chapter 6 data sources, methodologies and measurement issues david mcgranahan (us) and ray...
TRANSCRIPT
Chapter 6Data Sources, Methodologies and
Measurement Issues
David McGranahan (US) and Ray Bolman(Canada)
Joint UNECE/EURSTAT/FAO/OECD Meeting on Food and Agricultural Statistics in Europe
Rome, 29 June-1 July 2005)
Data Sources
Description Censuses of Population and Agriculture (linkage) Household budget surveys Living Standards Measurement Study
International Household Survey Network Labor market surveys Vital statistics Administrative records (taxes, licenses, schools)
Estimations
Concepts Rural (localities and regions) Households
Methods
Sampling Census master frame
Decays over time Stratified and cluster sampling Oversampling
Core and supplementary modules
GIS Distances (from urban center, hospital, school) Environmental features Ecological methods (transects)
Rural measurement issues
Definitions of ruralArea outside of places (or contiguous density) of 2,000 or 2,500
Recommended Census definition
Broader territorial units lacking either major centers or substantial urban populations (i.e., mostly rural)
Required for analysis of rural livelihoods, because of commuting
Geographic unitsBoundaries change over time with population growth Porous due to commutingSmall size creates problems of unreliability, confidentiality
Rural measurement issues 2
Measurement validity in rural contextUnemployment vs underemploymentMultiple and seasonal job-holding, informal economyDistance to as well as presence of facilities
Territorial level concepts (assets)Social capitalEntrepreneurship and creative capitalPhysical infrastructure (roads, airport access, broadband)GovernanceAmenities and disamenities
natural, cultural, built, agricultural
Figure 3
Forest and rural county employment indicators, 2000
Rural Indicator
Pe
rce
nt
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
13.2
21.2
Employment growth,1990-2000
4.86.5
Unemployment2000
-2.11.8
Population change,2000-2004
Under 10%
10% or more
Forest
Figure 5
Forest and county average income and housing statistics, 2000
32,600
58,000
79,300
32,000
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
Median household income,1999
Median value own housing, 2000
Rural Indicator
Do
llar
s
Under 10%
10% or more
Forest
Conclusion
Challenges Integrate farm, farm household with other surveys and
censuses GIS Integration with ecological, environmental measuresNonmarket goods; quality of life
Quality of Life
Evidence Preference for countryside residence (U.S., Netherlands) Net migration favors rural areas (U.S., ?) Almost universal preference for certain landscapes
Open vistas, clumps of trees, lake or pond, mystery (mountains) Evident in landscape pictures
Psychological benefits of exposure to nature
337 children, grades 3-5, 5 rural NY counties
Nature measured as natural views from kitchen and living room (0-2), live plants in living room, grass yard.
Lewis Stressful Life Events Scale
Parental report of distress behavior (Rutter Child Behavior Questionnaire)
Control for household income
Study Results
Nature moderates effects of stressful life events on psychological distress
Low Medium High
Stressful life events
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Psy
cho
log
ical
dis
tre
ss
7.2
10.2
13.2Low nature
6.3
7.9
9.4
High nature
Life stress among rural children (Wells & Evans, 2003)
Nature: the rural asset
Nature and quality of life U.S., Netherlands: preference for countryside residence Almost universal preference for certain landscapes
Open vistas, clumps of trees, lake or pond, mystery (mountains) Psychological benefits of exposure to nature
Can you measure nature? Largely public good (Housing an exception) Not captured by recreation Lack of measures does not make it unimportant and we can
begin with universal preferences. GIS
Forest example
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cleared Notreforested
Slightlyreforested
Mostlyreforested
Completelyreforested
Preferences in an alpine settingF
requ
enci
es o
f pa
ir-pr
efer
ence
s
Amount of woody patches
Hunziker and Kienast, 1999
Figure 2
Forest and average rural county population change, 1990-2000
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
Percent of land in forest
Per
cen
t ch
ang
e
Smoothed line
R2 = .19
Six Components:
Warm, sunny Januaries (2)
Temperate, low-humidity Julys (2)
Varied topography
Shores, lakes, ponds
Very high
High
Below average
Low
Above average
Figure 6
Map of Natural Amenities Scale
Source: McGranahan
Figure 7
Natural amenities and average rural county population change,1970-2003
-123 14
42
94
150
212
-3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4+
Natural amenities
Percent change
Conclusion
Rural context ≠ urban context Quality of life considerations mean that some may be
willing to forgo income for rural residence Natural settings are rural assets Measures extremely important in understanding rural
development not included in national survey statistics (landscape)
Ecologists have made considerable progress in measuring landscape
Denmark landscape study
4.7
6.56.0
Farmers Residents Visitors
Respondent group
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Bea
uty
5.8
4.7
3.8
Ag
rari
an
Hal
f-o
pe
n s
wam
p
Source: van den Berg et al., 1998
Analgesics, 2-5 days post op
Weak Moderate Strong
Strength
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
No
. of
do
ses
2.6
3.7
2.5
Wall5.4
1.7
1.0
Trees
Hospital study results (Ulrich, 1984)