Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to learn more!

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Economic Development Quarterly
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hammer, R. B.
Right arrow Articles by Voss, P. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Effects of Integrating the U.S. Census Bureau's Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates Into the Appalachian Regional Commission's Designation of Economically Distressed Counties

Roger B. Hammer

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Robin M. Blakely

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Paul R. Voss

University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) has used the "distressed county" designation to identify counties with the most structurally disadvantaged economies. The ARC annually updates distressed status of counties with current unemployment and per capita market income data. This research evaluates the potential impact of incorporating the U.S. Census Bureau Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) into the ARC distressed county designation. The distressed status accuracy results from the end of the 1980s and the magnitude and causes of distressed status transitions in the early 1990s indicate that using the SAIPE would alter the distressed designation but not to a radical degree. However, combining the SAIPE point estimate and the SAIPE upper bound estimate in the determination of distressed status would achieve the objective of using more current estimates of poverty while reducing the negative consequences of using an estimate of poverty with greater statistical variation than decennial census-derived estimates.

Key Words: poverty estimates • SAIPE • economic distress • Appalachia • Appalachian Regional Commission

Economic Development Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 2, 165-174 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0891242403017002004
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?