We usually fill BoomerCafé with individual stories about what boomers are doing, where they’re living, and how. But we just came across this report from the Population Reference Bureau that gives us a big picture, and if you’re anything like us, you’ll be surprised. It is written by Alicia VanOrman, senior research associate for U.S. Programs at PRB, and Mark Mather, associate vice president. The summary is, we are going rural!
Two demographic groups — young adults ages 20 to 34 and older adults ages 65 and older — are reshaping the population in rural America. Changes in the U.S. economy have attracted young adults to rural areas rich in natural resources, such as shale oil and natural gas and away from smaller metropolitan and nearby non-metropolitan areas, especially those areas with strong ties to the manufacturing industry.
The older adult population, on the other hand, has grown rapidly in areas with strong ties to recreation — areas with robust entertainment industries or natural amenities such as mountains, lakes, and forests that attract seasonal or vacation populations — many of which are in less-populated areas.
Photo by Bob Cullinan – www.cullinan.to
Overall, rural areas in the United States have struggled with shrinking populations as growth over the past 15 years has been concentrated in metropolitan areas. Between 2000 and 2015, about 60-percent of counties in rural America experienced population decline, and only 10-percent experienced rapid growth.
But trends among young adults and the older population show where rural population growth is different. Over the same 15-year period, although about 43-percent of rural counties experienced declines in the population ages 20 to 34, 28-percent experienced rapid growth in their young-adult populations. The number of older adults declined in just 26-percent of rural counties, while 21-percent of rural counties experienced rapid gains in the population ages 65 and older.
Some of these age-specific population gains in rural counties can be linked to broad demographic trends, such as the aging of the large baby boom cohort, but other gains are linked to the particular characteristics of counties that have attracted people in different age groups.
Older Population Increases Rapidly in Amenity-Rich Counties
As the oldest baby boomers began to reach retirement age, the population ages 65 and older grew from 35 million in 2000 to 48 million in 2015 — a 36-percent increase. Because of population aging, very few counties experienced a decline in the number of older adults. Only 399 counties (13-percent) had a smaller older-adult population in 2015 than in 2000. However, counties with shrinking older-adult populations are concentrated in rural counties that rely heavily on farming, especially those in the Great Plains. Due to a combination of out-migration and deaths among older adults, nearly half (48-percent) of farming counties had fewer adults ages 65 and older in 2015 than in 2000.
In contrast to the declines in the older-adult populations in many rural farming counties, the older adult population is booming in counties with economies that are dependent on recreation. Across all 332 recreation counties, 64-percent experienced rapid growth in their older-adult populations and only 1-percent experienced population losses.
Downtown Santa Cruz, California … a baby boomer mecca.
Although the population under age 65 in recreation counties is also growing, it is not increasing nearly as quickly as for older adults. In fact, the average old-age dependency ratio (the number of older adults per 100 working-age adults ages 20 to 64) increased more for recreation counties than for any other type of county. In 2000, the average recreation county had 28 older adults per 100 working-age adults. By 2015, this ratio rose to nearly 40. All other types of counties — regardless of county size or economic type — had, on average, no more than a 6-percentage-point increase in the old-age dependency ratio.
Many of these recreation-dependent counties are rural or located near small metropolitan areas, and the influx of older adults can be a boon for these less-populated communities. New retirees typically have money to spend, and their presence can increase demand for housing and other services, leading to economic growth. However, the concentration of older-age population growth in recreation areas is not without challenges. Today’s retirees are healthier and more active than ever before, but as they age, their local communities will need to have sufficient health- and aging-related infrastructure to support the growing older population. And unless they can also attract younger adults — who go on to have children — these counties could face rapid population aging and eventually declining populations.
Recreation counties in the Upper Midwest and Northeast are already experiencing rapid population aging. As older-age population growth in recreation counties is concentrated in the West and in Sun Belt states, the Upper Midwest and Northeast are being left behind. Counties in these areas are either declining or growing more slowly due to a combination of too few births and insufficient in-migration to offset deaths among older adults and out-migration.
As the population ages, it is likely that population growth in recreation counties will persist, and as long as the U.S. energy boom continues, young adults will flock to areas rich in natural resources. In the long-run, these trends point to a revitalization for some rural areas. Overall, however, rural counties continue to struggle with population decline. Indeed, recent signs suggest that baby boomers are more likely to age in place than move post-retirement. Also, some gas and oil production sites have closed in response to falling prices. Such developments could be bad news for rural areas looking for ways to stop — or at least slow — population loss.
Source: http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2017/Baby-Boomers-and-Millennials.aspx
Recent studies show that the risk of dementia is associated with living in polluted urban areas. That smoggy air not only ruins your lungs, it negatively impacts your memory and cognitive skills. So, moving to a rural setting with trees and/or lake is a great benefit to your long-term health. Maybe baby boomers are a lot smarter than other people think!
I read with interest the article by Alicia VanOrman the senior population moving to rural areas.
They are, for the most part not moving for the amenities, as they are the affordability. Any amenities realized from the move are a bonus.
The area that I live in was once considered rural and has now become suburban to large cities due to the ability to commute, or work at home via computers. The amenities are wonderful, unfortunately they come with a price tag that many retirees cannot afford. While the parks and recreation facilities are free to use, taxes are levied in order to maintain these facilities. As the taxes and utilities costs rise, the retirement income does not keep up and many, so called independent seniors find themselves counting their pennies to keep their homes or they fear they will become warehoused in state sponsored villages, usually in urban areas. Those who still have a large retirement income move to very elaborate retirement facilities, but overall the average income for most of us cannot support those living accommodations. I have several friends who have moved out of state, to areas very rural, with fewer amenities, but it is within their cost of living affordability. This entailed moving away from friends and family in order to maintain a certain amount of financial independence. I am also looking to downsize in order to reduce living expenses and free up time to enjoy life.
Maybe, on a statistical report, Ms. VanOrman is right. But on a personal level, she needs to delve into the demographics more closely.