Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T23:24:55.803Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Distribution of Benefits from Industrialization in Rural Areas: Some Findings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Richard F. Bieker
Richard F. Bieker*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Delaware State College, Dover
Get access

Extract

Industrialization has long been proposed as a policy for promoting regional economic growth and reducing the incidence of unemployment, poverty and dependency in lagging regions (Smith). Such policy proposals are based on the trickle down theory. This theory holds that economic development results in an increase in the demand for skilled labor which in turn results in an upgrading of the positions of the semiskilled, unskilled, and unemployed. The result is economic growth and a reduction in the incidence of unemployment, poverty and dependency and the degree of income inequality in the area.

Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , Fall 1982 , pp. 71 - 77
Copyright
Copyright © Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This research was funded by the Cooperative State Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

References

Aaron, Henry, “The Foundations of the ‘War on Poverty’ Reexamined,” American Economic Review, 57 (1967), pp. 1229–1240.Google Scholar
Aigner, D. J. and Haines, A. J., “On the Determinants of Income Inequality,” American Economic Review, 57 (1967), pp. 175–181.Google Scholar
Allred, David L. and Smith, Dennis K., An Interindustry Economic Analysis of the Agricultural Sector of Sussex County, Delaware, 1970, University of Delaware Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 405, April 1973.Google Scholar
Anderson, W. H. Locke, “Trickling Down: The Relationship between Economic Growth and the Extent of Poverty among American Families,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 78 (1964) pp. 511–524.Google Scholar
Brucker, Sharon and Cole, Gerald, An Input-Output Study of Sussex County, Delaware, University of Delaware Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 428, July 1979.Google Scholar
Bryant, W. Keith, “Industrialization as a Poverty Policy,” Agricultural Policy Institute Series 37, North Carolina State University (1969), pp. 71–82.Google Scholar
Budd, Edward C., “Postwar Changes in the Size Distribution of Income in the U.S.,” American Economic Review, 60 (1970), pp. 247–260.Google Scholar
Galbraith, John K., The Affluent Society, Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin, 1958.Google Scholar
Galoway, Lowell E., “The Foundations of the War on Poverty,” American Economic Review, 55 (1965) pp. 122–131.Google Scholar
Harrington, Michael, The Other America, Baltimore Md.: Penguin, 1963.Google Scholar
Lampman, Robert, Ends and Means of Reducing Poverty, Chicago, Ill.: Markham, 1971.Google Scholar
Reder, M. W., “The Theory of Occupational Wage Differentials,” American Economic Review, 45 (1955), pp. 833–852.Google Scholar
Reinschmiedt, Lynn and Jones, Lonnie, “The Impact of Industrialization on Employee Income Distribution in Rural Texas Communities,” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, 9 (1977), pp. 67–72.Google Scholar
Schiller, Bradley, The Economics of Poverty and Discrimination, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1980.Google Scholar
Shaffer, Ron Ε., “Rural Industrialization: A Local Income Analysis,” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, 6 (1974), pp. 97–102.Google Scholar
Smith, Eldon D., How New Industry Affects Rural Areas: A Review of Research, University of Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station paper, undated.Google Scholar
Smith, Eldon D., “Restrictions on Policy Alternatives Relating to Underdeveloped Regions of Developed Countries,” Journal of Farm Economics, 48 (1966), pp. 1227–1231.Google Scholar
Tobin, James, “Improving the Economic Status of the Negro,” Daedalus, 94 (1965).Google Scholar
U. S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1960, General Social and Economic Characteristics, Final Report PC(1)-C, Delaware (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962).Google Scholar
U. S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1970, General Social and Economic Characteristics, Final Report PC(l)-C9, Delaware (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972a).Google Scholar
U. S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-60, No. 107, Money Incomes and Poverty Status of Families and Persons in the United States: 1976 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977).Google Scholar
U. S. Bureau of the Census, County Business Patterns, 1970 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972b).Google Scholar
U. S. Bureau of the Census, County Business Patterns, 1978 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1980).Google Scholar
U. S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1978 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1979).Google Scholar
U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, Washington, DC, 1976.Google Scholar