplify— ing and extending the work attempted in this study. First, there should be further investigation into the size of the cities within the counties of the various bands. As implied earlier, cities of all sizes under 50,000 are included within the various distance bands. However, the location and effect of these cities, especially those slightly smaller than the central city of an SMSA, on the population cannot be aScertained from the data presented. 66 Second, the composition of the population within the bands with reference to occupation, in particular, would be helpful. This would give additional information to assess the element of migration. For example, there could be a high proportion of migrant laborers in one band whereas in another there may be farmers that own their own land. Occupational distributions would add another variable to account for possible variation of an age group in one band as compared to another. In sum, it would seem that for a greater degree of understanding of the variation of the indexes with distance, additional information regarding city size and population composition would be helpful. LITERATURE CITED Bogue, D. J. The Population of the United States. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1959. . The Structure of the Metropolitan Community, A Study of Dominance and Subdominance. Ann Arbor: RaCkham School of Graduate Studies, University of Michigan, 1950. Brunner, E. and Hallenbeck, W. C. American Society: Urban and Rural Patterns. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1955. Duncan, 0. D. "Gradients of Urban Influence on the Rural Population," Midwest Sociologist, Vol. 18 (1956-Winter), pp. 27-30. ., and Reiss, A. J. Social Characteristics of Urban and Rural Communities, 1950. New York: Wiley and Sons Inc., 1956. Hiller, E. T. ”Extension of Urban Characteristics into Rural Areas," Rural Sociology, Vol. 6 (1941 - September), pp. 241-257. Kinneman, J. A. "Newspaper Circulation from Small Metropolitan Centers," American Sociological Review, Vol. 11 (1946), PP. 150-155. Martin, W. T. "Ecological Change in Satellite Rural Areas," American Sociological Review, Vol. 22 (1957), pp. 173-183. Park, Robert. Hnman Communities. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1952. United States Bureau of the Census. United States Department of Agriculture Series Census. Farm Population. AMS (P-27) No. 29. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1961. . United States Census of Population: 1960. General Population Characteristics, United States Summary. Final Report PC(l)-lB. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1961. 67 68 . United States Census of Population: 1960. Number of Inhabitants, United States Summary. Final Report PC(l)-1A. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1961. APPENDIX Appendix Table 1. Percent distribution of the white rural- farm and urban populations by broad age groups in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South), 1960. Under 5 5-14 15-19 20-44 45-64 65 and over Nation Rural Farm 9.3 21.7 9.1 25.9 24.3 9.8 Urban 10.8 18.6 7.0 33.0 21.1 9.5 Northeast Rural Farm 9.6 21.2 8.8 26.7 23.0 10.7 Urban 9.8 17.3 6.7 32.3 23.5 10.5 North Central Rural Farm 10.1 22.2 8.6 26.1 23.6 Urban 11.3 18.8 6 9 . - South White Rural Farm 8.0 20.8 9.8 25.4 25.5 10.5 Urban 11.1 19.0 7.4 34.5 19.6 8.4 South Nonwhite Rural Farm 14.8 29.9 11.9 21.5 15.7 6.2 Urban 14.3 22.6 7.7 31.4 17.5 6.5 West Rural Farm 10.0 23.0 8.8 26.8 23.3 8.1 Urban 11.2 19.4 7.0 33.6 18.8 9.0 7O Appendix Table 2. 71 Differences between the percent distribution of the white rural-farm and urban populations by broad age groups in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South), 1960. Under 5 5-14 15-19 20-44 45-64 65 and over Northeast -0.2 +3.9 +2.1 -5.6 —0.5 +0.2 North Central -l.2 +3.4 +1.7 -6.3 +2.8 -0.3 W881: -102 +3.6 +108 -608 +405 -009 Appendix Table 3. Sex ratios of the white rural-farm and urban populations in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South), 1960. Rural farm Urban Nation 108.0 94.3 Northeast 109.0 93.2 North Central 109.6 94.5 South White 105.1 93.9 South NOnwhite 101.2 89.4 West 110.8 96.5 Appendix Table 4. 72 Youth and aged dependency ratios for the white rural-farm and urban populations in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South), 1960. 192E Egizl Urban 22:31 Urban Nation 79.9 67.0 19.5 17.6 Northeast 79.8 60.9 21.6 18.8 North Central 82.6 69.6 19.0 18.3 South White 75.8 69.4 20.5 15.4 South Nanhite 151.8 91.4 16.5 13.4 West 83.8 70.4 16.3 17.0 73 Appendix Table 5. Indices for the broad age groups of the white rural—farm population in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960. 50 miles SMSA or less 50-100 100-150 150-300 Nation 84.7 83.4 82.6 92.4 105.1 Northeast 96.9 96.0 97.8 109.8 104.9 North Central 81.8 84.6 86.3 92.4 106.3 South White 71.4 70.7 71.6 72.0 -- South Nonwhite 93.6 97.6 103.4 110.2 -- West 87.9 74.2 84.7 94.9 95.6 Age 5-14 Nation 115.3 116.1 116.6 123.1 130.6 Northeast 120.9 121.8 123.0 131.7 141.8 North Central 115.4 116.7 117.2 122.5 129.9 South White 105.9 108.2 111.1 117.3 -— South Nonwhite 127.9 130.6 135.2 140.8 -— West 115.2 112.2 118.4 122.7 124.1 Appendix Table 5a. 74 Age 15-19 SMSA :2 T:::S 50-100 100-150 150-300 Nation 129.9 133.7 135.5 134.9 127.8 Northeast 130.8 130.0 135.8 141.6 141.8 North Central 128.4 128.1 128.1 131.3 124.9 South White 131.3 138.7 140.9 130.6 —- South Nonwhite 161.5 161.1 161.6 154.5 -- West 127.2 136.8 126.7 131.3 128.0 Age 20-44 Nation 78.0 77.5 76.4 77.6 82.0 Northeast 83.9 82.5 80.8 80.9 78.9 North Central 78.0 78.8 78.2 77.4 84.7 South White 72.1 72.8 73.6 72.8 -- South Nonwhite 67.4 66.4 64.7 67.9 -- West 77.2 69.7 76.8 80.4 80.2 Appendix Table 5b. 75 Age 45-64 SMSA 50 miles 50-100 100-150 150-300 or less Nation 114.6 113.1 116.4 110.7 101.5 Northeast 97.6 99.2 97.9 90.6 90.6 North Central 114.9 119.9 115.0 112.2 100.4 South White 136.3 129.1 128.4 139.8 -- South Nonwhite 100.4 95.1 90.9 80.0 -- West 121.7 132.8 121.1 112.9 161.8 Age 65 and over Nation 111.4 113.7 108.3 93.3 74.0 Northeast 104.0 104.6 105.8 92.0 86.4 North Central 115.9 113.5 105.9 93.9 66.6 South White 133:2 137.2 124.9 93.6 -- South Nonwhite 114.4 115.7 104.6 90.6 -- West 99.9 119.8 100.3 79.4 82.5 Appendix Table 6. 76 Youth and aged dependency ratios of the white rural—farm population in the nation and regions (and nonwhite for the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960. Distance from SMSA SMSA 50 miles 50_100 100_150 150 miles or less or more Youth Dependencngatio Nation 77.6 77.8 78.6 84.3 89.8 Northeast 77.7 77.9 80.8 90.1 94.0 North Central 79.7 81.2 81.1 86.4 91.8 South Nonwhite 136.7 144.2 154.4 162.6 -- West 80.3 78.0 81.2 86.4 87.3 Aged Dependency Ratio Nation 20.3 21.0 19.8 17.3 13.8 Northeast 21.5 21.7 22.3 20.1 19.1 North Central 21.0 20.6 19.1 17.2 12.3 South White 20.1 21.2 20.4 19.3 -- West 17.7 21.4 17.9 14.3 15.0 Appendix Table 7. Sex ratios of the population in the (and nonwhite for white rural-farm nation and regions the South) by distance from SMSAs, 1960. SMSA 50 miles 50_100 100_150 150 miles or less or more Nation 107.5 106.5 107.5 110.4 112.8 Northeast 107.0 109.2 109.7 113.3 114.0 North Central 108.2 107.2 110.0 112.3 113.3 South White 105.5 104.9 105.1 105.4 -- South anwhite '100.5 102.7 101.0 99.8 -— West 109.2 113.0 109.9 111.4 112.2 .f p 9.? v! " . 7‘ .' 251'): mtg, " —:" IVs! Dr 2 (i Ei‘l" (1‘ ‘ .'I¢ '1 3‘ Li}; u'M.“_3'-4hm?t 35. ('2' 1 5'.) 1.1 F...) m m :2! VC‘TATE UNIVERSITY LIBRAFNES ”Alfj'lu “1111110111 1293 03146