Post on 26-Jun-2015
transcript
A reassessment of the social and economic
impact of schools on rural communities
John Sipple, Sutee Anantsuksomsri, Nij Tontisirin, Joe D. Francis - Program in Applied
DemographicsPresented at the 2013 Federal Reserve System Research
Conference, Washington, D.C. April 11, 2013
Introduction
• View that schools in rural communities are central to community vitality (e.g., the hub of community life).
• School district consolidation and school closure are often proposed to relieve fiscal stress (reduce tax burden & enhancing educational opportunity).
• It is unclear to what extent schools play in the social and economic vitality of rural communities.
Introduction
• Lyson (2002) showed that the presence of schools provide significant social and economic benefits to rural communities.
• Lyson’s Findings:– In smallest rural communities, the presence of a school is
associated with higher housing values– Higher per capita income from self-employment is found
in communities with schools– Higher proportion of workers in communities with school
are employed within their villages
This Study
• This paper revisits Lyson’s hypothesis by employing 2000 & 2010 Census and geoinformatic analysis of school locations in New York State.
• Like Lyson, we focus on rural villages (i.e. incorporated villages with population 2,500 or less)
• These rural villages are further categorized by presence or absence of public schools
Data & Methodology
• Data are primarily drawn from two databases: 1. Census data
• 2000 Census (short form & long form)• 2010 Census (decennial & ACS)• Census geography TIGER/Line® shapefile: rural incorporated villages in
New York State (NYS) of both 2000 & 2010 Census
2. Public school directory from NYS Department of Education (2010) and Cornell Program on Applied Demographics (2000)
• Key variables include: – population characteristics– housing characteristics– income and welfare– occupational and employment characteristics
Population 500 or less
Population 501 to 2,500
Population 2,500+ (urban)
2010 PlacesTotal: 1,189
73 66
272 245
2000 2010
exclude 32 outliers (based on village’s median house value)
705 846
Rural Schools in 2010
1990 2000 201030,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
55,000
60,000
65,000
Median House value (1990 $)
SM-SchoolSM-No SchoolLG-SchoolLG-No School
1990 2000 201020,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
Household Income (1990 $)
SM-SchoolSM-No SchoolLG-SchoolLG-No School
RegressionsHH Inc2000
HH Inc2010
PerCap Inc2000
PerCap Inc2010
H Value2000
H Value2010
Large + +
School +
School X Size -
<39 - - - - - -
W Child + + + + + +
% White - - - - -
White collar + + + + + +
Self Employ + + + + + +
No Commute
R2 .79 .60 .73 .57 .71 .51
Discussions & Conclusions
• We find more nuanced relationships between the presence of schools and community vitality– Stabilizing/Constraining impact of schools– Once controlling for other factors, the presence of schools only
impacts HH Income (less so for large).– Once controlling for other factors, larger villages are more prosperous
• Further studies– panel analysis (1990-2010)– Does distance from village center to school matter.