APPALACHIA AT THE MILLENNIUM: 

AN OVERVIEW OF RESULTS FROM CENSUS 2000 

Kelvin M. Pollard 

Population Reference Bureau 

1875 Connecticut Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20009 

JUNE 2003 
Table of Contents 

About the Appalachian Region..................................................................2 

The 2000 Decennial Census........................................................................7 

Demographic Characteristics.....................................................................8 

Economic Characteristics........................................................................17 

Education and Other Social Characteristics...................................................28 

Households and Families.........................................................................34 

Housing Characteristics...........................................................................41 

Drawing Conclusions About Appalachia—and Digging Beneath the Surface............50 
Abstract 

Since a landmark 1964 report, the region known as Appalachia has been characterized 

mostly by its economic hardship and its geographic isolation. However, the 13-state area 

is far from homogeneous, containing pockets of rural isolation and parts of fast-growing 

metropolitan areas. Using data from the decennial census, this report provides a 

demographic, economic, and social portrait in the 410-county Appalachian region at the 

dawn of the 21st century. The new century found a region that grew 9 percent during the 

1990s, and was approaching levels of the rest of country in some aspects (while 

continuing to lag behind in others). Moreover, these developments had some wideranging variations among Appalachia’s sub-regions and economic development 

categories.
1

APPALACHIA AT THE MILLENNIUM:

AN OVERVIEW OF RESULTS FROM CENSUS 2000

Kelvin M. Pollard

Population Reference Bureau

An area that was among the focal points of President Lyndon Johnson’s “War on

Poverty” in the 1960s, the region known as Appalachia has received occasional attention since

then—mainly for its economic hardship. Indeed, a landmark 1964 report by the President’s

Appalachian Regional Commission concluded that the region was different from other parts of

the country. Not only did it suffer from geographic isolation, but its social and economic

development lagged behind that of the rest of the United States. Although the original report

discussed the diversity within the Appalachian region, it stressed Appalachia as a single entity

(Isserman, 1996a).

Although it remains a distinct part of America, the Appalachian region is far from being

homogeneous. What is now considered Appalachia stretches from the Northeast to parts of the

old Confederacy. It includes pockets of rural isolation and parts of large (and sometimes rapidly

growing) metropolitan areas. The beginning of the new millennium provides as good an

opportunity as any to consider (1) the extent to which it is a single, unique region apart from the

rest of America, and (2) the variation and diversity within its geographic boundaries. Results

from the 2000 decennial census, the major tool for gleaning information about small areas, will

help us provide some answers to these questions.

As its title indicates, this report provides a general overview of how Appalachia fared

demographically, economically, and socially at the turn of the 21st century—as well as how its

status changed during the 1990s. The report is the first of a series of studies that will provide

great detail on these trends. Upcoming reports will examine in greater detail such phenomena as
2

Table 1

This overview is the first of a series of reports

examining trends in Appalachia during the 1990s. The

reports will cover the subjects listed below.

Population Change and Distribution

Labor Market Performance, Poverty, and Income Inequality

Geographic Concentration of Poverty

Migration and Immigration

Race and Ethnicity

Households and Families

Changing Age Structures

Educational Attainment

Housing and Commuting Patterns

population growth, labor markets,

poverty, racial and ethnic diversity, and

education (see Table 1). This overview

provides a summary look at the region

and a preview of what will follow in

future reports released in the coming

months.

About the Appalachian Region

Appalachia, not surprisingly, refers to the area around the Appalachian Mountains. The

Appalachian chain is the major mountain system of eastern North America, covering more than

1,500 miles of territory from the Canadian province of Quebec to northern Alabama. Included in

the Appalachian chain are many smaller sections, including the Green Mountains in Vermont,

the Allegheny Plateau in Pennsylvania, the Blue Ridge Mountains of the Virginias, and the Great

Smoky Mountains along the North Carolina-Tennessee border.

The definition of Appalachia has varied through the years—focused mainly on economic

types (Bogue and Beale, 1961; Beale, 1990, Bagi et. al., 1999). The one used in this report

comes from the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC). Created by the Appalachian

Regional Development Act of 1965 (and most recently reauthorized in 2002), the ARC is a

partnership between the federal government and the governments of 13 states, whose purpose is

to improve conditions in the Appalachian region. The region covers 410 counties1

 in 13 states

 1

 In addition to the 410 counties, the Appalachian region contains eight Virginia cities that are independent of any

county authority (that is, they function like counties). For analytical purposes, the Appalachian Regional

Commission—following the practice of the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)—incorporates each

independent city within an adjacent county, and this report follows that practice.
3

Figure 1

Appalachia is a diverse region—one that encompasses all or part

of 13 states and can be separated into three different subregions.

Source: Appalachian Regional Commission, 2002.

(see Figure 1)—all of West Virginia, as well as southern New York; most of Pennsylvania;

southeastern Ohio; the western portions of Maryland, Virginia, and the Carolinas; the eastern

portions of Tennessee and Kentucky; the northern portions of Georgia and Alabama; and

northeastern Mississippi (Appalachian Regional Commission, 2002a).

As defined by the ARC, the

Appalachian region is divided into

three major subregions. Northern

Appalachia contains every

Appalachian county in New York,

Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Ohio,

as well as 46 of West Virginia’s 55

counties. Central Appalachia

includes West Virginia’s nine

southernmost counties, all of

Appalachian Kentucky, the

southwestern tip of Virginia, and

the northwest part of Tennessee’s

Appalachian area. Finally, southern Appalachia includes most of the Appalachian portion of

Virginia and Tennessee, as well as the entire Appalachian sections of the Carolinas, Georgia,

Alabama, and Mississippi (Appalachian Regional Commission, 2002b).2

 

2

 The ARC created the current subregions in 1974 as a result of an analysis of several geographic, economic, and

demographic factors. For a detailed analysis of the criteria used to define the three subregions, see the article, “The

New Appalachian Subregions and their Development Strategies” (Appalachian Regional Commission, 1974). An

earlier classification of Appalachia into four subregions is available in another article, “Experiment in Appalachia”

(Appalachian Regional Commission, 1967).
4

Of the 410 Appalachian counties, 109 are in metropolitan areas; these metropolitan

counties comprise three-fifths of the region’s population. Some of these are part of large

metropolitan areas (areas of at least 1 million persons)—for example, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, and

Washington, D.C. Others are part of mid-size metropolitan areas (areas between 250,000 and 1

million population), such as Knoxville, Tenn.; Scranton-Wilkes-Barre-Hazelton, Pa.; and

Charleston, W. Va. And others are part of small metros (of less than 250,000 persons), virtually

all of which consist of one or two counties. State College, Pa.; and Florence, Ala., are examples

of this last type (Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2001). Roughly

half of these metropolitan counties (55 in all) are in southern Appalachia, which includes parts of

Atlanta and Birmingham within its boundaries. Another 47 counties are in northern

Appalachia—home to Pittsburgh; Charleston, W. Va.; and the western exurbs of Washington,

D.C. Central Appalachia is the most rural of the three sub-regions, with just seven metropolitan

counties among the 87 in the region. The three metropolitan areas that have components in

central Appalachia are Knoxville, Tenn.; Louisville, Ky.; and Huntington, W. Va.-Ashland, Ky.,

metro.

The Appalachian region also has had a variety of economic experiences. Many areas

continue to be almost as economically depressed as they were during the Johnson administration.

Many other areas, however, have an economic status that approaches—and in some cases

surpasses—that of the United States as a whole. Recognizing this fact, the ARC has developed a

system that classifies Appalachia into four categories of economic development (see Figure 2,

page 5). Each of these categories is based on three indicators of economic viability—per capita

income, poverty, and unemployment.
5

Figure 2

Based on their levels of economic development, Appalachian

counties can be classified into four categories.

Source: Appalachian Regional Commission, 2002.

As the category’s name implies, Distressed counties are experiencing the greatest

economic hardships. Counties in the Distressed category have per capita incomes no greater that

67 percent of the national

average, and rates of poverty and

unemployment at least 150

percent of the respective rates for

the country as a whole. Counties

with poverty rates at least 200

percent of the national average

need only match one of the two

remaining criteria to be classified

as Distressed. As Figure 2

shows, Distressed counties are

mostly in central Appalachia,

although there are pockets

elsewhere—notably in Ohio, Alabama, and Mississippi.

Counties classified as Transitional are noticeably worse off than the nation as a whole on

at least one of the three economic indicators, but do not meet all of the criteria necessary to

classify them as Distressed. As the name indicates, Transitional counties can be considered in an

“intermediate” phase of economic development. Such areas have some characteristics that

clearly are problematic, yet might also be close to (or even be better than) the national average

on another key economic indicator. For example, Pickens County, S.C. (home to Clemson

University), had a 1999 per capita income of slightly less than $18,000—just 72 percent of the
6

national average. Yet both its unemployment and poverty rates were better than those for the

nation as a whole. The vast majority of Appalachian counties (259, predominately in northern

and southern Appalachia) find themselves in this category.

Competitive counties are those that have per capita incomes between 80 percent and 99

percent of the national average, but have poverty and income rates at or lower than (i.e., better

than) the national average. Competitive counties are those that increasingly resemble the rest of

the country economically, yet have not achieved total economic parity. As the per capita income

threshold indicates, however, Competitive counties are reasonably close even on this measure.

(Indeed, the wide gap between its per capita income and the national average is what caused

Pickens County, S.C., to be classified as Transitional rather than Competitive.) Most of the 21

Competitive counties are in southern Appalachia.

Finally, there are the counties in the Attainment category. Attainment counties have rates

at or better than the national average on all three indicators—income, poverty, and

unemployment. As the name implies, Attainment counties have achieved total economic parity

with the nation as a whole; some of them would be among the most economically advanced

counties in the nation. For example, 2000 census data show that Forsyth County, Ga., in

suburban Atlanta, ranked among the top 100 counties nationally (out of 3,110)3

 on income and

unemployment, and among the top 150 on the poverty indicator. Nine counties are in the

Attainment category, and all but one is part of a metropolitan area, such as Atlanta; WinstonSalem, N.C.; and Pittsburgh. (Allegheny County, Pa., which contains Pittsburgh, is the only

Attainment county outside southern Appalachia.)

 3

 The 2000 census reports data for 3,141 counties and county equivalents (including independent cities that function

as counties). That number shrinks to 3,110 when we follow the BEA practice of incorporating many independent

cities into their adjacent counties.
7

Using data from the 2000 census, this report will provide a preliminary overview of

selected demographic, social, economic, and housing patterns within the Appalachian region.

Besides comparing Appalachia with the rest of the country, the report will examine (where

applicable) the Appalachian counties with the non-Appalachian areas in their individual states.

Comparisons also will be made between metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas; between

northern, central, and southern Appalachia; and among the ARC’s four economic development

categories.

The 2000 Decennial Census

The decennial census provides a detailed look at demographic, social, and economic

characteristics for small areas. Besides being required by the U.S. Constitution to provide data

for congressional apportionment, the census also provides the informational source for the

distribution of nearly $200 billion in federal funds. Many people in the public and private

sector—including local officials and business people—rely on census data to make key decisions

in such areas as transportation, housing, and economic development. And, the results from the

2000 census allow researchers to analyze the “state of the U.S. population”—how it (or various

subgroups within the population) is faring at a given time.

Data from the Census 2000 “short form”—items that the census asked of every

household in the country—include statistics on six items: age, sex, race, Hispanic origin,

household relationship, and owner/renter status (tenure). From these data, one can analyze such

characteristics as age structure, racial and ethnic diversity, composition of households, rate of

homeownership, and vacancy status. Items from the census “long form” (asked of one-sixth of

households nationwide) contain data on a variety of other characteristics—including labor force,
8

Table 2

Of Appalachia’s 22.9 million residents in

2000, the greatest number lived in

Pennsylvania, the fewest in Maryland.

AREA 2000 POPULATION

(in thousands)

APPALACHIA 22,894

Alabama 2,837

Georgia 2,208

Kentucky 1,142

Maryland 237

Mississippi 615

New York 1,073

North Carolina 1,526

Ohio 1,455

Pennsylvania 5,820

South Carolina 1,029

Tennessee 2,479

Virginia 665

West Virginia 1,808

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

industry, income and poverty, education, nativity, and housing costs. As these data are available

for small areas, they can allow users to study not only individual areas, but different

combinations of such areas, depending on the user’s needs.

Demographic Characteristics

Population in 2000. The Appalachian region had 22.9 million people in 2000—8 percent

of the total U.S. population of 281.4 million. Nine of 10 Appalachian residents live in either the

region’s northern section (which had 10.1 million residents) or its southern one (with 10.7

million persons). In fact, the 2000 census marked the first time where more persons were

counted in southern Appalachia than in northern Appalachia. Central Appalachia, by contrast,

had about 2.2 million persons in 2000—just 9

percent of the region’s population.

Among the states, the greatest number of

Appalachian residents called Pennsylvania home;

the Keystone State’s 52 counties in the region had

5.8 million people in 2000 (see Table 2). That

figure is more than twice the number of

Appalachia’s people who lived in Alabama,

which had 2.8 million residents in its 37 counties

in its region. The Appalachian sections of

Tennessee and Georgia also had more than 2

million persons each—both surpassing the 1.8

million residents of West Virginia, the only state
9

entirely in the Appalachian region. The fewest number of Appalachians lived in Maryland; just

236,000 lived in the Old Line State’s three westernmost counties.

About 13.2 million Appalachian residents—58 percent of the total—lived in the region’s

109 metropolitan counties. About 62 percent of persons in both northern and southern

Appalachia lived in metropolitan areas, compared to just 14 percent (312,000) of central

Appalachia’s residents. Among the economic development categories, the Transitional counties

had the greatest number of residents—14.7 million, or 64 percent of Appalachia’s total

population. The nine Attainment counties had 3.2 million persons, nearly 400,000 more than the

region’s 121 Distressed counties. This is because all but one of the Attainment counties were

part of metropolitan areas, while the Distressed counties were predominately rural in character.

In fact, 82 of the Distressed counties had fewer than 25,000 residents in 2000; 17 of those had

populations under 10,000. As for the 21 Competitive counties, they were home to roughly 2.2

million Appalachian residents.

Population change in the 1990s. Taken in its entirety, the Appalachian region grew 9

percent in the 1990s, which was slower than the rest of the nation, which grew almost 14 percent.

As was the case nationwide, however, Appalachia’s growth pattern during the past decade was

not uniform (see Figure 3, page 10). Southern Appalachia grew 18 percent (twice the regional

average), and a number of counties in Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Alabama grew

even faster. In all, 76 counties (58 of which were in southern Appalachia, but also including

Pike and Monroe counties in northeastern Pennsylvania and Menifee County in Kentucky) were

particular growth magnets, increasing their population at least 20 percent during the past

decade—1.5 times the national average. (Forsyth County, Ga.—mentioned earlier as among the

wealthiest counties nationwide—more than doubled its population between 1990 and 2000.)
10

Figure 3

Appalachia’s 9 percent population growth in the 1990s masks

rapid growth in some areas and population loss in others.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

By contrast, growth was

slower in much of Appalachia’s

northern and central portions.

Central Appalachia grew slightly

less than 6 percent, which was

less than one-third southern

Appalachia’s rate. Northern

Appalachia barely grew at all; it

had less than 2 percent more

people in 2000 than it did in

1990. The situation was

particularly stark for 83

Appalachia counties. These

areas—mostly in New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and the southeastern corner of

Kentucky—all lost people during the 1990s. New York’s Appalachian region was especially

hard hit; 10 of its 14 counties lost population. So did 27 of West Virginia’s 55 counties

(although Putnam County outside Charleston, Monroe County in the southeast, and five counties

in the state’s panhandle all grew at least 15 percent—faster than the United States as a whole).

And, although Pike and Morgan counties each grew more than 40 percent, 18 of Pennsylvania’s

52 Appalachian counties had population losses in the 1990s.

Among the states, Appalachian Georgia grew the fastest—not really surprising

considering that the Peach State was among the nation’s growth leaders in the past decade. The

Appalachian counties in Georgia (which include outlying portions of Atlanta’s metropolitan area
11

as well as some retirement areas) had especially rapid growth –43 percent between 1990 and

2000, which was twice the growth rate the rest of the state enjoyed. (Of Georgia’s 37

Appalachian counties, 27 grew at least 20 percent during the decade.) The Appalachian sections

of North Carolina (17 percent), South Carolina (16 percent), and Tennessee (15 percent) also

proved to be attractive growth areas—although the non-Appalachian portions of all three states

had faster rates of growth. (Conversely, Alabama’s and Ohio’s Appalachian sections—at 10

percent and 6 percent, respectively—had relatively low growth rates, but growth in these states

was even slower outside those areas.)

By contrast, some states had particularly sluggish growth in their Appalachian sections.

Maryland’s Appalachian counties, for example, grew barely 5 percent—less than half the 11

percent growth in the rest of the state. The 4 percent increase in Virginia’s Appalachian

population was just one-fourth of the growth rate the rest of the Old Dominion experienced

during the 1990s. Appalachian Pennsylvania and West Virginia each grew less than 1 percent,

and the Appalachian portion of New York State actually lost people.

Appalachia’s metropolitan counties grew slightly faster than its nonmetropolitan ones

during the 1990s (9.5 percent vs. 8.6 percent). In northern Appalachia, however, it was the

nonmetropolitan counties that grew faster—they grew nearly 4 percent, which was nearly 10

times the paltry 0.4 percent growth rate for the subregion’s metropolitan counties. However,

population growth in nonmetro northern Appalachia still lagged behind the growth that both

metro and nonmetro counties in southern and central Appalachia experienced.

Among the economic development categories, the Competitive counties actually had the

fastest rate of growth, increasing nearly 19 percent during the 1990s. The Attainment counties

also grew faster than the non-Appalachian United States, collectively increasing their population
12

15 percent. Growth was more sluggish in the Transitional and Distressed counties; the

population in those two categories increased 8 percent and 4 percent, respectively. An

examination of rapidly growing counties (those that increased their population at least 20 percent

during the 1990s) and counties that lost population highlights the contrasting fortunes of the

Transitional and Distressed counties, however. Among the Transitional counties, 57 experienced

rapid growth while 49 lost population. By contrast, just five of the Distressed counties grew at

least 20 percent while 32 others shrunk.4

Racial and ethnic diversity. One of the major demographic stories of the 2000 census has

been the growing racial and ethnic diversity of the country. Nearly one in three Americans (31

percent) was a member of a minority group (defined here as anyone who identified with a racial

or ethnic group other than “non-Hispanic white”).5

 The country’s diversity is not universal,

however, and one can understand that by looking at Appalachia. Racial and ethnic minorities

made up only one in eight Appalachians (12 percent); they made up an even smaller share of

northern and central Appalachians (7 percent and 4 percent, respectively). Southern Appalachia,

with a 19 percent minority population, was more diverse than the region as a whole; in fact,

southern Appalachia was home to 2 million of the region’s 2.8 million residents who were

members of minority groups. Of the 2.8 million minority Appalachians, two-thirds (1.8 million)

were non-Hispanic black6, with Hispanics making up another one-sixth (465,000).

 4

 Two of the five Distressed counties that grew at least 20 percent (Cherokee County, N.C., and Meigs County,

Tenn.) are among 32 Distressed counties that the ARC might reclassify as Transitional counties for Fiscal Year 2004

(FY2004). Five other Distressed counties targeted for reclassification (Hart and Lincoln in Kentucky, Jackson and

Morgan in Tennessee, and Swain in North Carolina) also grew faster than the national growth rate of 13.2 percent.

However, four Distressed counties that might go to the Transitional category in FY2004 (Pike County, Ky.; Benton

County, Miss.; Monroe County, Ohio; and Lee County, Va.) actually lost people during the 1990s.

5

 In Census 2000, persons were allowed to select more than one race. “Multiracial” persons—including nonHispanic whites who also identified with another racial group—are included here among minorities.

6

Those persons who did not identify with another racial group.
13

Despite the relative lack of racial and ethnic diversity compared with the rest of the

country, Appalachia is more diverse at the dawn of the 21st century than it was a decade earlier.

In 1990, just 9 percent of Appalachians (1.9 million persons) were members of minority groups,

compared with 25 percent of persons living outside the region. During the 1990s, in fact, the

number of minorities in Appalachia increased nearly 50 percent—even faster than the 43 percent

increase in the rest of the country. The number of Hispanics in Appalachia more than tripled

between 1990 and 2000, and Hispanics accounted for more than one-third of the region’s

929,000 additional minority residents in the region during that time.

Just as is the case in the rest of the nation, children have been at the forefront of

minorities’ increasing presence in Appalachia. Of the region’s 5.4 million children, 16 percent

(869,000) were members of minority groups, compared with 41 percent for the non-Appalachian

United States. In southern Appalachia, minorities are 24 percent of the under-18 population.

While Appalachia clearly is not as racially or ethnically diverse as the rest of the country, the

above figures suggest that minorities can expect to play an increased role in the region’s future.

Among individual counties, the relative lack of racial and ethnic diversity is even starker

(see Figure 4, page 14). Non-Hispanic whites are at least 90 percent of the total population in

310 of the region’s 410 counties, and at least 95 percent in 215. Of Appalachia’s 27 counties

with minority populations of at least 30 percent, all but four are in either Alabama or Mississippi.

In most of these counties—indeed, in most of the region’s counties that are at least 5 percent

minority—non-Hispanic African Americans are the predominant minority group.

Among the states in the Appalachian region, Alabama’s Appalachian counties had the

largest number of minorities (718,000); Mississippi’s had the highest percentage (34 percent).

Among states with Appalachian and non-Appalachian portions, Alabama was the only state
14

Figure 4

Three-fourths of the counties in Appalachia were less than 10

percent minority.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

where more minorities resided

inside Appalachia than outside

it. Minorities in 2000 were

more than 20 percent of

residents in Alabama’s and

South Carolina’s Appalachian

sections, and were nearly 20

percent of the population in

Georgia’s. These, however,

were the exceptions; more than

90 percent of Appalachian

residents in almost all the other

states in the region were non-Hispanic white. In four states—Maryland, New York, Tennessee,

and Virginia—the contrast was especially stark. Minorities were less than 10 percent of the

population in the Appalachian portions of these states, but at least 30 percent outside the region.

Even in Mississippi and Alabama, minorities made up a smaller share in the Appalachian portion

than in the rest of the state.

Most minority Appalachian residents (1.5 million of 2.8 million) lived in the Transitional

counties—not surprising given the large number of Appalachians in those areas. Minorities,

however, made up just 10 percent in those counties as a whole—the same percentage as in the

Distressed counties. Minorities were a significantly greater presence in the Competitive and

Attainment counties, where they were 14 percent and 22 percent of the population, respectively.

It is perhaps no coincidence that virtually all the counties in these groups were in southern
15

Figure 5

The population in the Appalachian region tended to be older than that

of rest of the nation.

23.7

38.3

23.7

14.3

25.9

40.0

21.9

12.3

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Under age 18

Ages 18-44

Ages 45-64

Ages 65+

Appalachia Non-Appalachian U.S.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

Appalachia, or that they were in metropolitan areas. Indeed, Appalachian counties in metro

areas had larger minority concentrations than those in nonmetro areas—14 percent to 9 percent.

The 2000 census counted 219,000 multiracial persons—those who identified with more

than one race—in Appalachia. While the multiracial population is less than 1 percent of the

region’s total population (and not even 3 percent of the rest of the country’s), the very existence

of a “more than one race” option in the 2000 census form—and the fact that 219,000

Appalachian residents exercised that option—presages a significant change in the way

Americans think about race. Additionally, children (who are at the forefront of the country’s

diversity) make up 43 percent of Appalachia’s multiracial population. Those two facts suggest

that persons identifying with more than one race will become a greater part of the Appalachian

(and the total U.S.) population in future decades.

Age structure.

Appalachian areas tend to

have older populations

than the country as a

whole (see Figure 5).

The region’s 5.4 million

children under age 18 and

8.8 million younger

working-age adults ages

18 to 44 made up smaller

shares of the population

in 2000 (24 percent and
16

38 percent, respectively), than children and younger adults do outside Appalachia (26 percent

and 40 percent, respectively). At the other end of the age spectrum, Appalachia’s 3.3 million

persons age 65 and older were 14 percent of the region’s population, compared to 12 percent in

the rest of the country. All three Appalachian subregions and all four economic development

categories followed this general pattern, although older people made up 16 percent of northern

Appalachians and 13 percent of southern Appalachians. Moreover, this phenomenon is present

in every state except Georgia, where both the Appalachian and non-Appalachian sections are

growing much faster than the national average due to high in-migration, which favors young

adults.

In some states, the gap between the Appalachian section and the rest of the state is

particularly noticeable. In Appalachian Virginia, for example, children made up less than 21

percent and older people nearly 15 percent of the area’s populace. By contrast, the respective

shares were 25 percent and 11 percent in the Old Dominion’s non-Appalachian portion.

Pennsylvania, which has a greater concentration of older people than any other state except

Florida (nearly 16 percent of the Keystone State’s population was age 65 or older), illustrates this

point further. In the state’s Appalachian region, older people made up 17 percent of the

population, compared to barely 14 percent for the rest of the state. At the local level, children

made up less than 25 percent in about three-quarters of Appalachia’s counties (289 out of 410);

older people were at least 15 percent of the population in nearly half (180).

An examination of median age—the age at which half the population is older and the

other half younger—also illustrates the point about Appalachia’s older age structure.

Appalachia’s median age was 37.3 years in 2000, compared with 35.1 years in the rest of the

country. Northern Appalachia had the highest median age (38.6); southern Appalachia, the
17

Figure 6

In one-fifth of Appalachia’s 410 counties, the median age of the

population was older than 40 years.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

lowest (36.2). The median age

exceeded 39 years in

Appalachian Pennsylvania (and

almost did so in West Virginia),

but was just 34 years in

Georgia’s Appalachian section.

In 358 of the region’s 410

counties, the median age was

greater than 35 years (see Figure

6). It was at least 40 years in 83

of these counties—nearly every

one in either the Distressed or

Transitional category. Most of the counties where the median age was in the late 20s or early

30s were dominated by a major college or university, including Oktibbeha County, Miss.

(Mississippi State University); Montgomery County, Va. (Virginia Tech and Radford

University); Athens County, Ohio (Ohio University); Tompkins County, N.Y. (Cornell

University and Ithaca College); and Centre County, Pa. (Pennsylvania State University).7

Economic Characteristics

Income and poverty. It was Appalachia’s income and poverty levels in the 1960s that

helped get the federal government to pay attention to the region in the first place—which

ultimately led to the formation of the ARC. In 1960, per capita market income in the region was

 7

 Other examples included: Rowan County, Ky. (Morehead State University); Watauga County, N.C. (Appalachian

State University); Monongalia County, W.Va. (West Virginia University); Tuscaloosa County, Ala. (University of

Alabama); and Pickens County, S.C. (Clemson University).
18

$1,267, 77 percent of the U.S. average.8 Nearly one-third (31.1 percent) of the region’s

residents lived in poverty, compared with just over one-fifth (22.1 percent) of all Americans

(Wood and Bischak, 2000).

The 2000 census found that Appalachian residents continued to have lower incomes than

residents in the rest of the country, although the gap has narrowed some. Per capita income in

1999, for example, in the Appalachia region was $18,200, 84 percent of the national average

($21,600). Ten years earlier, Appalachian residents’ per capita income was 81 percent that of all

Americans.9

Income differences were even greater within Appalachia. Central Appalachia, for

example, had a per capita income of $14,300, which was just 66 percent of the national average.

By contrast, per capita income in southern Appalachia stood at $19,200—89 percent that of the

country as a whole. And of course (since income is one of the three criteria the ARC uses for

economic development classification), income was significantly lower in the Distressed counties

than in any of the other categories. For example, per capita income in the Distressed counties

was $13,800, nearly $4,000 less than in the Transitional counties and about $10,000 less than in

the Attainment areas.

The poverty news from Census 2000 was more favorable for Appalachia. Just over 3

million Appalachian residents lived below the poverty level in 1999, 102,000 fewer than 10

years earlier. The region’s poverty rate of 13.6 percent is nearly two percentage points lower

 8

 The figure is in 1960 dollars.

9

 There are major differences between the way the Census Bureau calculates per capita income and the method used

by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). While the population estimates differ slightly, the major differences lie

in the fact that the Census Bureau’s income measure excludes employer contributions to pension and health funds,

as well as some transfer payments (such as food stamps and Medicare). The BEA measure, by contrast, includes

these sources. As a result, the 1999 per capita income levels as calculated by the BEA—$27,800 for the United

States, $23,400 for Appalachia—are much higher than those in Census 2000. Even using the BEA numbers,

however, per capita income in the Appalachian region is still 84 percent that of the national average (Bernat, 2003).
19

Table 3

Although poverty was higher in Appalachia than outside the

region, the reverse was true in some states.

Number and percent of persons in poverty, 1999

APPALACHIA NON-APPALACHIAN

SECTION

AREA

Number

(1000s)

Percent of

total

population

Number

(1000s)

Percent of

total

population

UNITED STATES 3,031 13.6 30,869 12.3

Alabama 397 14.4 301 19.2

Georgia 201 9.2 833 14.4

Kentucky 271 24.4 350 12.4

Maryland 26 11.7 413 8.4

Mississippi 116 19.4 432 20.1

New York 139 13.6 2,554 14.6

North Carolina 174 11.7 785 12.4

Ohio 192 13.6 979 10.2

Pennsylvania 640 11.4 664 10.6

South Carolina 117 11.7 431 14.9

Tennessee 343 14.2 404 13.0

Virginia 100 15.7 556 9.0

West Virginia 316 17.9 --- ---

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

than the 15.4 percent rate in 1989. And because the poverty rate in the rest of the nation dropped

just 0.6 percentage points to 12.3 percent in 1999, the gap between Appalachia and the rest of the

country is at its smallest in recent years.

As has been the case with other characteristics, there was a great deal of variation within

Appalachia. More than one in five central Appalachians (22.1 percent) was poor in 1999,

compared with one in eight residents of both northern and southern Appalachia (12.8 percent

each). Poverty was more prevalent in nonmetropolitan counties (16.4 percent) than in metro

ones (11.6 percent). And as expected, given poverty’s inclusion as a criterion the ARC uses in

its economic classification system,

areas under greater economic

stress had the highest poverty

rates. Distressed counties in

Appalachia had a poverty rate of

23.1 percent—nearly 10

percentage points higher than the

rate in Transitional areas. In both

Competitive and Attainment areas,

just 10 percent of persons were

poor—rates well below the overall

national average. (Even in the

Transitional counties, the poverty

rate was slightly below that for all

of Appalachia.)
20

In six of the 12 states with Appalachian and non-Appalachian sections, poverty was less

prevalent in the Appalachian counties (see Table 3, page 19). Fast-growing Appalachian

Georgia, for example, had a poverty rate of just 9.2 percent, compared to 12.4 percent in the rest

of the Peach State. And although the Appalachian sections of Alabama and Mississippi had

higher poverty rates (14.4 percent and 19.4 percent, respectively) than Appalachia as a whole,

the non-Appalachian sections of both states had higher rates.10 By contrast, poverty in

Kentucky’s and Virginia’s Appalachian sections was noticeably higher than in the rest of their

respective states. A staggering 24.4 percent of the Bluegrass State’s Appalachian residents were

poor, compared to just 12.4 percent elsewhere; in the Old Dominion, poverty was 15.7 percent

inside Appalachia and just 9 percent outside the region. Locally, Appalachia had five of the

nation’s poorest 25 counties (Owsley, Clay, Martin, and Magoffin counties in Kentucky, as well

as McDowell County, W.Va.)—all with poverty rates above 36 percent (Mather, 2002). In 44

other Appalachian counties, however, poverty was less than 10 percent, with a low of 5.2 percent

in Botetourt County, Va.

For the most part, poverty patterns among children and older people were consistent with

those mentioned above. One finding, though, serves as an example of central Appalachia’s

depressed economic state. For the Appalachian region as a whole the poverty rate among

persons age 65 and older (12 percent) was nearly six percentage points lower than the rate for

children under age 18 (17.7 percent). However, a greater percentage of central Appalachia’s

older people (18 percent) were poorer than the percentage of children in either northern (16.9

percent) or southern Appalachia (16.2 percent).

 10 Conversely, poverty in Maryland’s Appalachian section (11.7 percent) was lower than that of the nonAppalachian United States, but was more than three percentage points higher than in the rest of the state (8.4

percent).
21

Labor force and unemployment. According to McLaughlin, Litcher, and Matthews

(1999), three characteristics related to the working world—labor force participation, occupation,

and industry—are crucial in assessing the overall economic vitality of a locality. These

measures provide information on a community’s “human capital”: whether that local area relies

on older or less-skilled workers, or has a foothold in the new industries driving the American

economy.

It would be hard to overstate the profound changes in the nation’s economic structure

over the last 100 years. At the dawn of the 20th century, for example, two-fifths of American

workers were in agricultural jobs, while about another one-third were in manufacturing and other

blue-collar jobs (Riche, 2000). The growing urbanization and industrialization of the country

reduced the share of workers in farm-related jobs to less than 10 percent by 1960 (U.S. Census

Bureau, 1975). Over the last half-century, and particularly in the last 30 years, the United States

has undergone another transformation. More workers have moved into white-collar occupations,

and a diverse service sector (which includes information specialists as well as convenience store

clerks) increasingly drives the American economy. These profound economic shifts particularly

have been felt at the regional and local level.

During the 1990s, labor force participation in Appalachia declined slightly for men, yet

rose for women. About 67 percent of males age 16 and older were part of the Appalachian labor

force in 2000, down from nearly 70 percent in 1990. Among Appalachian women, labor force

participation was 53 percent, up from 51 percent 10 years earlier. Outside Appalachia,

participation remained slightly higher in 2000 for both sexes—71 percent for men, 58 percent for

women.
22

Table 4

In most cases, labor force participation was lower in

Appalachia than in the rest of the country.

Labor force participation of men and women ages 16 and older, 2000

APPALACHIA NON-APPALACHIAN

SECTION

AREA Percent

men in

labor force

Percent

women in

labor force

Percent

men in

labor force

Percent

women in

labor force

UNITED STATES 67.5 53.3 71.0 57.9

Alabama 68.6 53.3 65.3 52.0

Georgia 75.9 59.8 72.1 59.3

Kentucky 57.3 45.3 72.2 58.1

Maryland 62.2 54.7 73.9 63.2

Mississippi 66.2 52.6 65.9 53.8

New York 67.3 56.5 67.8 55.1

North Carolina 69.6 56.1 73.5 59.8

Ohio 66.7 52.6 72.4 59.4

Pennsylvania 66.9 52.7 71.3 57.7

South Carolina 72.1 57.5 69.0 57.5

Tennessee 68.7 53.4 72.9 59.0

Virginia 62.0 49.7 74.7 61.8

West Virginia 61.9 47.6 --- ---

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

As with many other

characteristics, the differences

were often greater within the

region. In central Appalachia,

for example, 58 percent of men

and 45 percent of women were

in the civilian labor force,

compared with 71 percent of

men and 56 percent of women

in southern Appalachia.

Participation was greater in

metropolitan areas (70 percent

for men, 55 percent for

women) than in nonmetro ones

(64 percent and 50 percent,

respectively). Among the economic development categories, labor force participation rates

ranged from 73 percent for men and 58 percent for women in the Attainment counties to 57

percent for men and 45 percent for women in the Distressed counties. In most states (Alabama,

Georgia, and South Carolina being key exceptions), participation was higher outside the

Appalachian regions than inside them (see Table 4). In Appalachian Kentucky, for example, 57

percent of men and 45 percent of women were in the labor force. In the rest of the Bluegrass

State, labor force participation was 72 percent for men and 58 percent for women—just above

the national average.
23

Unemployment in Appalachia reflected two things: increasing parity on this measure

with the rest of the country and the improved economic conditions nationwide during the 1990s.

About 5.8 percent of the region’s civilian labor force (623,000 persons ages 16 and older) was

unemployed in 2000, just barely about the 5.7 percent rate for the rest of the country. Ten years

earlier, the unemployment rates were 6.8 percent for Appalachia and 6.2 percent for the nonAppalachian U.S.11

While overall unemployment in Appalachia had reached near parity with the rest of the

nation in 2000, there were significant intraregional variations. For example, the unemployment

rate in 2000 was just 5.0 percent in southern Appalachia—significantly below the regional and

national averages. By comparison, the rate was 6.2 percent in northern Appalachia and 7.5

percent in central Appalachia. Among the ARC’s economic development regions,

unemployment patterns ranged from a low of 4.8 percent in the Attainment counties (and 4.3 in

the Competitive counties) to a high of 8.6 percent in the Distressed counties. Among the states,

unemployment varied significantly, ranging from less than 5 percent in Georgia and the

Carolinas to 7 percent or higher in Mississippi’s, West Virginia’s, and Kentucky’s Appalachian

sections.

But it was among the Appalachian counties where unemployment variations were the

greatest (see Figure 7, page 24). Unemployment was less than 5 percent in 107 of Appalachia’s

410 counties. Eighty of these counties were in southern Appalachia; 42 were in metropolitan

areas. Fast-growing Georgia was especially noteworthy—30 of the Peach State’s 37

 11 Unemployment data as calculated in the census differs from the Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS),

calculated monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and used in developing annualized rates. The LAUS

data—which are the statistics most often in news reports on unemployment—are derived from household surveys,

establishment surveys, and unemployment claims. By contrast, the Census 2000 figures are based on figures from a

household survey at a single point in time. ARC uses the LAUS data to determine counties with persistent

unemployment. More information is available at the LAUS website (www.bls.gov/lau).
24

Figure 7

At 5.7 percent in 2000, unemployment in Appalachia was on par

with that in the rest of the country. But there were significant

intraregional differences.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

Appalachian counties had unemployment rates below 5 percent, and 18 had rates below 4

percent. (The latter figure represents nearly half of the 40 counties in all of Appalachia with less

than 4 percent unemployment in 2000.) Conversely, 40 Appalachian counties—31 of which

were in either Kentucky or West

Virginia—had unemployment rates

of 10 percent or more.

Occupation and industry.

Of the 10.2 million persons in

Appalachia’s work force, more

than 2.9 million (29 percent) were

managers or professionals, about

933,000 more (and seven

percentage points higher) than a

decade earlier. Workers in these

occupations were a smaller share

of the Appalachian work force than

of the work force elsewhere; in the rest of the United States, managers and professionals were 34

percent of workers. At the other end of the occupational spectrum, 20 percent of Appalachian

workers—barely more than 2 million—were in the production-transport-moving occupations

(i.e., lower-skilled, lower-paying jobs), compared to 14 percent of workers elsewhere.

Central Appalachia had a smaller share of its work force in the managerial and

professional occupations (24 percent) than the other two subregions (29 percent each);

conversely, central and southern Appalachia (22 percent and 21 percent of their respective work
25

forces) were more likely to have workers in the lower-skilled jobs than northern Appalachia (18

percent of its work force). The economic development categories produced even greater

contrasts. Managers and professionals represented 37 percent of the workers in Appalachia’s

Attainment counties, for example, compared with 24 percent in the Distressed counties. The

share of workers in the production-transport-moving occupations ranged from just 12 percent in

the Attainment counties to 22 percent in the Distressed counties. Not surprisingly, the greatest

differentials were at the local level. For example, managers and professionals were at least onethird of the work force in 24 Appalachian counties (all of which were part of major metro areas

and/or housed major colleges and universities), but less than one-fifth of workers in 60 counties.

Conversely, workers in the production-transport-moving occupations were at least one-fourth of

the work force in 174 of the 410 counties in the region. These counties were largely rural in

character—93 had fewer than 25,000 persons in 2000.

Appalachia’s industrial structure at the dawn of the millennium resembled that of the rest

of the country. That is, a large percentage of working-age adults were employed in a fastgrowing and diverse service sector. This report defines this sector as including information

services, finance, insurance, real estate, education, health and social services, entertainment and

recreation, food service, public administration, and a host of other services. Persons employed in

the service sector work in a variety of occupations—from those requiring college and advanced

degrees (such as attorneys, bank managers, and teachers) to jobs requiring relatively few skills

and no more than a high school diploma (for example, convenience store clerks, office couriers,

and restaurant servers). Readers should consider these matters when considering information

about the service industry.
26

Table 5

The Appalachian economy has become increasingly

service-based and less dependent on manufacturing.

However, Appalachia remains more dependent on

manufacturing than the rest of the country.

Workers ages 16 and older in service and manufacturing sectors,

1990 and 2000

APPALACHIA NON-APPALACHIAN

U.S. YEAR / SECTOR Number

(1000s) Percent Number

(1000s) Percent

1990

Services 3,475 38.1 47,929 45.0

Manufacturing 2,140 23.4 18,322 17.2

2000

Services 5,148 50.3 68,431 57.3

Manufacturing 1,962 19.2 16,324 13.7

Note: Included among “services” are finance, insurance, real estate,

professional services, information, entertainment, recreation, education,

health and social services, and public administration.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

In 2000, slightly more than 50 percent of Appalachian workers were in the service sector,

compared with 38 percent of workers just a decade earlier (see Table 5). In the rest of the

country, 57 percent of workers were in the service sector. Even in central Appalachia, 47

percent of workers were employed in the service sector. And in the Distressed counties, 48

percent of workers were similarly employed. By comparison, the service industries employed 58

percent of workers in the Attainment counties. Service-sector workers were at least 40 percent

of employed persons in 309 of the 410 Appalachian counties and were at least 50 percent of

workers in 124 counties.

Also like the rest of the country, Appalachia has become less dependent on

manufacturing than it was 10 years earlier. Slightly less than 2 million workers were in

manufacturing in 2000—178,000

fewer than was the case a decade

earlier. Similarly, manufacturing

employed a smaller share of

Appalachia’s workers in 2000 (19

percent) than in 1990 (23 percent).

And, the share of workers working in

the manufacturing sector declined in

357 of the region’s 410 counties.

Despite the declining numbers,

however, Appalachia remained more

dependent on manufacturing than the

rest of the country, where just 14
27

percent of the workers were employed in the manufacturing industries (see Table 5, page 26).

This was the case in virtually every state in the region (with Kentucky being the exception). In

Mississippi’s Appalachian section, nearly one-third of workers (31 percent) were employed in

manufacturing, compared with just one-seventh of workers (15 percent) in the rest of the

Magnolia State.

Within the Appalachian region, there is some variation. For example, manufacturing is

more important to the economy outside metropolitan areas (employing 23 percent of workers)

than within them, and more important in southern Appalachia (22 percent of workers) than in

northern and central Appalachia (17 percent each). (A synergistic effect: In southern

Appalachia’s nonmetropolitan counties, manufacturing employed 28 percent of the workers.)

Among the economic development categories, the Transitional counties and Competitive

counties had a greater share of workers in manufacturing (21 percent and 20 percent,

respectively) than the Distressed counties (17 percent, thanks partly to a relatively high share of

workers in agriculture) and Attainment counties (13 percent, largely the result of their high

percentage of service-sector workers). And despite its falling share in most Appalachian

counties during the 1990s, manufacturing still employed at least one-fifth of the workers in 236

of them, and at least one-fourth of the workers in 141 counties. Conversely, in 112 counties in

the region, less than 15 percent of workers were in manufacturing.

As Appalachia has become less dependent on manufacturing during the 1990s, so has it

become equally less dependent on the “extractive” industrial sectors of agriculture, forestry,

fishing, and mining. Just 219,000 workers—about 133,000 fewer than in 1990 and just 2 percent

of Appalachia’s work force—were employed in these four sectors in 2000. The percentage of

Appalachian workers in these industries matched the share in the rest of the country. There
28

were, however, some noticeable differences within Appalachia. In central Appalachia, 6 percent

of workers were in the four “extractive” industries—mainly in mining. The share in these

industries was at least 10 percent in 21 counties, all of which were rural counties in Kentucky

and the Virginias. In Wyoming County in southern West Virginia, 21 percent of workers

remained employed in agriculture, forestry, fishing, or mining. Even in these counties, however,

a much larger share of workers—more than half in many counties—were in the professional

services, emphasizing the transition of Appalachia (and the rest of the country) to a servicedriven economy.

Education and Other Social Characteristics

Education. Education has long been seen as the major ticket to upward mobility in

American society. A well-educated populace is best prepared to meet the demands of a complex

and changing society, as well as to participate fully in today’s global economy. Over the last 20

years, that increasingly has meant education beyond the high school level; indeed, more highpaying jobs today require at least some college education. During his administration, former

President Bill Clinton stated his desire to see most Americans complete at least two years of

college in order to take advantage of these jobs (Public Broadcasting Service, NewsHour Online,

2002). President George W. Bush likewise has made educational achievement a hallmark of his

administration (White House, 2002).

Adults in Appalachia are more likely to have completed high school and college than

ever before. In 2000, 77 percent of Appalachian residents age 25 and older have completed high

school, up from 68 percent in 1990. Likewise, the share of Appalachians with at least a

bachelor’s degree rose from 14 percent to 18 percent during the 1990s. However, educational
29

Table 6

Educational attainment was lower in Appalachia than in the

rest of the country. This was especially true in some parts of

the region.

Number and percent of persons ages 25 and older who are high school

and college graduates, 2000

HIGH SCHOOL

GRADUATES

COLLEGE

GRADUATES AREA

Number

(1000s) Percent Number

(1000s) Percent

APPALACHIA 11,744 76.8 2,712 17.7

NON-APPALACHIAN U.S. 134,752 80.7 41,750 25.0

Northern Appalachia 5,523 81.2 1,204 17.7

Central Appalachia 926 64.1 154 10.7

Southern Appalachia 5,295 75.2 1,354 19.2

Distressed counties 1,191 65.3 186 10.2

Transitional counties 7,500 76.8 1,561 16.0

Competitive counties 1,016 78.4 259 20.0

Attainment counties 2,037 84.6 707 29.4

Appalachian sections of:

Alabama 1,408 75.4 360 19.3

Georgia 1,088 76.7 298 21.0

Kentucky 470 62.5 79 10.5

Maryland 127 78.6 23 14.4

Mississippi 262 68.1 54 14.0

New York 574 83.1 144 20.8

North Carolina 795 75.8 201 19.1

Ohio 743 78.2 117 12.3

Pennsylvania 3,293 82.7 759 19.1

South Carolina 509 75.3 139 20.6

Tennessee 1,234 73.4 290 17.2

Virginia 312 69.8 66 14.8

West Virginia 928 75.2 183 14.8

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

attainment remains lower in

Appalachia than in the rest of the

country. Outside Appalachia, about

81 percent of adults had at least a

high school education in 2000; 25

percent had at least a college degree.

And although the high-school gap

between Appalachia and the rest of

the country narrowed during the

1990s (from seven percentage points

to four percentage points), the

college degree gap remained as wide

in 2000 as in 1990.

As noticeable as the

differences were between

Appalachia and the rest of the

country, however, they often were

more pronounced within Appalachia

(see Table 6). For example, 81

percent of northern Appalachian

adults had a high school diploma in

2000, compared with 75 percent of

southern Appalachians and just 64
30

percent of central Appalachians. College graduates were more prevalent in southern and

northern Appalachia (19 percent and 18 percent, respectively) than in central Appalachia (11

percent). Educational attainment was higher in metropolitan counties (81 percent high school,

21 percent college) than in nonmetropolitan areas (72 percent high school, 13 percent college).

And as one would expect, high school completion varied significantly among the ARC’s four

economic development categories. High school completion rates ranged from 85 percent of

adults in the Attainment counties to just 66 percent of adults in the Distressed counties.

Additionally, 29 percent of adults in the Attainment counties had at least a bachelor’s degree in

2000—19 points higher than the rate among adults in the Distressed counties and four percentage

points higher than in the non-Appalachian U.S.

Among most of the states in the region, high school and college completion was lower

than in their Appalachian sections than in the rest of the state. In some cases, the gap was quite

wide. For example, 70 percent of adults in Appalachian Virginia had finished high school and

15 percent had at least a college degree in 2000, compared to 83 percent and 31 percent,

respectively, in the rest of the Old Dominion. In Maryland and Ohio, the share of adults with a

bachelor’s degree was at least 10 percentage points lower in their Appalachian sections than

outside them. There were a few exceptions, however. Appalachian residents in Alabama, New

York, and Pennsylvania had higher high school completion rates in 2000 than each state’s nonAppalachian residents, and Alabama’s Appalachian section also had a higher share of college

graduates than the rest of the Yellowhammer State. Housing a major college or university

helped, as many of the counties where both the high school and college attainment rates were

above the national average contain a well-known institution of higher learning. Included in this

group were Tompkins County, N.Y. (Cornell University and Ithaca College); Centre County, Pa.
31

Table 7

Appalachian residents were more likely to have long-standing

ties to the region than persons in the rest of the country.

Persons born in their state of residence, 2000

APPALACHIA NON-APPALACHIAN

SECTION

AREA

Number

(1000s)

Percent of

total

population

Number

(1000s)

Percent of

total

population

UNITED STATES 16,811 73.4 151,919 58.8

Alabama 2,118 74.7 1,144 71.1

Georgia 1,230 55.7 3,505 58.6

Kentucky 909 79.6 2,071 71.4

Maryland 162 68.3 2,449 48.4

Mississippi 475 77.1 1,639 73.5

New York 822 76.6 11,563 64.6

North Carolina 1,023 67.0 4,050 62.1

Ohio 1,112 76.4 7,373 74.5

Pennsylvania 4,809 82.6 4,735 73.3

South Carolina 679 66.0 1,890 63.4

Tennessee 1,667 67.2 2,012 62.7

Virginia 463 69.6 3,213 50.1

West Virginia 1,343 74.2 --- ---

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

(Pennsylvania State University); Montgomery County, Va. (Virginia Tech and Radford

University); Monongalia County, W.Va. (West Virginia University); and Knox County, Tenn.

(University of Tennessee).

In-state ties. Because of its relative geographic isolation, Appalachia has not been a top

destination for people from outside the region to settle down. As a result, many Appalachian

residents retain long-standing ties to the region.

In 2000, nearly three-fourths (73 percent, or 16.8 million) of Appalachia’s persons were

born in their state of residence,

compared with less than threefifths (59 percent) of nonAppalachians (see Table 7). Instate nativity actually was less

common in Appalachia than it was

in 1990, when 77 percent of the

region’s residents were born in

their state of residence. Some of

these residents might have been

born outside the Appalachian

region (and vice-versa for nonAppalachian residents of the ARC

states). However, even when only

the 13 ARC states are considered,
32

64 percent of non-Appalachian residents are native to their home states—a full nine percentage

points lower than the share for their Appalachian counterparts.

In-state nativity was more common in northern and central Appalachia, where 79 percent

and 77 percent of the residents, respectively, were born in their state of residence. In

Appalachian Pennsylvania alone, 83 percent of the population was born in the Keystone State.

Similarly, Kentucky was the birthplace of almost 80 percent of the Bluegrass State’s

Appalachian residents (see Table 7, page 31). In southern Appalachia, by contrast, just 67

percent of the population was born in their state of residence. In Georgia’s fast-growing

Appalachian region, that percentage was just 56 percent. (In Gwinnett County in suburban

Atlanta, as well as in Catoosa and Dade counties on the Tennessee border, less than 40 percent of

the residents were native to the Peach State.)

In nearly every state in the region, in-state nativity was more common in the Appalachian

counties than elsewhere. While the gap was relatively narrow in some states, it was quite wide

in others. In Virginia, for example, nearly 70 percent of Appalachian residents were born in the

Old Dominion, compared to 50 percent of persons in the rest of the state. Maryland provides

another contrast—68 percent of the residents of the three Appalachian counties were born in the

Old Line State, versus 48 percent of non-Appalachian Marylanders. Georgia was the one state

where in-state nativity was higher outside Appalachia (59 percent) than inside the region (56

percent).

Among the economic development areas, in-state nativity is more common among the

economically disadvantaged counties. Four in five residents of the Distressed counties (80

percent) and three in four residents in the Transitional counties (76 percent) were born in their

state of residence. By contrast, fewer than two in three residents of the Competitive and
33

Attainment counties (67 percent and 64 percent, respectively) could say the same. This suggests

the relative attraction that areas that are stronger economically have on potential migrants. Instate nativity was more prevalent in Appalachia’s nonmetropolitan areas (76 percent) than its

metro ones (72 percent). And locally, in-state nativity was at least 85 percent in 73 of

Appalachia’s 410 counties, less than 50 percent in 21 others.

An examination of migration patterns during the latter half of the 1990s suggests similar

patterns. For example, about 8 percent of Appalachian residents had migrated from another state

between 1995 and 2000. While this is about the same as the share for persons in the rest of the

United States, certain parts of the region proved more attractive to internal migrants. For

example, about 10 percent of the residents of the Appalachian counties of North Carolina, South

Carolina, and Tennessee had lived in another state in 1995, as had 12 percent of Appalachian

Georgia’s population. In Pike County, Pa., an outpost of the New York City megalopolis, that

share was an incredible 24 percent. Conversely, fewer than 5 percent of the residents of 130 of

the region’s 410 counties had migrated from another state.

Foreign-born persons and linguistic ability. Appalachia’s geographic isolation also

makes it less attractive for immigrants than the “gateway” areas of the country’s borders. Just

611,000 Appalachian residents (3 percent of the total population) were born outside the United

States in 2000. While this represents a sizeable increase from 1990, when just 292,000

Appalachians (just 1.4 percent) were foreign-born, it pales in comparison with the rest of the

country, where the foreign-born made up 12 percent of the residents—and 9 percent of the

residents of the non-Appalachian portions of the 13 ARC states. Although this percentage is low

throughout the region, there are some variations. For example, nearly 7 percent of persons in the

Attainment counties were foreign-born, compared with less than 1 percent of those in the
34

Distressed counties. In Georgia’s Appalachian counties, the foreign-born were 8 percent of the

populace, more than double the share in any other state’s Appalachian section. (Georgia also

was one of just three Appalachian states—Alabama and South Carolina were the others—where

people born abroad were more prevalent within the region than outside it.)

Given the region’s low share of foreign-born persons, one should not be surprised that

Appalachian residents are much less likely than Americans elsewhere (5 percent vs. 19 percent)

to speak a language other than English at home. Within the region, the patterns are about the

same as the ones for the foreign-born population: Speakers of another language were most

prevalent in the Attainment counties and in Georgia (9 percent and 11 percent, respectively),

least so in the Distressed counties and in Appalachian Kentucky (2 percent each). About 2

percent of Appalachian residents reported problems with English proficiency (defined as an

inability to speak English “very well”), compared with 9 percent in the rest of the United

States—and there was little variation within the region.

Households and Families

Families. Of Appalachia’s nearly 9 million household units in 2000, 6.2 million (69

percent) were family households, or households where at least one of the members was related to

the household head. About 2.8 million of these family households had at least one of their own

children present in the home. “Traditional families”—families headed by a married couple with

at least one of their own children at home—numbered just over 2 million in 2000, 23 percent of

the total number of Appalachian households. Numerically and proportionally, this actually

represented a decrease from 1990, when the region had slightly less than 2.2 million two-parent

families—27 percent of all households. (In the rest of the nation, the number of two-parent
35

Table 8

Traditional two-parent families were less common in

Appalachia than in the rest of the country. There

were some exceptions, however.

Two-parent families with children, number and percent of all

households, 2000

AREA NUMBER

(1000s)

PERCENT OF

HOUSEHOLDS

APPALACHIA 2,046 22.7

NON-APPALACHIAN U.S. 22,790 23.6

Northern Appalachia 864 21.7

Central Appalachia 202 23.7

Southern Appalachia 980 23.6

Distressed counties 251 23.0

Transitional counties 1,297 22.3

Competitive counties 211 24.9

Attainment counties 288 23.1

Appalachian sections of:

Alabama 257 23.0

Georgia 234 29.5

Kentucky 111 24.8

Maryland 20 21.6

Mississippi 53 22.8

New York 88 21.1

North Carolina 131 21.2

Ohio 136 24.3

Pennsylvania 492 21.2

South Carolina 91 22.6

Tennessee 220 22.0

Virginia 57 21.4

West Virginia 157 21.3

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

families increased from 22.1 million to 22.8

million during the decade, although their share

of all households declined from 26 percent to

24 percent.) Northern Appalachia, where

married couples with children were 22 percent

of all households, skewed the region’s overall

average: two-parent families’ share of

households in central and southern Appalachia

was roughly the same as the proportion of

households in the non-Appalachian U.S. that

had this living arrangement (see Table 8).

Two-parent families were most

common in Appalachian Georgia, comprising

nearly 30 percent of all households. Kentucky

was next among states in the region; nearly 25

percent of the Bluegrass State’s Appalachian

households consisted of married couples with

children. However, married couples with kids

were just 21 percent of all households in the

Appalachian portions of several other states

(New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania,

Virginia, and West Virginia).
36

Traditional families were equally common in metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas for

Appalachia as a whole, but there were different patterns in each of the subregions. In northern

and central Appalachia, traditional families were more common outside metropolitan areas, but

in southern Appalachia, they were more common within the metro areas. Among the economic

development categories, two-parent families had the greatest presence in the Competitive

counties (25 percent of all households) and the smallest presence in the Transitional counties (22

percent).

The tendency of traditional families to be relatively uncommon in the Appalachian

sections of so many states—and their proportional decline since 1990—partly lies in the age

structure of these areas. In West Virginia, as well as in the Appalachian portions of

Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Maryland, at least 15 percent of the total population consisted

of persons ages 65 and over, who are not as likely as younger persons to have their own children

under age 18 living at home. In each of these areas, the share of households consisting of

married couples with children was at least two percentage points smaller than the national

average. Contrast this with Georgia’s Appalachian section, where two-parent families were the

most common in the region. There, persons age 65 or older were just 9 percent of the 2000

population.12

Remember as well that Georgia’s Appalachian counties grew an impressive 43 percent

during the 1990s. Fast-growth places tend to attract young persons—persons who sometimes

have young children or who are about to start families. By contrast, the areas in Appalachia with

larger-than-average elderly populations tended to grow more slowly than the United States as a

whole. In such slow-growth places, young people tend to move out.

 12 A similar case occurred in 1990, when older persons made up more than 15 percent of the population in

Pennsylvania’s and Maryland’s Appalachian sections. These were the only two states in the region where twoparent families were less than 26 percent of households that year.
37

An examination of the situation at the county level lends some support to this “rapid

growth” hypothesis. Traditional families were at least 25 percent of all households in 96

Appalachian counties; 62 of those had grown faster during the 1990s than the nation as a whole.

(Forty-three of these counties had grown at least 20 percent—roughly 1.5 times the national

growth rate.) In 48 counties, by contrast, less than 20 percent of all households were married

couples with children. Eighteen of those 48 had lost people between 1990 and 2000.

Appalachia had 726,000 single-parent families in 2000, roughly 205,000 more than in

1990 and 8 percent of all households in the region. Single mothers headed slightly more than

552,000 of these families, or 6 percent of all Appalachian households. (In the rest of the country,

single-parent families were 9 percent of households; single-mother families, 7 percent.) By and

large, single-parent families were equally common in northern, central, and southern Appalachia,

as among metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties. They were slightly more common among

the Distressed counties (9 percent of households) than among any of the other economic

development categories (8 percent). Among the states, they were most common in Mississippi

(11 percent) and least common in Virginia (7 percent). In every Appalachian state, single-parent

households were less common in the Appalachian portion than in the non-Appalachian part.

Locally, single-parent families were at least 10 percent of households in 33 counties (27 in

southern Appalachia), but less than 5 percent in five others. Generally, families headed by single

mothers accounted for most of any differences; single-father families were about 2 percent of all

households in the vast majority of areas throughout Appalachia.

Single-person households. More than 2.3 million Appalachians lived alone in 2000, an

increase of about 449,000 persons from 1990. (These individuals made up the overwhelming

majority of the area’s 2.7 million nonfamily households.) Thanks partly to the increase in
38

Table 9

Persons living alone were 30 percent of all households in 13

Appalachian counties; they were less than 20 percent in 15 others.

Counties where persons living alone

were at least 30 percent of all

households, 2000

Counties where persons living alone

were less than 20 percent of all

households, 2000

Ohio County, W.Va. 33.7 Union County, Tenn. 19.8

Macon County, Ala. 33.0 Jackson County, Ga. 19.7

Allegheny County, Pa. 32.7 Banks County, Ga. 19.2

Tompkins County, N.Y. 32.5 Botetourt County, Va. 19.2

Luzerne County, Pa. 31.3 Hall County, Ga. 19.2

Monongalia County, W.Va. 31.3 Murray County, Ga. 18.8

Cabell County, W.Va. 31.3 Bartow County, Ga. 18.7

Lackawanna County, Pa. 31.3 Barrow County, Ga. 18.6

Broome County, N.Y. 31.0 Dawson County, Ga. 18.6

Kanawha County, W.Va. 30.8 Gwinnett County, Ga. 18.4

Northumberland County, Pa. 30.2 Douglas County, Ga. 18.4

Cameron County, Pa. 30.1 Holmes County, Ohio 16.1

Allegany County, Md. 30.1 Cherokee County, Ga. 16.0

 Forsyth County, Ga. 14.8

 Paulding County, Ga. 14.6

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

persons living alone, Appalachia now has more single-person households than traditional

families—a circumstance that

was definitely not the case in

1990. That year, two-parent

families outnumbered singleperson households in Appalachia

by about 269,000; by 2000, they

had been outnumbered by nearly

299,000.

Single-person households

were more prevalent than twoparent families throughout the

Appalachian region—in all three

subregions, among three of the

four economic development

categories (the Competitive counties being the exception), 11 of the 13 states (all but Georgia

and Kentucky), and 272 of the region’s 410 counties. In fact, persons living alone made up at

least 30 percent of households in 13 Appalachian counties (see Table 9). (By contrast, they were

less than 20 percent in 15 others—12 of them in Georgia.)

Some people think of single-person households in terms of young persons making a

major step in the transition to adulthood. Appalachia’s case, however, suggests another

scenario—older people aging at home after the departure of their adult children and/or the death

of their spouse. More than 968,000 Appalachians who lived alone in 2000 were age 65 or
39

Table 10

In most states in the Appalachian region, at least two-fifths of

persons living alone were age 65 or older.

Persons age 65 or older living alone, number and percent of all persons

living alone, 2000

APPALACHIA NON-APPALACHIAN

SECTION

AREA

Number

(1000s)

Percent of

total

population

Number

(1000s)

Percent of

total

population

UNITED STATES 968 41.3 8,754 35.2

Alabama 109 37.5 61 37.2

Georgia 51 32.5 159 28.8

Kentucky 46 41.9 110 36.2

Maryland 11 45.9 149 31.7

Mississippi 25 42.1 76 38.1

New York 48 41.1 668 35.8

North Carolina 65 39.8 205 32.4

Ohio 60 43.9 386 35.8

Pennsylvania 301 45.8 254 38.3

South Carolina 36 35.4 96 34.2

Tennessee 100 38.4 102 32.3

Virginia 29 42.4 187 30.8

West Virginia 88 43.9 --- ---

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

older—41 percent of the total. (Outside Appalachia, older persons were 35 percent of those

living by themselves.) Although the number of older Appalachians in single-person households

increased by 84,000 since 1990, their share among all persons living by themselves actually

declined; 10 years earlier, persons ages 65 and older headed 47 percent of all single-person

Appalachian households (and 38 percent of those outside the region).

Older persons who lived alone were most prevalent in northern Appalachia, maintaining

45 percent of single-person households in the subregion. By contrast, 37 percent of southern

Appalachians who lived alone in 2000 were age 65 or older. Appalachians who lived alone were

more likely than non-Appalachians

to be older in every state in the

region—including fast-growing

Georgia (see Table 10). (In

Maryland’s three Appalachian

counties—Garrett, Alleghany, and

Washington—46 percent of

residents who lived alone were 65

or older, compared to just 32

percent in the rest of the Old Line

State.) In 43 Appalachian

counties, more than half of the

persons living alone in 2000 were

over 65; northern Appalachia had

29 of these counties.
40

Single-person households in Appalachia were more common in metropolitan areas (27

percent) than in nonmetro areas (25 percent); this was the case in all three Appalachian

subregions. Among metropolitan-area counties, they were most common in the small areas.

However, metro and nonmetro counties did not seem to follow any pattern between the

prevalence of single-person households and the share of those living alone who were age 65 and

over. For example, although single-person households were more prevalent in metro counties

than in nonmetro counties, metro persons who lived alone actually were less likely to be older.

Single-person households were most common in the Transitional counties (28 percent of

all households), least prevalent in the Competitive counties (24 percent). However, persons

living alone in counties that were worse off economically were more likely to be 65 or older than

those in more advanced counties. For example, older people were 44 percent of those living

alone in the Distressed counties; that percentage was 34 percent in the Attainment counties.

Unmarried-partner households. Appalachia had 392,000 unmarried partner

households—households that, according to the Census Bureau, consist of the householder and “a

person who is not related to the householder, who shares living quarters, and who has a close

personal relationship with the householder” (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001: B-11). These

“cohabitating” households, some of which have children, were 4 percent of all households in the

region, compared to 5 percent in the rest of the nation. Unmarried partners were most common

in Appalachian New York, which had eight of the 10 counties in which this formation

represented at least 7 percent of all households. (The other two counties were Berkeley and

Jefferson counties in West Virginia, both of which are on the outskirts of the Washington, D.C.,

area.) In no county in Appalachia, however, did cohabitating couples represent more than 8

percent of all households.
41

Housing Characteristics

Housing vacancy. The presence or absence of vacant housing suggests different things,

depending on the nature of the vacant units. The presence of vacant homes designed for

everyday use is a reflection of the desirability of a community as a place to live and/or work. By

contrast, the presence of vacant homes designed for seasonal or occasional use suggests that the

community might have significant recreational, resort, or retirement activity. Therefore, persons

examining housing vacancy rates would be prudent to look at these two components—the

vacancy rate for nonseasonal reasons and the seasonal vacancy rate.

In 2000, 746,000 housing units in the Appalachian region (slightly more than 7 percent of

all housing units) were vacant for nonseasonal reasons, 133,000 more than 10 years earlier. This

percentage was slightly higher than the 6 percent rate for the rest of the country, which actually

saw its number of nonseasonal vacancies decrease during the 1990s. Nonseasonal vacancy was

particularly acute in central Appalachia and the Distressed counties; in both cases, 9 percent of

the units were vacant. (In northern and southern Appalachia, and in the other three economic

development categories, the nonseasonal vacancy rate hovered around 7 percent, although just 6

percent of units in the Competitive counties were vacant.) Nonseasonal vacancy was more

prevalent outside metropolitan areas than within them (8 percent vs. 7 percent).

Among the states, nonseasonal vacancy rates varied noticeably. Georgia’s Appalachian

section—a boom area during the 1990s—had a vacancy rate of just over 5 percent. By contrast,

the rate approached 9 percent in Kentucky, West Virginia, and Alabama. Whether nonseasonal

vacancy was higher within or outside the Appalachian portion of the ARC states depended on the

state. In New York, Ohio, and Virginia, for example (plus four other states), the Appalachian

portions had higher rates. (Nonseasonal vacancy rates were 8 percent in Virginia’s Appalachian
42

Figure 8

One in six Appalachian counties had nonseasonal vacancy rates of

at least 10 percent.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

section while just 5 percent in the rest of the state.) But in Alabama and Georgia, nonseasonal

vacancy was more prevalent

outside the Appalachian regions.

For example, 10 percent of the

housing units in Alabama’s nonAppalachian section were vacant,

compared with just 9 percent in the

state’s Appalachian portion.

Nonseasonal vacancy was

especially high in several central

and southern Appalachian

counties. In about one-sixth of

Appalachia’s 410 counties (71 in

all), at least 10 percent of housing

units were vacant for nonseasonal reasons (see Figure 8). Forty-seven of these counties were in

three states—West Virginia, Kentucky, and Alabama. Forty-nine of the 71 were in the

Distressed category; 67 were outside metropolitan areas; and 27 lost population between 1990

and 2000. By contrast, the nonseasonal vacancy rate was less than 5 percent in 20 Appalachian

counties—mostly in northern Appalachia but including several counties in the Atlanta area.

Almost 4 percent of Appalachia’s housing units (376,000 in all) were vacant for seasonal

reasons, a slightly higher rate than the 3 percent rate for the rest of the country.13 Three-fifths of

these units were in northern Appalachia; its seasonal vacancy rate was 5 percent, compared with

 13 In 1990, about 313,000 housing units in Appalachia were vacant for seasonal reasons, about 3.5 percent of the

total.
43

3 percent in southern Appalachia and 2 percent in central Appalachia. Seasonal vacancy also

was more common among the Transitional and Distressed counties (5 percent and 4 percent,

respectively) than among the Competitive and Attainment counties (less than 2 percent and less

than 1 percent, respectively). Given that many nonmetropolitan areas have seen tourism as a

means to revitalize their economies, it probably is not very surprising that the seasonal vacancy

in these localities was relatively high at 6 percent. (In northern Appalachia, 9 percent of housing

outside metro areas was vacant for seasonal reasons.) By contrast, the rate is less than 2 percent

in metro areas.

Among the states in the region, seasonal vacancy rates were highest in New York (8

percent), North Carolina (7 percent), Pennsylvania (5 percent), and Maryland (5 percent). By

contrast, less than 2 percent of the housing units in Alabama’s, Mississippi’s and South

Carolina’s Appalachian areas were vacant for seasonal reasons; these were the only three states

where seasonal vacancy was not more common in the Appalachian section than outside it. In 75

of Appalachia’s 410 counties, at least one in 10 units was vacant for seasonal reasons. By and

large, this group was quite diverse in character. Eighteen of these counties grew at least 20

percent during the 1990s, while 12 lost population. Several, not surprisingly, were recreational

havens—such as Sullivan and Wayne counties in Pennsylvania; Avery and Macon counties in

North Carolina; Pocahontas County, W.Va.; Highland County, Va.; and Rabun County, Ga.

(Johnson and Beale, 2001). Seasonal vacancy rates exceeded 30 percent in each of the above

counties.14

Tenure. Homeownership is more common in Appalachia than in the rest of the country.

Just as in 1990, nearly three-fourths of Appalachian households (6.6 million in all) owned their

 14 Forest County, Pa., where half the land area is occupied by Allegheny National Forest (Forest County Industrial

Development Corporation, 2003), had Appalachia’s highest seasonal vacancy rate in 2000, at 75 percent
44

Figure 9

Homeownership was more common in Appalachia than in the rest of the country.

Percent homeowners, 2000

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

own homes in 2000, compared to less than two-thirds in the non-Appalachian United States (see

Figure 9). Homeownership was higher in central Appalachia (76 percent) than in the northern or

southern subregions; among the economic development categories, it was highest in the

Distressed counties (76 percent) and lowest in the Attainment counties (69 percent). The fact

that the Distressed counties are predominately rural and the Attainment counties mostly urban

might be a factor: Appalachia’s nonmetropolitan areas had higher ownership rates than its

metropolitan areas (76 percent vs. 72 percent).

Among the Appalachian states, homeownership rates were below 72 percent in only

Maryland and New York (69 percent each, still higher than the national average). In every state
45

but South Carolina (where homeownership rates were about equal), homeownership was more

common in the Appalachian counties than in the rest of the state. More than 100 counties in the

region (102, to be exact) had homeownership rates of at least 80 percent. By contrast, the rate

was below 65 percent in just 11 counties—each of which is home to a college or university

where students make up a fairly sizeable share of the populations.15 Population growth does not

seem to be highly correlated with ownership rates. For example, about one-third of the counties

with high ownership rates grew at least 20 percent during the 1990s, but another one-eighth

actually lost population.16

Affordable housing. One area where Appalachia fares favorably with the rest of the

country is in housing affordability. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development, housing is considered affordable if costs (rent or mortgage payments, taxes,

insurance, and related expenses) do not reach or exceed 30 percent of a household’s income. If a

household must allocate 30 percent or more of its income to housing costs, it is less likely to

have enough resources for food, clothing, medical care, or other needs—a problem similar to that

faced by a household living in poverty (U.S. Housing and Urban Development, 2002).

In 2000, 23 percent of Appalachian households (nearly 1.7 million) lacked affordable

housing, compared with 28 percent of households in the rest of the country. This pattern held for

both homeowners (18 percent vs. 22 percent) and renters (33 percent vs. 37 percent). (See

Figure 10, page 46.) There was little variation among the three subregions, although renters in

northern Appalachia were more likely to lack affordable housing than renters elsewhere (35

 15 Some examples of Appalachian counties with ownership rates below 65 percent include Montgomery County, Va.

(Virginia Tech and Radford University); Tompkins County, N.Y. (Cornell University and Ithaca College);

Oktibbeha County, Miss. (Mississippi State University); Madison County, Ky. (Eastern Kentucky University);

Athens County, Ohio (Ohio University); and Tuscaloosa County, Ala. (University of Alabama).

16 Conversely, one of the counties with low ownership rates (Madison County, Ky.) grew 23 percent, while two

others (Cortland County, N.Y. and Cabell County, W.Va.) lost population.
46

Figure 10

Affordable housing is one area where Appalachians—both homeowners and renters—fare

favorably relative to other Americans.

Percent of owner and renter households spending at least 30 percent of their income on housing costs

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

percent vs. 32 percent in central and southern Appalachia). Among the economic development

categories, the housing burden was greater in the Attainment counties (where nearly 25 percent

of households lack affordable housing) than elsewhere. Metropolitan and nonmetropolitan

counties in Appalachia had similar housing burdens.

Among the states, the share of households lacking affordable housing mostly ranged from

22 percent to 24 percent. The exception was Appalachian New York, where affordable housing

was a problem for 27 percent of households—and 41 percent of renters. However, the rest of the

Empire State had an even greater overall housing burden, with nearly 35 percent without

affordable housing. Indeed, in every ARC state except Kentucky, the non-Appalachian section

had a greater overall housing burden than the Appalachian portion. (And even in Kentucky, the

gap was small; 23 percent of households in Appalachian Kentucky lacked affordable housing,
47

compared with 22 percent in the rest of the Bluegrass State). In 96 of Appalachia’s 410 counties,

affordable housing was a problem for fewer than 20 percent of households; it was a problem for

more than 30 percent of households in just 11 others.

Telephone service and plumbing facilities. Telephone service and plumbing facilities are

two amenities that Americans generally take for granted. Telephone service provides households

with a link to the outside world, especially in case of an emergency. Plumbing facilities

promotes good public health by preventing groundwater contamination.

Just 3 percent of Appalachian households (296,000 total) lacked telephone service,

compared with just over 2 percent of households outside the region. This is a noticeable

improvement from 1990, when 7 percent of homes in the region (528,000) were without a

telephone.17 In 57 Appalachian counties, fewer than 2 percent of households were without phone

service. In certain parts of the region, however, the percentage of homes without the ability to

make and receive calls remained noticeably higher. For example, 7 percent of households in

central Appalachia and in the Distressed counties had no phone service. And in 23 counties,

phone service was absent in at least 10 percent of households; in Holmes County in east central

Ohio, an astonishing 28 percent of households lacked telephone service.

Less than 1 percent of Appalachian households (only 62,000 in all) lacked full plumbing

facilities—hot and cold running water, a flush toilet, and a bathtub or shower. This percentage

was the same as the rest of the country and varied little among the states and the three

subregions.18 Even among economically distressed areas, less than 2 percent of households

 17 The 1990 census question asked about the presence of a telephone in the home. In the 2000 census question,

however, just having a telephone was not enough. The focus instead was on the presence of telephone service in the

home—service through which occupants could make and receive calls.

18 In 1990, 1.4 percent of households in Appalachia (117,000 total) lacked complete plumbing facilities, compared

to 0.7 percent in the rest of the country. In central Appalachia, that percentage approached 5 percent.
48

lacked complete plumbing. There were, however, 21 counties (16 of which were classified as

Distressed by the ARC) where plumbing was incomplete in at least 3 percent of households; the

percentage was nearly 8 percent in rural Hancock County in northeastern Tennessee.

Commuting patterns. Like Americans in general, Appalachian residents spent more time

commuting from their homes to their jobs over the 1990s. In 2000, the average worker in the

Appalachian region spent 24.8 minutes commuting to work—almost four minutes longer than in

1990, when the average journey to work took just 20.9 minutes. Still, Appalachian workers

spent slightly less time traveling to work than workers in the rest of the country, who traveled an

average of 25.6 minutes to their jobs.

Workers in central Appalachia spent more time commuting than those in either of the

other two subregions (26.9 minutes, compared to 25.1 minutes in southern Appalachia and 24.2

minutes in northern Appalachia). Among the ARC’s economic development categories, workers

in the Distressed counties had the longest commutes (28.1 minutes, on average), but those in the

Attainment counties had the next longest (25.9 minutes). Commutes were slightly longer outside

metropolitan areas than inside metro areas, particularly in central Appalachia. Among the

Appalachian states, however, workers commuted for as long as nearly 30 minutes in Georgia

(partly a byproduct of the counties in suburban Atlanta) and as short as just under 21 minutes in

New York.

As one might expect, the greatest variation was at the county level. Workers commuted

at least 30 minutes in 100 of the region’s 410 counties, but less than 20 minutes in just 20 others.

Residents of Elliott County in eastern Kentucky (which borders the Huntington, W. Va.-Ashland,
49

Figure 11

In one-fourth of the counties in Appalachia, workers commuted at

least a half-hour to their jobs. Many of these counties are

economically stressed.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 census.

Ky., metropolitan area) had the longest commutes, with an average of nearly 49 minutes.19 In

fact, many of the counties whose residents had the longest commutes were either at the edges of

or adjacent to metropolitan areas (for example, Pike and Monroe counties in Pennsylvania; Clay,

Hampshire, Lincoln, and Jefferson counties in West Virginia; and Paulding and Heard counties

in Georgia). Commuting times also were long for residents in some of the more isolated rural

counties, however. (Workers in Magoffin County, Ky., and Brandon and Doddridge counties in

West Virginia, for example, commuted between 38 and 39 minutes to their jobs, on average.)

Nearly half (48) of the

counties whose workers

commuted at least 30 minutes

were classified as Distressed

by the ARC; this, combined

with the fact that many

counties with long commutes

were not adjacent to

metropolitan areas, suggests a

disconnect between lowincome workers and areas of

job growth. This “spatial

mismatch” between the new

jobs for low-skilled workers and the residences of the poor, usually considered a problem for

inner cities, also is an acute problem for rural areas (Fisher and Weber, 2002). In 2000, there

 19 In fact, residents in Elliott County had the two longest average commutes not only in Appalachia, but in the whole

country as well. Workers in Pike County, Pa. (46 minutes) had the second longest commutes—both regionally and

nationally.
50

were 46 counties nationwide where average commuting times were more than 30 minutes and at

least 25 percent of the residents lived in poverty. The Appalachian region accounted for 23 of

these counties, and most of these were in central Appalachia (see Figure 11, page 49).

Drawing Conclusions About Appalachia—and Digging Beneath the Surface

In many ways, the Appalachian region as a whole continues to be distinct from the rest of

the United States. Although it added nearly 2 million persons between 1990 and 2000, its rate of

growth remained slower than that of the rest of the nation. The country’s racial and ethnic

diversity remains virtually nonexistent in nearly half of Appalachia’s 410 counties. With a

higher median age and disproportionately fewer children and more elderly, Appalachia’s

population is aging earlier than the rest of the country. Despite some improvements,

Appalachians still lag behind other Americans on a variety of economic, labor force, and

education measures—although their economy is less dependent on manufacturing and more

dependent on a very diverse service sector, and they have reached near parity on unemployment

(thanks to the 1990s economic boom). Appalachian residents are more likely than other

Americans to be natives of their home states, and much less likely to have been born in another

country. Traditional families are slightly less prevalent in Appalachia than elsewhere, most

likely as a result of this older age structure. There are proportionately more persons living alone

in the region, and these people tend to be age 65 or older. Housing vacancy is more common in

Appalachia, but so is homeownership; moreover, both owners and renters are more likely to live

in affordable housing than their non-Appalachian counterparts. And although Appalachian

workers are experiencing longer commutes to their jobs than in 1990, those commutes remain

shorter than in the rest of the United States.
51

But the data from Census 2000 also shows the great variation within the Appalachian

region. Southern Appalachia tended to grow faster than the national average (several counties

grew at least 20 percent), while significant portions of northern and central Appalachia lost

population during the 1990s. Appalachia contains many economically distressed areas that

suffer a shortage of skilled, well-educated workers who needed to take advantage of a growing

postindustrial economy. Yet in many other areas, the educational and labor force structure

approaches—and occasionally surpasses—that outside the Appalachian region. Younger

populations and married-couple families with children were more common in rapidly growing

areas than in their slow-growth counterparts. Although vacant housing (especially for

nonseasonal reasons) continues to be an issue in parts of central Appalachia, it is much less of an

issue in the areas on the outskirts of Atlanta. And while the average worker in Appalachia

commutes less than 25 minutes to their job, workers in several rural areas—some of which are

economically stressed—encounter commutes of more than 30 minutes.

As rich as the data in this report are in helping us understand the state of Appalachia, they

only scratch the surface. Upcoming reports examine these characteristics and trends in much

greater detail than this overview allows:

 The report on population growth and distribution will analyze historical and regional

patterns of Appalachia’s demographic change.

 The report on labor markets, poverty, and income inequality will investigate

Appalachia’s macroeconomic status and trends over the 1990s, and what it means for the

region’s residents.

 The report on poverty concentration will examine spatial trends in poverty during the

1990s and provide a look at the poverty population.

 In the report on migration and immigration, the focus will be on the contribution of these

components to Appalachia’s population change in the last 20 years, and characteristics of

the new arrivals.
52

 The race and ethnicity report will examine Appalachia’s growing diversity, where it is

occurring most strongly, and its effects on selected economic and social patterns.

 Changes in the composition of the Appalachian household, plus an examination of the

various household types, will be the focus of the report on households and families.

 In the report on changing age structures, the emphasis will be on trends and the reasons

behind them.

 The educational attainment report will examine levels of high school and college

completion among various cohorts of adults, as well as the effects of in- and outmigration.

 The report on housing and commuting patterns will focus on such issues as

homeownership, housing vacancy, and travel time to work.

Studies that were done after the 1990 census yielded interesting findings about the

Appalachian region. For example, McLaughlin, Lichter, and Matthews (1999) noted the

diversity within the Appalachian region and the challenges that remain. Isserman (1996a,

1996b) found that although Appalachian social and economic conditions had improved greatly

between the mid-1960s and the early 1990s (even surpassing conditions in parts of the

southeastern and southwestern United States), it still lagged behind most of the rest of the nation

on a variety of indicators. Wood and Bischak (2000) found that more than half the counties

classified as economically distressed in 1960 were no longer so in 1990. And Obermiller and

Howe (2000) noticed that migration patterns in the late 1980s had transformed the populations of

all three Appalachian subregions. The thematic reports in this Census 2000 series will show

whether the above patterns continued, where they continued, and how they were different.

Moreover, they will allow data users to better assess the region’s economic and social standing at

the dawn of a new millennium—and prospects for beyond.
53

REFERENCES

Appalachian Regional Commission. 1967. “Experiment in Appalachia.” Appalachia, a Journal

of the Appalachian Regional Commission 1:1 (September): 3-5.

_______________. 1974. “The New Appalachian Subregions and their Development

Strategies.” Appalachia, a Journal of the Appalachian Regional Commission 8:1

(September): 11-27.

_______________. 2002a. Accessed at www.arc.gov, on Aug. 30, 2002.

_______________. 2002b. Unpublished data not available on their website.

Bagi, Faqir S., Richard J. Reeder, and Samuel D. Calhoun. 1999. “Federal Funding’s Unique

Role in Appalachia.” Rural Development Perspectives 14:1 (May): 14-21.

Beale, Calvin L. 1990. “A Characterization of Types of Metropolitan Areas.” Pp. 59-75 in A

Taste of the Country: A Collection of Calvin Beale’s Writings, edited by Peter A.

Morrison. University Park, Pa., and London: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

Bernat, G. Andrew. 2003. “State Personal Income and Per Capita Personal Income, 2002.”

Survey of Current Business 83:5 (May): 16-41. Accessed at

www.bea.gov/bea/ARTICLES/2003/05May/0503SPI.pdf, on May 30, 2003.

Bogue, Donald J. and Calvin L. Beale. 1961. Economic Areas of the United States. New York:

The Free Press of Glencoe, Inc.

Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2001. “Measuring Rurality: RuralUrban Continuum Codes.” Accessed at

www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/rurality/RuralUrbCon, on May 23, 2001.

Fisher, Monica G., and Bruce A. Weber. 2002. “The Importance of Place in Welfare Reform:

Common Challenges for Central Cities and Remote-Rural Areas.” Center on Urban and

Metropolitan Policy, Research Brief 1. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

Forest County Industrial Development Commission. 2003. Forest County, Pennsylvania,

website. Accessed at www.forestcounty.com, on Feb. 19, 2003.

Isserman, Andrew M. 1996a. “Socioeconomic Review of Appalachia—Appalachia Then and

Now: An Update of ‘The Realities of Deprivation’ Reported to the President in 1964.”

Appalachian Regional Commission, Regional Research Report.

_______________. 1996b. “Socioeconomic Review of Appalachia—The Evolving Appalachian

Economy.” Appalachian Regional Commission, Regional Research Report.
54

Johnson, Kenneth M., and Calvin L. Beale. 2001. “Recreational Counties in Nonmetro

America.” Accessed at www.luc.edu/depts/sociology/johnson/p99webr.html, on Sept. 6,

2001.

Mather, Mark. 2002. “Patterns of Poverty in America.” Accessed at

www.prb.org/AmeristatTemplate.cfm?Section=IncomeandPoverty&template=/ContentM

anagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=5985, on Nov. 5, 2002. Accompanying

table accessed at www.prb.org/pdf/povertytable.pdf, on Nov. 5, 2002.

McLaughlin, Diane K., Daniel T. Lichter, and Stephen A. Matthews. 1999. “Demographic

Diversity and Economic Change in Appalachia.” Population Research Institute,

Pennsylvania State University, July 31.

Obermiller, Phillip J., and Steven R. Howe. 2000. “Appalachian Migration Patterns, 1975 to

1980 and 1985 to 1990.” Appalachian Regional Commission, Regional Research Report.

Public Broadcasting Service, NewsHour Online. 2002. “Clinton on Education.” Transcript of

President Bill Clinton’s address to the graduating class of Princeton University on June 4,

1996. Accessed at www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/election/june96/clinton_6-4.html, on Nov.

19, 2002.

Riche, Martha Farnsworth. 2000. “America’s Diversity and Growth: Signposts for the 21st

Century.” Population Bulletin 55:2 (June).

U.S. Census Bureau. 1975. Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970.

Volumes 1 and 2. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

_______________. 2001. Census 2000 Summary File 1, Technical Documentation.

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2002. “Affordable Housing.” Accessed

at www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/affordablehousing/index.cfm, on Nov. 13, 2002.

White House. 2002. “President Bush Signs Landmark Education Reforms into Law: Bipartisan

Effort Reaps Historic Freedom and Flexibility for America's Schools.” Accessed at

www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/education/, on Nov. 27, 2002.

Wood, Lawrence E., and Gregory A. Bischak. 2000. “Progress and Challenges in Reducing

Economic Distress in Appalachia: An Analysis of National and Regional Trends Since

1960.” Appalachian Regional Commission, Regional Research Report.