The amenity value of natural resources depends on how resources are defined and measured. For some purposes, it may be desirable to measure fixed resources that are not easily affected by human activity, such as the presence of mountains, lakes, and rivers. For other purposes, researchers may want to focus on resources that can be affected, either intentionally or unintentionally, by public policy, such as access to forestland. In the process of trying to understand the role natural amenities play in the development process, ERS researchers have developed several measures, including:
The natural amenities scale was built from measures of climate, topographic variation, and water area—all relatively permanent features of an area unlikely to be affected by local economic activities or human settlement. This meant that natural amenities could be studied as an influence on rural growth or economic change without worrying that the causal direction went the other way. The measures were not chosen based on any theory, but rather on what features seemed attractive to people. The individual measures were combined into a scale by summing standardized scores, which meant that each indicator was given equal weight. The justification for the scale was, first, that it was the simplest way of combining measures and second, that in statistical analyses the scale was almost as good a predictor of population change as all the measures considered separately when included in a multivariate analysis.
Information about the scale can be found in the defining ERS report and data product:
The natural amenities scale has been extremely useful in socioeconomic and demographic analysis as it allows one to refer to areas as having higher or lower natural amenities without having to consider 6 measures separately. Thus, counties that are remote, very thinly settled, and relatively lacking in natural amenities have been extremely prone to population loss (see Understanding Rural Population Loss, in Rural America, Winter 2002).
The natural amenities scale, based on relatively permanent characteristics of counties-climate, topography, and lake, pond and ocean water area, is necessarily only a partial measure of an area's natural attributes that might influence migration and development. Area attractiveness also depends on how land is used. Landscape preferences research confirms that water and varied terrain are attractive features, but also shows that scenery with a mix of forest and open country is attractive to people, much more so than scenery that is either largely treeless or extensively forested. Rural migration patterns suggest that people have followed these preferences in choosing where to live.
The importance of forest cover to rural growth is explored in An Illustrated Guide to Research Findings from USDA's Economic Research Service, Forestland a Big Draw for Rural Living and the Amber Waves finding, Scenic Landscapes Enhance Rural Growth.
Relative to income, people generally pay more for housing in areas offering a better quality of life. A recent study took advantage of this relationship to develop a new measure of outdoor amenities that included the 6 climate, water and topography measures in the natural amenities scale, forest, and, because recreation in rural areas is usually built around outdoor amenities, the proportion of employment accounted for by hotels and restaurants. In effect, the measures were weighted by the extent that they accounted for the difference between local housing values and the expected values given homeowner income. The statistical method took into account the fact that people prefer some but not extensive forest. The measure proved highly related to the natural amenities scale, with the inclusion of forest in the outdoor amenities scale accounting for almost all the difference.
These various natural amenities measures have been used to explore a number of rural development related issues. While it is clear that natural amenities are associated with both population and job growth in rural areas, the mechanisms through which they influence individual decisions regarding migration and employment are complex. One question is whether growth occurs because new jobs attract migrants to an area or because new migrants create new jobs in an area. Research suggests that natural amenities lead to rural growth in the 1990s principally by attracting people, which in turn led to job growth.
In The Rise of the Creative Class, Richard Florida developed a theory of urban growth based around the concept of the creative class, arguing that economic growth in today's economy requires talent and knowledge, characteristic of the creative class. In applying the notion of a creative class to rural economies, ERS developed a modified classification scheme that better targets creative occupations in rural settings (see Creative Class County Codes). Research suggests that the creative class is drawn to rural areas high in natural amenities, and rural areas with an extensive creative class tended to have greater growth in jobs and population in the 1990s than rural areas with relatively few people in the creative class, as explored in The Creative Class: A Key to Rural Growth (Amber Waves, April 2007). The relationship between artists (a particularly mobile segment of the creative class), natural amenities, and rural growth was explored in Arts Employment Is Burgeoning in Some Rural Areas (Amber Waves, November 2007).
While important, the presence of a local creative class may not be enough to generate growth. For instance, people doing scientific research are part of the creative class, but if they work in a large organization, their creative efforts may be focused on the organization rather than the local economy. Research suggests that counties with a combination of entrepreneurship and creative class are the ones that showed the most net gains in the number of businesses and jobs in the 1990s. This was especially true in higher outdoor amenity areas, but also true in rural counties with average amenities.
Much of the research focusing on the role natural amenities play in the rural development process was published in scientific journals. While ERS supported this research, the views and opinions expressed in these articles are the authors' and do not necessarily represent those of the agency or the USDA. They are made available here for your convenience, but are not official USDA publications.
Last updated: Tuesday, September 13, 2016
For more information contact: David McGranahan
Open the original version of this page.