Elements of a Paradigm for Rural Development

Abstract

Rural development specialists seek to explain and anticipate changes in the well-being of rural residents and in the rural environment. Their motivation stems in part from the oppor­ tunities and satisfaction which greater under­ standing of society yields, but they are also interested in policy objectives. In particular, they would like to be able to show the connec­ tion between changes in governmental policies and changes in the well-being of rural resi­ dents and therefore to be able to make policy recommendations. The reality of the work falls well short of this ambitious goal, as Edwards noted. The growth in nonmetropolitan population which became apparent in the mid-1970s after de­ cades of decline surprised most rural devel­ opment specialists. From 1976 to 1982, on the other hand, employment grew less in nonmet­ ropolitan areas than elsewhere, reversing the earlier pattern (Daberkow and Bluestone). This finding suggests that the population turn­ around in rural areas in the late 1960s and early 1970s may have been an aberration. Again, analysts have little basis for judging whether these findings are consistent with the nature of the structure of rural areas before the late 1960s and thus expected or whether the structure has changed and the population and employment shifts should surprise us. Ana­ lysts attempt to explain these phenomena only by offering lists of underlying factors or regressions on descriptive variables (e.g., Beale, Deavers and Brown). Changes such as those noted above are not necessarily unexpected or puzzling. A known, stable structure of relationships among vari­ ables may allow analysts to understand sources of change. Analysts may even be able to anticipate changes based upon relationships