University of Washington, Seattle.
Urban Stud. 2012;49(3):563-85. doi: 10.1177/0042098011404932.
Because poverty in rural and urban areas of the US often has different causes, correlates and solutions, effective anti-poverty policies depend on a thorough understanding of the ruralness or urbanness of specific places. This paper compares several widely used classification schemes and the varying magnitudes of poverty that they reveal in the US. The commonly used ‘metropolitan/non-metropolitan’ distinction obscures important socioeconomic differences among metropolitan areas, making our understanding of the geography of poverty imprecise. Given the number and concentration of poor people living in mixed-rural and rural counties in metropolitan regions, researchers and policy-makers need to pay more nuanced attention to the opportunities and constraints such individuals face. A cross-classification of the Office of Management and Budget’s metro system with a nuanced RUDC scheme is the most effective for revealing the geographical complexities of poverty within metropolitan areas.
由于美国城乡贫困的原因往往不同，其关联和解决办法也不同，有效的扶贫政策取决于对特定地点的农村或城市特征的透彻了解。本文比较了几种广泛使用的分类方案，以及它们在美国揭示的不同程度的贫困。常用的“都市区/非都市区”划分掩盖了都市区之间重要的社会经济差异，使得我们对贫困地理状况的理解不够准确。鉴于生活在大都市地区的农村和混合农村县的贫困人口数量众多且集中，研究人员和政策制定者需要更加细致地关注这些人所面临的机会和限制。使用管理和预算办公室的大都市系统与细致的 RUDC 方案进行交叉分类，是揭示大都市地区贫困地理复杂性的最有效方法。
