City mouse, country mouse? Modeling rural/urban population flows. W. Webb Sprague Department of Demography, UC Berkeley. Introduction -- Why the Red/ Blue split in the USA?
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
W. Webb Sprague
Department of Demography, UC Berkeley
Introduction -- Why the Red/ Blue split in the USA?
There seem to be two very different USA’s. One sees itself as part of a world-wide network of culturally rich urban places, the other is trenchantly local. One depends on finance and manufacturing, the other on natural resources and tourism. One votes Democrat, the other Republican. And one often lives (with important exceptions) in metropolitan counties and one doesn’t.
What creates this dynamic?
There has been a rural versus cosmopolitan cultural tension in the West at least since the Ancient Greeks with Hesiod. Is the split due to a set of physical features like agriculture leading to different world views? To circulating discourses of authority and patriarchy (Lakoff)? To simple quality of life attributes? To the machinations of culturally savvy neoliberal media? To a fundamental cultural dialectic reflecting a tension between intimacy and universality?
Exposure to rurality does have an effect on subsequent rural residential choices, whether accounting for education or not
(Note that that all the tables have a p ~ 0.00)
I think that the rural 79 to rural 96 association is mostly independent of the educational variable, leaving a cultural explanation as the most reasonable. See below tables.
Unfortunately, the clustering did not yield any results that I could interpret. Average s(i) .63 wth k=2, then dropped with greater k. Needs more work.
The four groups -- rural + ba, rural + noba, city+ba, city+noba -- show distinct lifecourse patterns when graphed. Each bar represents the proportion in each phase.
To test the anecdotally driven hypothesis that there is a population circulation among “countrified” and “citified” places in the USA.
This project requires that
we substantiate a difference in country and city lifecourses, and
we create a life course typology of cosmopolitan and non-cosmopolitan USA residents, with a set of representative lifecourses to use as input to a macro population model.
Overview of approach:
Red blue map: http:www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2008/countymapnonlinr1024.png
Non-Metro counties: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Emphases/Rural/Gallery/nonmetrocounties.htm
Haven’t quite figured out the details, but I have substantiated what might be termed a “rural culture effect” in terms of concrete population flows.
Georeferenced data would be nice -- county + rurality codes. Record linking would be even better.
Possibly revisit more traditional models and path analysis now that I have an exploratory sense of the data.
Population stocks and flows driving Red versus Blue?
Or perhaps the tension is due partly to cultural diffusion along stable population flows? This idea stems from my experience doing fieldwork in “Alexandria” Oregon, town that values its “country” identity. Here I met many people who migrate between small towns like Alexandria throughout Oregon and the US, moving yet avoiding the cosmopolitan centers over their life course.
If there are such laminar strata of circulation, these populations may lead to identity stances, as well as cultural inertia due to domestic cultural reproduction.
Thus, Red Versus Blue may, to some degree, be driven by population dynamics. But this idea needs to be investigated more rigorously.
Elder corn stupid thing
Prof. Jenna Johnson-Hanks, Dr. Sheila Martin, UC Berkeley Dean’s Normative Time Fellowship, and