Local Governments across the Rural–Urban Continuum: Findings from a Recent National County Government Study

• Date: 01 December 2019
• Published date: 01 December 2019
• Author: Linda Lobao,Paige Kelly
• DOI: 10.1177/0160323X20922287
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

Local Governments across

the Rural–Urban Continuum:

Findings from a Recent

National County

Government Study

Linda Lobao

1

and Paige Kelly

1

Keywords

county government, fiscal stress, local government, rural communities

In recent decades, local governments have

faced profound changes in their economic,

social, and political environment. Long-term

economic restructuring, the fallout from the

Great Recession, and political changes such

as ongoing devolution and pressure from st ate

governments have affected the performance of

local governments (Dadayan and Boyd 2013;

Katz and Bradley 2013; Kim and Warner

2018). Residential mobility continues to

decline, leaving American s increasingly stuck

in place and in need of community support

(Graham and Pinto 2019). Geographic varia-

tions in vulnerability to change have become

more evident, expressed in recent social dis-

tress such as the rural opioid crisis and in polit-

ical polarization. These events call for creative

responses from local governments and place-

based policies that are tailored to specific local

conditions and population needs.

Yet despite recognition that local govern-

ments face a new normal operating environ-

ment (Martin, Levey, and Cawley 2012), we

know relatively little about their responses

across both the urban and rural United States.

To what degree do rural and urban governments

vary in terms of the challenges they experience,

governance capacities, policies, and services?

While some studies illustrate national-level

trends for local governments (Dadayan and

Boyd 2013), overall, they do not drill down into

rural and urban differences. Rural or nonmetro-

politan local governments remain particularly

understudied. Research from policy and aca-

demic institutions often has an urban bias, char-

acterized by attention to large cities. This focus

has tended to yield a portrayal of high-capacity

local governments with an array of policies and

programs that protect citizens and spur eco-

nomic development (Katz and Bradley 2013).

Existing data sources are a further limitation.

While detailed data may exist for small sample

studies, generalizable information on local

governments across the United States is lim-

ited. For example, although the Census of Gov-

ernments provides important financial data, it

does not provide information about specific

policies, services, and challenges faced by

1

Rural Sociology, School of Environment and Natural

Resources, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH,

USA

Corresponding Author:

Linda Lobao, Rural Sociology, School of Environment and

NaturalResources, The Ohio State University,210 Kottman

Hall, 2021 Coffey Road,Columbus, OH 43210, USA.

Email: lobao.1@osu.edu

State and Local GovernmentReview

2019, Vol. 51(4) 223-232

ªThe Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0160323X20922287

journals.sagepub.com/home/slg