Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Half Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Contents -- Foreword -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Small Town Demographics: Current Patterns of Community Change -- 3 Rethinking Assumptions About Farm and Community -- 4 Timber-Dependent Communities -- 5 Rapid Growth Effects on Rural Community Relations -- 6 The Character and Prospects of Rural Community Health and Medical Care -- 7 Education and Community -- 8 Religion and Community -- 9 Crime and Community -- 10 Community Development -- 11 Community Leadership -- 12 Leadership and Implementation in Rural Economic Development -- 13 Community and Social Change: How Do Small Communities Act? -- 14 Barriers and Opportunities for Community Development: A Summary -- Bibliography -- About the Editors and Contributors -- Index.

Objective. This article explores the relationship between the timing of land-use tool adoptions & local growth. Methods. Land cover data, census data, & information about land-use tools were merged for all PA minor civil divisions (MCDs) for the period 1975-1980 to 1990-1992. The extent to which growth was absorbed in MCDs without land-use tools was assessed, & the importance of structural changes for distinguishing new adopters & nonadopters was analyzed using a subset of MCDs. Results. Both the aggregate & MCD-level analyses suggested that nonadoptions under growth pressure were not widespread. Growth was not a necessary condition, however, for adoption. Conclusions. The findings support an emphasis on outreach aimed at improving the effective use of existing tools, but suggest that the importance of improving the capacity of MCDs without tools is increasing with population decentralization. 2 Tables, 1 Figure, 22 References. Adapted from the source document.

Rural often is viewed as a setting for study rather than an object of study. Often a priori definitions of rural are used; these definitions may bear little resemblance to residents' understanding of the concept. A cognitive mapping experiment to explore the meaning of rural is undertaken in this paper. Results indicate that urban residents could readily identify rural areas on a blank map of Pennsylvania. Their responses to the question varied, however, with some respondents indicating urban areas or writing images on the map. A discussion of these thought processes and implications from these varying responses are presented. Then, the cognitive maps are compared to three commonly accepted definitions of rural. Population density was found to best approximate the areas that urban residents perceived as rural. The paper concludes by discussing policy implications of the findings.

Abstract Recent typologies of U.S. counties differentiated by sustenance base suggest that mining‐dependent counties are characterized by levels of socioeconomic well‐being slightly above national averages. However, striking regional differences in well‐being among mining‐dependent counties are masked when such counties are considered as a single category. Comparison with nonmetropolitan nonmining‐dependent counties in the same states reveals that the differences are only partly accounted for by overall regional effects. Further disaggregation demonstrates substantial effects of mining subsector and of subsector‐region interaction on well‐being. Of particular concern is the disadvantage associated with coal mining dependence in the South and Great Lakes regions contrasted with the advantage associated with such dependence in the West.

Over the past decade, environmental sustainability has emerged as a prominent theme in the community development literature. In fact, the concept has become a standard feature of most economic and social development plans. Most models of sustainable community development stress the importance of widespread participation in the decision‐making process. Unfortunately, community studies document numerous barriers to broad involvement and the high level of activeness envisioned by proponents of sustainable community development. In searching for ways to overcome these barriers, scholars and policymakers have embraced the idea that we can enhance efforts to create more sustainable communities by increasing the local stock of social capital. We examine this line of reasoning in light of what we view as the most important conceptual issues surrounding the relationship between social capital and sustainable community development. We conclude that before social capital is endorsed as a central component of public policy, much work remains to be done in terms of developing a more precise definition of the concept, situating it within extant theories of community, constructing better measures of social capital, documenting the activities and networks most important in building social capital, and gaining a better understanding of the forms of social capital that are most important in developing sustainable communities.