RURAL‐URBAN DIFFERENCES IN THE UTILIZATION AND AMELIORATIVE EFFECTS OF WELFARE PROGRAMS

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

At a time when welfare policy analysts are preoccupied with the problem of welfare dependency, this paper refocuses attention on the ability of welfare (AFDC and general assistance) to reduce poverty among families, by highlighting and explaining rural‐urban differences in this ameliorative effect. Descriptive and multivariate methods are used to analyze data from the March 1987 Current Population Survey. Results show that despite comparatively high poverty rates in nonmetro areas, the nonmetro poor were much less likely than their urban counterparts t o receive welfare. Moreover, nonmetro welfare recipients received considerably less welfare income, on average, than metro recipients. Accordingly, the ameliorative effect of welfare was lowest in nonmetro areas and highest in central cities. Logistic regression analysis revealed that nonmetro poor families were less likely to receive welfare than those in metro areas because they were more likely to be working, older, childless, and headed by a married couple.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)782-794
Number of pages13
JournalReview of Policy Research
Volume7
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1988

Fingerprint

poverty
welfare
utilization
logistics
regression analysis
income
welfare recipient
married couple
social policy
family
effect
programme
assistance
recipient
ability
rate
method
city
policy

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Public Administration
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

@article{7ca5a51ffe504cad856392a9ade6cdea,
title = "RURAL‐URBAN DIFFERENCES IN THE UTILIZATION AND AMELIORATIVE EFFECTS OF WELFARE PROGRAMS",
abstract = "At a time when welfare policy analysts are preoccupied with the problem of welfare dependency, this paper refocuses attention on the ability of welfare (AFDC and general assistance) to reduce poverty among families, by highlighting and explaining rural‐urban differences in this ameliorative effect. Descriptive and multivariate methods are used to analyze data from the March 1987 Current Population Survey. Results show that despite comparatively high poverty rates in nonmetro areas, the nonmetro poor were much less likely than their urban counterparts t o receive welfare. Moreover, nonmetro welfare recipients received considerably less welfare income, on average, than metro recipients. Accordingly, the ameliorative effect of welfare was lowest in nonmetro areas and highest in central cities. Logistic regression analysis revealed that nonmetro poor families were less likely to receive welfare than those in metro areas because they were more likely to be working, older, childless, and headed by a married couple.",
author = "Lief Jensen",
year = "1988",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1111/j.1541-1338.1988.tb00896.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
pages = "782--794",
journal = "Review of Policy Research",
issn = "1541-132X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

RURAL‐URBAN DIFFERENCES IN THE UTILIZATION AND AMELIORATIVE EFFECTS OF WELFARE PROGRAMS. / Jensen, Lief.

In: Review of Policy Research, Vol. 7, No. 4, 06.1988, p. 782-794.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - RURAL‐URBAN DIFFERENCES IN THE UTILIZATION AND AMELIORATIVE EFFECTS OF WELFARE PROGRAMS

AU - Jensen, Lief

PY - 1988/6

Y1 - 1988/6

N2 - At a time when welfare policy analysts are preoccupied with the problem of welfare dependency, this paper refocuses attention on the ability of welfare (AFDC and general assistance) to reduce poverty among families, by highlighting and explaining rural‐urban differences in this ameliorative effect. Descriptive and multivariate methods are used to analyze data from the March 1987 Current Population Survey. Results show that despite comparatively high poverty rates in nonmetro areas, the nonmetro poor were much less likely than their urban counterparts t o receive welfare. Moreover, nonmetro welfare recipients received considerably less welfare income, on average, than metro recipients. Accordingly, the ameliorative effect of welfare was lowest in nonmetro areas and highest in central cities. Logistic regression analysis revealed that nonmetro poor families were less likely to receive welfare than those in metro areas because they were more likely to be working, older, childless, and headed by a married couple.

AB - At a time when welfare policy analysts are preoccupied with the problem of welfare dependency, this paper refocuses attention on the ability of welfare (AFDC and general assistance) to reduce poverty among families, by highlighting and explaining rural‐urban differences in this ameliorative effect. Descriptive and multivariate methods are used to analyze data from the March 1987 Current Population Survey. Results show that despite comparatively high poverty rates in nonmetro areas, the nonmetro poor were much less likely than their urban counterparts t o receive welfare. Moreover, nonmetro welfare recipients received considerably less welfare income, on average, than metro recipients. Accordingly, the ameliorative effect of welfare was lowest in nonmetro areas and highest in central cities. Logistic regression analysis revealed that nonmetro poor families were less likely to receive welfare than those in metro areas because they were more likely to be working, older, childless, and headed by a married couple.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84984016435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84984016435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1541-1338.1988.tb00896.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1541-1338.1988.tb00896.x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84984016435

VL - 7

SP - 782

EP - 794

JO - Review of Policy Research

JF - Review of Policy Research

SN - 1541-132X

IS - 4

ER -