Disparities in Gun Ownership

Gun ownership is common in the United States. Overall, 40 percent of Americans say they or someone in their household owns a gun, according to a 2021 survey by Pew Research Center. 

Surprisingly, the differences in gun ownership by age or education are small. By age, the range is from 35 percent among 18-to-29-year-olds to 42 percent among those aged 50 or older—a 6 percentage point difference. By education, the range is from 33 percent among those with a graduate degree to 45 percent among those with some college—a 12 percentage point gap. 

The gap in gun ownership is much larger by race, type of residence, and political affiliation...

 

PERCENTAGE WITH GUN(S) IN HOUSEHOLD

Total adults: 40%

Race and Hispanic origin

47% of non-Hispanic whites

37% of Blacks

26% of Hispanics

20% of Asians

Difference between highest and lowest: 27 percentage points

Rural-urban status

53% of rural

40% of suburban

29% of urban

Difference between highest and lowest: 24 percentage points

Political party affiliation

54% of Republicans

31% of Democrats

Difference between highest and lowest: 23 percentage points

Source: Pew Research Center, Key Facts about Americans and Guns

Reversal: Big Metro Counties Lose Population

Population growth in the United States ground to a halt during the pandemic. Between July 1, 2020, and June 30, 2021, the population grew by just 0.1 percent, according to Census Bureau estimates. This is the slowest rate of growth in the nation's history. 

The coronavirus pandemic explains the slow growth. Because of Covid, deaths exceeded births in a record high 73 percent of the nation's counties. Because of Covid, the number of net international migrants to the United States plunged, falling to just 247,000 in 2020–21, down from 477,000 in 2019–20. For context, net international migration was as high as 1,049,000 in 2015–16.

The pandemic also messed with domestic migration, consequently reversing the long-standing pattern of population growth by Rural-Urban Continuum. The Rural-Urban Continuum (RUC) is the federal government's system of classifying counties by their degree of urbanity. It is a useful tool for analyzing growth patterns at the county level. The RUC is a scale ranging from 1 (the most urban counties, in metropolitan areas of 1 million or more) to 9 (the most rural counties, lacking any settlements of 2,500 or more people and not adjacent to a metropolitan area).

The long-term pattern during the 2010s was one of urban growth—the more urban, the greater the growth. But this was not the case in 2020–21, according to a Demo Memo analysis. Counties with a rank of 1 on the continuum (the most urban) lost population during the year. Every other county type grew at least a bit, even the most rural. Here is how county populations changed in 2020–21 by rank on the Rural-Urban continuum...

County population change by Rural-Urban Continuum rank, July 1, 2020–June 30, 2021
1. -0.16% for counties in metros with 1 million or more people
2.  0.62% for counties in metros of 250,000 to 1 million people
3.  0.47% for counties in metros with less than 250,000 people
4.  0.36% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 20,000-plus, adjacent to metro
5.  0.06% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 20,000-plus, not adjacent to metro
6.  0.29% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 2,500–19,999, adjacent to metro
7.  0.04% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 2,500–19,999, not adjacent to metro 
8.  0.63% for nonmetro counties with urban pop less than 2,500, adjacent to metro 
9.  0.28% for nonmetro counties with urban pop less than 2,500, not adjacent to metro 

Behind the population loss in big metro counties is the one-two-three punch of the pandemic. Births fell, deaths increased, and the trickle of net international migrants could not make up for domestic migration losses in some of the largest metros such as New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Chicago.

Source: USDA, Economic Research Service, Rural-Urban Continuum Codes and Census Bureau, County Population Totals: 2020–2021

Suspicious and Misinformed

When it comes to Covid, suspicious and misinformed are words that describe millions of Americans—especially those who live in rural areas. Rural residents are much more likely than urban residents to say they "definitely won't" get a Covid vaccine, according to a KFF survey fielded in November. More than one in five (21 percent) adults in rural areas say they definitely won't get a vaccine versus 16 percent of suburban residents and 8 percent of adults in urban areas. 

Among parents with children under age 18, the rural-urban gap is even larger...

Parents with children aged 12 to 17 who say they definitely won't get their child vaccinated

Rural: 53%

Suburban: 29%

Urban: 20%

Parents with children aged 5 to 11 who say they definitely won't get their child vaccinated

Rural: 49%

Suburban: 27%

Urban: 22%

One reason for the heightened resistance among rural parents is their belief that the vaccine is not safe. Among parents in rural areas, 65 percent of those with children aged 12 to 17 and an even larger 71 percent of those with children aged 5 to 11 are "not too/not at all confident" in the safety of Covid vaccines. Most rural parents, in fact, think the bigger risk to their child's health is the vaccine itself rather than Covid.

Parents with children aged 12 to 17 who say the bigger risk to their child's health is the vaccine 

Rural: 60% 

Suburban: 40% 

Urban: 25% 

Parents with children aged 5 to 11 who say the bigger risk to their child's health is the vaccine

Rural: 53% 

Suburban: 44% 

Urban: 28% 

Source: KFF, KFF Covid-19 Vaccine Monitor: Differences in Vaccine Attitudes between Rural, Suburban, and Urban Areas

Conflict between Urban and Rural

How much conflict is there between people who live in cities and people who live in rural areas? When Pew Research Center asked this question in 16 different countries, a median of 23 percent said the conflicts are strong/very strong. In the United States, a larger 42 percent reported either very strong (12 percent) or strong (30 percent) conflicts between urban and rural populations. Here are the U.S. numbers...

Perceived level of conflict between people who live in cities and people who live in rural areas

12% very strong

30% strong

48% not very strong

  9% none

The United States ranks third among the 16 countries in the percentage of the public that perceives strong/very strong conflict between urban and rural. In France, 45 percent of the public feels this way. In South Korea, the figure is 43 percent. 

The perception of urban-rural conflict differs by political affiliation in the U.S. "People on the left (53%) are more likely than those on the right (38%) to say there are strong or very strong conflicts between people who live in urban areas and people who live in rural areas," Pew reports.

Source: Pew Research Center, Diversity and Division in Advanced Economies

Growing Gap in Death Rates between Urban and Rural

More bad news for rural America. The death rate in rural areas is higher than the rate in urban areas and the gap is growing, according to a National Center for Health Statistics report. The NCHS examined trends in age-adjusted death rates from 1999 to 2019...

Age-adjusted deaths per 100,000 people, 2019 (and 1999) 

Rural areas: 834.0 (923.8)

Urban areas: 693.4 (865.1)

While the death rate fell in both rural and urban areas between 1999 and 2019, the decline was much greater in urban areas. Between 1999 and 2010, both rural and urban areas saw their death rate fall. Since 2010, however, the death rate hasn't budged in rural areas while continuing to fall in urban areas. Consequently, the gap between rural and urban death rates has nearly tripled. The rural rate was just 7 percent greater than the urban rate in 1999. By 2019, it was 20 percent higher. 

What accounts for the widening gulf in death rates between rural and urban areas? The NCHS examined death rates by cause and found rates in rural areas exceeding rates in urban areas for all 10 leading causes of death. The biggest differences were for heart disease, cancer, and chronic lower respiratory disease.

"Those living in rural areas often face greater public health challenges as they have more limited access to health care, are less likely to be insured, and are more likely to live in poverty," the NCHS explains.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Trends in Death Rates in Urban and Rural Areas: United States, 1999–2019

Stressful Life Events Are More Common among Children in Rural/Nonmetro Areas

A substantial percentage of the nation's school children have experienced stressful life events, according to an analysis by the National Center for Health Statistics. Using data from the 2019 National Health Interview Survey, the NCHS estimated the percentage of children aged 5 to 17 who had ever experienced one or more of the following stressful life events, as reported by an adult (usually a parent) who responded to the following questions...

• Has the child ever been the victim of violence or witnessed violence in his/her neighborhood?
• Has the child ever lived with a parent or guardian who served time in jail or prison?
• Did the child ever live with anyone who was mentally ill or severely depressed?
• Did the child ever live with anyone who had a problem with alcohol or drugs?

The findings are not what you might expect. On every measure, children who live in rural areas and small towns outside of metropolitan areas are more likely than those in small/medium metros, suburbs of large metros, or cities of large metros to have experienced stressful events.

Overall, 6.8 percent of children aged 5 to 17 had ever been exposed to violence in their neighborhood. Among children in rural/nonmetropolitan areas, 8.2 percent had been exposed to violence in their neighborhood versus 7.8 percent of children in small/medium metros, 6.3 percent of those in the cities of large metros, and 5.2 percent of those in the suburbs of large metros. 

Among school-aged children, 6.5 percent had ever lived with a parent/guardian who had served time in jail or prison. Again, the children most likely to have experienced this stress are those in rural/nonmetropolitan areas (9.4 percent), followed by children in small/medium metropolitan areas (8.0 percent), cities of large metro areas (5.1 percent), and suburbs of large metros (4.5 percent). 

A substantial 9.2 percent of children have ever lived with someone who was mentally ill or severely depressed. The figure ranges from a high of 12.0 percent for children in rural/nonmetropolitan areas to a low of 6.8 percent among children in the cities of large metropolitan areas. 

Fully 9.7 percent of children have ever lived with someone who had a problem with alcohol or drugs. The figure ranges from a high of 13.7 percent among children in rural/nonmetropolitan areas to a low of 7.3 percent among children living in cities of large metropolitan areas.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Disparities in Stressful Life Events among Children Aged 5–17 Years: United States, 2019

Rural Resistance to the Covid Vaccine

Americans who live in rural areas are more resistant to getting the Covid-19 vaccine than urban or suburban residents, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation survey fielded March 15-29, 2021. While 10 percent of urban residents and 13 percent of suburban residents say they will "definitely not" get the vaccine, the figure is a much higher 21 percent among adults who live in rural areas. 

The Kaiser survey explored vaccine resistance in rural America by the characteristics of residents. Here are some of the findings...

Percent of rural residents who say they will "definitely not" get the Covid-19 vaccine

All rural residents: 21%

Aged 65-plus: 10%

Aged 50-64:19%

Aged 18-49: 28%

Blacks: 10%

Hispanics: 18%

Non-Hispanic whites: 22%

College degree: 13%

No college degree: 23%

Democrats: 4%

Republicans: 32%

White evangelicals: 31%

Among rural residents who say they will "definitely not" get the Covid-19 vaccine, 83 percent are non-Hispanic whites, 73 percent are Republicans, and 41 percent are white evangelicals.

Source: Kaiser Family Foundation, KFF Covid-19 Vaccine Monitor—Rural America 

Less Educated Counties are Falling Behind

The U.S. population is getting better educated. But only in some places and not in others. Among the nation's 3,138 counties, the 58 percent majority are becoming better educated. The remaining 42 percent are educationally stagnant—they have not experienced a statistically significant increase in educational attainment over the past decade, according to a Census Bureau analysis of five-year American Community Survey data from 2005–09 to 2015–19.  

Forty-two percent is a lot of counties—more than 1,000. The bad news doesn't stop there. A disproportionate share of the stagnant counties were the least educated to begin with. This means there is a growing gap between counties not only in educational attainment, but also in the economic opportunities that accrue to educated populations. 

To do its analysis, the Census Bureau divided counties into two educational attainment groups. The measure of educational attainment was the percentage of county residents aged 25 or older with a bachelor's degree in 2005–09. For all counties at the time, 18.7 percent of residents aged 25 or older had a bachelor's degree. One educational attainment group consisted of all counties that fell below this threshold. The other group was all counties above this threshold. Now for the analysis: among the counties that fell below this threshold in 2005–09, only 49.8 percent experienced an increase in educational attainment by 2015–19. Among the counties that were above this threshold in 2005–09, a much larger 78.6 percent experienced an increase in educational attainment during the next 10 years. 

This is not good news for stagnant counties. It means the socioeconomic gap between counties is growing, the rural-urban divide is widening, and struggling counties will find economic prosperity even more elusive. 

The coronavirus pandemic will only exacerbate these problems. Recently released Bureau of Labor Statistics projections of the labor force impact of the pandemic show jobs disappearing for less-educated Americans. The number of jobs available for those without a high school diploma is projected to drop 2.3 percent between 2019 and 2029 because of the pandemic, according to a New York Times analysis of the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Covid-impact projections. Pre-Covid, these jobs had been projected to grow. The number of jobs available to those with a high school diploma and no further education will inch up by only 0.1 percent in the decade ahead, far less growth than foreseen pre-Covid. At the other extreme, Covid will boost job growth for the better educated. For those with a bachelor's degree, jobs will increase 6.7 percent—a bit more than forecast pre-Covid. Similarly, the job market for people with a graduate degree will expand 9.7 percent during the decade, also above the pre-Covid forecast. 

All this means we need to prepare for more friction, more turmoil—political and otherwise—between educationally stagnant and educationally advancing counties as these trends unfold.

Source: Census Bureau, Bachelor's Degree Attainment in the United States: 2005 to 2019

17% Walk, Bike on an Average Day

On a typical day, 17 percent of Americans aged 5 or older travel by walking or biking, according to the Federal Highway Administration's National Household Travel Survey. Each of these "non-motorized trips," as the NHTS calls them, averages 1 mile in length and lasts 16 minutes. The trips are for a variety of purposes such as exercise, recreation, going to work, or visiting a store.

Some people are more likely to walk/bike places than others. Among people who report excellent health, 19 percent walk or bike on an average day compared with just 9 percent of those in poor health. People who usually exercise vigorously in a typical week are more likely to report walking or biking on an average day (22 percent) than those who report rarely or never exercising (8 percent). Not surprisingly, people who live in large cities are most likely to report walking or biking on an average day (34 percent) while those in live in rural areas are least likely (10 percent).

Percent of people aged 5 or older who walk/bike on an average day, by place of residence
Major city: 34%
Suburb: 21%
Small town: 14%
Rural area: 10%

Source: Federal Highway Administration, National Household Travel Survey, Non-Motorized Travel (PDF)

48% of Counties Lost Population, 2018–19

The U.S. population grew by just 0.48 percent in the year ending July 1, 2019. This is the slowest annual rate of growth in 100 years. Growth has actually ground to a halt in many places. According to the Census Bureau's latest estimates, 48 percent of the nation's 3,142 counties lost population between 2018 and 2019.

Even in counties with growing populations, expansion is slowing. The slowdown is occurring everywhere—from the largest urban areas to the most remote rural outposts. A handy way to analyze growth patterns at the county level is by using the federal government's Rural-Urban Continuum, a system of classifying counties by their degree of urbanity. The Continuum is a scale ranging from 1 (the most urban counties, in metropolitan areas of 1 million or more) to 9 (the most rural counties, lacking any settlements of 2,500 or more people and not adjacent to a metropolitan area).

The long-term pattern since 2010 has been one of urban growth—the more urban, the greater the growth. But an examination of the trend in annual growth rates reveals some changes. Counties with a rank of 1 on the continuum (the most urban) grew faster than any other county type in every year between 2010 and 2017. But in 2018 and 2019, the growth rate of rank 1 counties slipped below that of rank 2 counties. Another change has occurred in nonmetropolitan counties. Counties ranking 6 and 8 on the Rural-Urban Continuum had been steadily losing population for most of the decade, but in 2017 they began to record small gains which continued in 2018 and 2019. The gains have not been large enough, however, to make up for losses earlier in the decade. Here are county growth rates for the decade and for the past year by rank on the Rural-Urban continuum...

County population change 2010-2019 (and 2018–19) by Rural-Urban Continuum rank
1. 8.0% (0.54) for counties in metros with 1 million or more people
2. 6.7% (0.64) for counties in metros of 250,000 to 1 million people
3. 4.4% (0.38) for counties in metros with less than 250,000 people
4. 0.6% (0.17) for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 20,000-plus, adjacent to metro
5. 1.6% (0.10) for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 20,000-plus, not adjacent to metro
6. –1.0% (0.01) for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 2,500–19,999, adjacent to metro
7. –1.6% (-0.18) for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 2,500–19,999, not adjacent to metro 
8. –1.0% (0.10) for nonmetro counties with urban pop less than 2,500, adjacent to metro 
9. –2.2% (-0.21) for nonmetro counties with urban pop less than 2,500, not adjacent to metro 

Behind the widespread slowing of population growth is the ongoing baby bust, the aging of the baby-boom generation, and the decline in net migration—both domestic and international. With population growth already slowed to a crawl before coronavirus swept the nation, the percentage of counties recording population losses in 2020 is likely to be greater than the 48 percent of 2019. 

Source: USDA, Economic Research Service, Rural-Urban Continuum Codes and Census Bureau, County Population Totals and Components of Change: 2010–2019

Which Lifestyle Do You Prefer?

If you ask the public which it prefers—life in the suburbs/country or life in the city—most prefer the suburban/country lifestyle, according to a Pew Research Center survey.  Ask yourself which lifestyle you prefer:

1. Prefer to live in a community where houses are larger and farther apart, but schools, stores and restaurants are several miles away.
2. Prefer to live in a community in which houses are smaller and closer to each other, but schools, stores and restaurants are in walking distance.

Overall, the 53 percent majority of Americans choose option number 1. They prefer the suburban/country lifestyle. A smaller 47 percent prefer option number 2, the urban lifestyle.

Fortunately, most of us live in the type of community we prefer. Among residents of urban areas, the 60 percent majority prefers the urban lifestyle. Among people living in rural areas, the 69 percent majority prefers the suburban/country lifestyle. The suburban population is split on which it prefers, however, While 51 percent of suburban residents prefer the suburban/country lifestyle, nearly as many—48 percent—prefer the urban lifestyle.

Source: Pew Research Center, Big Houses, Small Houses: Partisans Continue to Want Different Things in a Community

Who Lives in the Suburbs?

When it comes to identifying where Americans live, there are two different perspectives. One perspective is delineated by the federal government's metropolitan area definitions, where people live in the principal city of a metro area, or outside the principal city but still in the metro area (the suburbs), or in a nonmetropolitan area. The other and perhaps more important perspective is based on feelings. Millions of Americans feel like they live in small cities and towns, finds a Gallup survey, when they actually live in big cities and suburbs, according to metropolitan definitions.

The biggest difference between perception and reality is in the suburbs. The 54 percent majority of Americans live in the suburbs—in a metropolitan area outside a principal city, according to the government's definition. But only 26 percent of Americans think they live in the suburbs, finds Gallup.

There's also a difference in perceptions of city living. Fewer Americans say they live in a "big city" than actually live in the principal cities of metropolitan areas. Only 20 percent think they live in a big city, according to Gallup, but 32 percent of the U.S. population lives in a principal city—defined as a city with a population of at least 50,000.

Where are the missing city and suburban residents? They're not in rural areas, since the percentage of Americans who say they live in a rural area almost exactly matches the government's nonmetropolitan population estimate—15 percent and 14 percent, respectively. Instead, the missing city and suburban residents live in what they identify as small cities (20 percent) or towns (16 percent).

Bottom line: Many Americans feel like they live in smaller, more intimate communities than what is conjured by the terms "principal city" and "suburb."

Source: Demo Memo analysis of Census Bureau data; and Gallup, Americans Big on Idea of Living in the Country

Non-Hispanic White Share of Public School Students by Urbanicity

Non-Hispanic whites are a minority of the nation's public school students, accounting for 48.9 percent of elementary and secondary students in 2015, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. But the share of non-Hispanic whites varies greatly by urbanicity...

Non-Hispanic white share of public elementary and secondary school students
20.2% in large cities (city population of 250,000 or more)
32.6% in mid-sized cities (city population of 100,000 to 250,000)
46.0% in small cities (city population below 100,000)
47.8% in large suburbs (suburb of city with 250,000 or more population)
59.9% in mid-sized suburbs (suburb of city with population of 100,000 to 250,000)
63.6% in small suburbs (suburb of city with population below 100,000)
67.1% in fringe towns (urban cluster 10 miles or less from an urbanized area)
64.8% in distant towns (urban cluster 10 to 35 miles from an urbanized area)
58.3% in remote towns (urban cluster 35-plus miles from an urbanized area)
65.9% in fringe rural areas (not in an urban cluster, less than 5 miles from an urbanized area)
79.3% in distant rural areas (not in an urban cluster, 5 to 25 miles from an urbanized area)
73.1% in remote rural areas (not in an urban cluster, 25-plus miles from an urbanized area)

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, School Choice in the United States, 2019

Trends of the 2020s: The Rural-Urban Divide

The growing gap in the wellbeing of rural and urban America is an intractable problem likely to worsen in the 2020s. Here's why the problem won't go away. Over the years, ongoing urbanization has "sorted and segregated national populations" by personality type, according to Will Wilkinson, vice president for research at the Niskanen Center. In his paper, The Density Divide: Urbanization, Polarization, and Populist Backlash, Wilkinson examines research on personality type and selective migration and uses the lessons learned to explain the rural-urban divide.

Urban areas are increasingly home to people who score higher on the "openness to experience" personality domain, Wilkinson says. "People high in openness seek novelty, like to travel, are interested in other cultures, try new foods, are motivated to learn, and are relatively comfortable with ethnic and cultural difference," he explains. Population density and openness to experience are highly correlated, in part because those who are high in openness are also more likely to migrate. As urban areas accumulate people higher in openness, rural areas are increasingly populated by those who are less open. "Those low in openness are wary of change and more likely to hew to tradition, remain close to home, and feel unsettled by cultural difference." They are stuck in place, resistant to moving despite the problems of rural America—depopulation, the loss of jobs, lower incomes, relatively poor health, and widespread drug abuse. Rather than move to places of opportunity, they succumb to what economists Angus Deaton and Anne Case call "deaths of despair." (For a chilling account of this phenomenon, see Who Killed the Knapp Family? by Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn in the New York Times.)

The rural-urban divide is likely to widen in the 2020s not only because of what Wilkinson calls the "density divide" between urban and rural personalities, but also because of the "small-state bias" in our electoral system. Those high in openness tend to be more liberal and Democratic. Those low in openness tend to be more conservative and Republican. "Under the conditions of the density divide," Wilkinson concludes, "the constitutionally baked-in overrepresentation of sparsely populated states lends Republicans an enormous structural advantage, and as America's population continues to concentrate in highly urbanized states, this bias grows worse."

Only 24% Meet Physical Activity Guidelines

How are Americans doing when it comes to exercising? They are doing better than they had been, but not good enough. Only 24 percent of adults met the recommended aerobic and muscle-strengthening physical activity guidelines in 2017, according to a CDC study. What are those guidelines? Brace yourself for a wordy explanation:

"Federal physical activity guidelines recommend that adults perform at least 150–300 minutes of moderate-intensity, or 75–150 minutes of vigorous-intensity aerobic physical activity per week, or an equivalent combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity aerobic physical activity (i.e., the aerobic guideline). In addition, adults should do muscle-strengthening activities of at least moderate intensity that involved all major muscle groups on ≥2 days per week (i.e. the muscle-strengthening guideline)."

Whew! Got that? 

So, only one in four adults met these guidelines in 2017. Pathetic, but not as pathetic as in 2008 when a smaller 18 percent met the guidelines. Are Fitbits and Apple Watches making a difference?  Maybe. The percentage of adults who met the guidelines has increased significantly in almost every demographic segment. Hispanics living in rural areas and rural residents of the South were the two segments whose physical activity level did not increase over the past few years.

The purpose of the CDC's study was to compare physical activity levels in urban and rural areas by demographic characteristic. Overall, urban residents are more likely to meet federal guidelines than rural residents (25 versus 20 percent, respectively). By age, here is how urban (and rural) residents compare... 

Percent meeting physical activity guidelines in urban (and rural) areas, 2016–17
Aged 18 to 24: 33.4% (25.3%)
Aged 25 to 34: 31.3% (23.6%)
Aged 35 to 44: 26.6% (21.5%)
Aged 45 to 64: 20.9% (16.1%)
Aged 65-plus: 13.8% (9.5%)

Source: CDC, Trends in Meeting Physical Activity Guidelines among Urban and Rural Dwelling Adults—United States, 2008–2017

A Generation Behind on Diversity

The nation's rural population is much less diverse than the urban population, reports the USDA's Economic Research Service. In nonmetropolitan counties (the definition of rural for this comparison), fully 78 percent of the population is non-Hispanic White. In metropolitan counties (urban) non-Hispanic Whites are only 58 percent of the population.

The diversity of rural America is a generation behind the United States as a whole. You have to go all the way back to 1985 to find Hispanics, Blacks, Asians, and other minorities accounting for only 22 percent of the total population.

Minority share of population
Urban (metropolitan counties): 42%
Rural (nonmetropolitan counties): 22%

Source: USDA Economic Research Service, Rural America at a Glance, 2018 Edition

County Population Trends, 2010 to 2018

Between 2010 and 2018, the nation's most urban counties grew faster than any other county type, according to the Census Bureau's county population estimates. A Demo Memo analysis of 2010-to-2018 county population trends along the Rural-Urban Continuum documents ongoing metro growth and continuing rural decline. But patterns are changing.

The Rural-Urban Continuum is the federal government's way of classifying counties by their degree of urbanity. The continuum is a scale ranging from 1 (the most urban counties, in metropolitan areas of 1 million or more) to 9 (the most rural counties, lacking any settlements of 2,500 or more people and not adjacent to a metropolitan area). If you sort the nation's 3,000-plus counties by their rank on the continuum, then measure population change between 2010 and 2018 for each rank, this is the result...

County population change 2010-2018 by Rural-Urban Continuum Rank
1. 7.6% for counties in metros with 1 million or more people
2. 6.2% for counties in metros of 250,000 to 1 million people
3. 4.1% for counties in metros with less than 250,000 people
4. 0.5% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 20,000-plus, adjacent to metro
5. 1.7% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 20,000-plus, not adjacent to metro
6. –1.0% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 2,500–19,999, adjacent to metro
7. –1.6% for nonmetro counties with urban pop of 2,500–19,999, not adjacent to metro 
8. –1.0% for nonmetro counties with urban pop less than 2,500, adjacent to metro 
9. –1.9% for nonmetro counties with urban pop less than 2,500, not adjacent to metro 

The long-term pattern has been one of urban growth—the more urban, the greater the growth. But an examination of annual growth rates reveals important changes. Counties with a rank of 1 on the continuum (the most urban) grew faster than any other county type in every year between 2010 and 2017. But between 2017 and 2018, the growth rate of rank 1 counties slipped below that of rank 2 counties—an increase of 0.72 percent for rank 1 counties versus a slightly larger 0.75 percent increase for rank 2 counties. Behind the slower growth of rank 1 counties are small declines between 2017 and 2018 in the populations of the three largest metro areas —New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. 

Conversely, some nonmetropolitan counties that had been steadily losing population are now making small gains. Rank 6 and 8 counties grew slightly in both 2017 and 2018, but those gains were not large enough to make up for losses earlier in the decade.  

Source: USDA, Economic Research Service, Rural-Urban Continuum Codes and Census Bureau, County Population Totals and Components of Change: 2010–2018

Student Loans May Explain Rural Population Decline

Rural counties have been losing population in recent years and urban counties have been growing. One factor behind rural population loss is the migration of young adults from rural to urban areas. What's driving young adults away from their rural homes? Student debt may be a factor, according to a study by the Federal Reserve Board. In an analysis of how student debt affects the migration of young adults in rural areas, the Feds examined Equifax/Federal Reserve Bank of New York Consumer Credit Panel data, comparing student debt levels of young adults in rural areas with changes in their census tract of residence over a six-year time period. These are the findings...

• Young adults with student loans were less likely to remain in rural areas than those without student loans—52 percent of those with student loans were still in a rural area six years later versus 66 percent of those without student loans.
• Young adults with the greatest student loan debt were least likely to remain in rural areas—37 percent of those in the highest quartile of student loan debt were in a rural area six years later versus 73 percent of those in the lowest quartile of debt.
• Young adults who moved to metropolitan areas did better than those who stayed in rural areas. They paid down their loans faster, had higher credit scores, and were more likely to have mortgage debt (own a home).

"With students borrowing at higher rates and in larger amounts to pursue postsecondary education," conclude the Fed researchers, "student loan debt may play an increased role in the dynamics of urban-rural migration."

Source: Federal Reserve Board, Consumer and Community Context, January 2019, "Rural Brain Drain": Examining Millennial Migration Patterns and Student Loan Debt," (PDF)

Opioid Prescriptions Are More Common in Rural Areas

Rural areas have been hit hard by the opioid epidemic. The injury is, in part, self-inflicted. Primary care physicians in rural areas are more likely than those in urban areas to prescribe opioids for their patients, reports the CDC in a study of opioid prescribing rates.

CDC researchers examined electronic prescriptions written by 31,422 primary health care providers during the January 2014 to March 2017 time period. Their findings document the big differences in opioid prescription rates by a county's urban-rural status...

Percent of patients receiving opioid prescriptions, January 2014—March 2017 average
9.6% in rural counties
9.4% in micropolitan counties
7.7% in small metro areas
6.7% in medium metro areas
5.6% in large fringe metros
5.2% in large central metros

The CDC undertook the study to determine whether the 2016 release of its Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain had helped to reduce opioid prescriptions. It did. In every type of county, the opioid prescription rate declined over the time period. In rural counties, the percentage of patients who received opioid prescriptions fell from 10.3 percent in 2014 to 9.0 percent during the March 2016 to March 2017 time period. In large central metropolitan counties, the rate fell from 5.4 to 5.0 percent.

"As less densely populated areas appear to indicate both substantial progress in decreasing opioid prescribing and ongoing need for reduction," the researchers conclude, "community health care practices and intervention programs must continue to be tailored to community characteristics."

Source: CDC, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Opioid Prescribing Rates in Nonmetropolitan and Metropolitan Counties among Primary Care Providers Using an Electronic Health Record System—United States, 2014–2017

10 Questions: An Update (Part 1)

Two years ago Demo Memo presented 10 vital demographic questions and asked how many answers to these questions we would have once we had more data in hand. Two years later, the same questions are still of great importance. We have more data. So how much more do we know? Let's take a look...

1. When will the baby bust end? We now know it might not end. The decline in births since the 2007 peak is as great as the decline in the aftermath of the Great Depression (a 10.7 percent drop). But this may be more than a dip in the road. An analysis by the Center for Retirement Research suggests the fertility decline may be permanent, driven by structural changes in childbearing patterns. The United States appears to be adopting the low-fertility regime common in other developed countries.

2. Why is life expectancy declining? In two of the past three years, life expectancy in the United States has declined. We now know that the declines in 2015 and 2017 were due in large part to rising mortality rates among people under age 65—primarily from drug overdoses and suicides. The biggest increases in drug overdoses and suicide rates have occurred in rural areas—see Question 4, below.

3. Will homeownership make a comeback? The homeownership rate hit a post-Great Recession low of 63.4 percent in 2016, then climbed to 63.9 percent in 2017—the first statistically significant rise in more than a decade. While the increase is encouraging, the homeownership rate is unlikely to return to the highs of the early 2000s. The Millennial generation—now at the age of first-time home buying—is burdened by student loan payments. Student loans delay homeownership by 7 years, according to the National Association of Realtors. Consequently, the age of first-time home buying (the age at which the homeownership rate first surpasses 50 percent) has shifted from the early to the late thirties.

4. What will save small town and rural America? Corporate America will not be coming to the rescue, judging by Amazon's choice to place its second headquarters in two of the largest and richest metropolitan areas in the country. The continuing allure of urban areas makes this question more important than ever—and we don't yet have any answers. But we may know more about why rural areas are falling behind. A statistical concept called "gambler's ruin" explains it, says economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. The gambler (small town or rural area) who starts with the fewest pennies (economic opportunities) is the one most likely to go bankrupt. Small towns and rural America have a shrinking pile of pennies to play with and are increasingly likely to face ruin because of it. We still don't know how to solve this problem or even if we can.

5. When will Millennials marry? The median age at first marriage continues to rise, reaching a new record high in 2017 of 27.8 years for women and 29.8 years for men. Why are Millennials delaying marriage? One reason is that a much larger share of them go to college, which delays marriage and childbearing. Another reason is student loan debt, which not only delays homeownership but also marriage, according to the National Association of Realtors.

To be continued tomorrow...