 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
  |
|
|
|
CORVALLIS, Oregon (May 21, 2005) -- Oregon might seem a strange home for Bruce Weber, the co-director of the Rural Poverty Research Center, a national network of scholars who study rural poverty and policies to alleviate it.
On the institute's Web site, a U.S. map that indicates areas of extreme poverty with dark shades shows a nearly unblemished Oregon.
However, Weber, an Oregon State University economics professor, finds plenty to keep him busy here, a state with hunger and unemployment rates well above the national averages.
1. You recently were quoted in the Christian Science Monitor about Wal-Mart and how economists think about it. What were you trying to say there?
Answer: Economists soothe themselves about the Wal-Mart situation through this idea of utilitarianism, that you're looking for the greatest good for the greatest number. If consumers are benefited more than workers that lose, Wal-Mart is a good thing.
That's one perspective, but there's a larger and harder perspective of: What does the common good require? That's a model that says what's good for society is that people have work that is meaningful, that pays them well and that people are able to live at a decent level because of work that they do. Then, you evaluate something based on how well does it serve that goal. You look at what happens to people and families and the sense of community, things that aren't quantifiable in usual economic systems.
2. How would you describe the poor in Oregon? You've said most have jobs.
A: In 2000, about 62 percent of households in poverty in Oregon had full-year workers. Another 20 percent were part-year workers, and only 18 percent of poor households have no worker present.
That's startling to people. We picture poverty and idleness are somehow related. They may not be full-time, but in about 60 percent of households, there is a full-year worker.
3. Why is Oregon's hunger rate higher than average if our poverty rate is lower?
A: Our overall hunger rate of 5.2 percent is higher than the national rate of 3.1 percent. Our poor and unemployed and single mothers don't really have a significantly higher hunger rate than (the same groups in the) rest of the country. The people that have significantly higher rates are our employed people, families with full-year, full-time employed workers, where the hunger rate is twice as high as nationally. And those with two adults in a household with children.
These are people you don't expect to be hungry, and they're much hungrier in Oregon.
4. Why is that?
A: It's some relation between income and costs. Our incomes are a little lower than in the rest of the nation, even though there's not a lot of poverty.
And our housing costs for low-income people were significantly related to hunger rates in a study we just did. I don't know about child-care costs, but for some people that's a major burden as well. The unemployment rate and low wages, and cost of living and housing costs could be related (to hunger).
And the other possible cause, that we couldn't demonstrate, could have something to do with social networks. Oregonians are pretty self-sufficient. I wonder if some of the individualism we pride ourselves on doesn't get in the way when trying to make ends meet. We tested whether church attendance had an affect on hunger, or church attendance in your area. I thought if there were more churches or soup kitchens, people would be less hungry. There didn't seem to be a relation. Being a low church state doesn't affect our hunger.
5. What about our higher minimum wage? You would think that would help keep hunger down.
A: You'd think it would, but I think it's this ratio between income and cost. I think if you look at a U.S. map with states with high housing costs, it's very similar to the map of hunger. There's no simple causation between housing costs and hunger, but it is part of the story. And it's frustrating because there's not much you can do with public policy about housing costs.
6. Do you get the feeling that there's less of a sense that poverty can be solved today, unlike when you started studying the issue? We think of Lyndon Johnson's war on poverty.
A: There was a time in our country when we thought we could reduce or eliminate poverty, and the federal government had an important role. We've put in programs that have helped, but some have been by accident. It wasn't designed as an antipoverty program, but Social Security has been the major antipoverty program of the past half century. The elderly were very much at risk in the 1960s, but they're at lower risk than kids right now.
The other major poverty program is the earned income-tax credit. It's like a negative income tax, except you have to work to get it.
7. What about social mobility in Oregon? Are there any studies of how it compares to the rest of the United States?
A: The studies of social mobility I've seen have been done in the Eastern United States, in the (Mississippi) Delta and Appalachia. There was a rigid class structure that kept poverty rates high, whereas in northern New England and Maine, more fluid social structure helped people move across classes. I use that in class and ask students if we're more like Mississippi or Maine. Nobody wants to be like Mississippi (laughs). So that was kind of a gimme question.
8. On this map of poverty in your office, what are the dark spots representing poverty in Oregon?
A: That's the Warm Springs reservation. There's also a spot in southwestern Oregon where I think there's unreported income from cash crops (drugs) that aren't marketed through legal channels.
9. What are you working on now?
A: I'm in the middle of a study of low-income health-care workers in Linn and Benton counties. I'm trying to see if the contact with state agencies have had any effect on their wage progression.
One of the exciting parts of my job is being director of the new rural studies program. It's an attempt to connect Oregon State better to the concerns of rural Oregonians. We're developing a new degree program that would help people understand rural areas and be more effective in policy design.
The university has invested in the Sustainable Rural Communities Initiative. We hope in the next few years to develop relationships with three communities that would let them define the agenda for the university in the relationship.
10. What kind of practical forms would the relationship take?
A: Think if a community had water and sewer problems and wanted help in designing a system appropriate to their financial situation and topography. We could get engineers and business people and people to write grant applications.
Think about a set of faculty that commits to working with the people in Falls City. We could do an economic study of that community if they wanted it, and look at where they sell their products and where they buy supplies and see if there were overlooked opportunities for them or other people to make investments in.
Contacts:
Toby Manthey, Statesman Journal
(503) 399-6611
Terry Kirby, Communications Director, FOOD for Lane County
(541) 343-2822
tkirby@foodforlanecounty.org
|
|
||
| Home | Contact Us |
© 2006 Food for Lane County
|