Rural Policy Formulation in the United States

The major participants in the formation of policy and programs for rural areas include agricultural interest groups, nonfarm groups, certain legislators, and--less directly--the media. Policy is developed in many institutional arenas: the local community and state governments, the Department of Agri...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author Long, Richard W
Format Report
LanguageEnglish
Published 01.04.1987
Subjects
Agency Cooperation
Agriculture
Coordination
Decentralization
Economic Factors
Federal Government
Federal Programs
Government Role
Information Sources
Institutional Role
Legislators
Local Government
Low Income Counties
Manufacturing Industry
Media Role
Participant Characteristics
Policy Formation
Political Influences
Presidents of the United States
Public Policy
Regional Planning
Retirement
Rural Development
Rural Economics
Social Influences
Special Interest Groups
State Programs
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The major participants in the formation of policy and programs for rural areas include agricultural interest groups, nonfarm groups, certain legislators, and--less directly--the media. Policy is developed in many institutional arenas: the local community and state governments, the Department of Agriculture, the White House, and the Congress and its committees. Rural policy formation is affected by larger public policy and economic forces such as the national trend toward decentralization, a declining role for government, and the rapid internationalization of the American economy. Policy makers can use many sources of raw and interpreted information ranging from statistics analyzed and compiled by the Bureau of Census to academic research, special interest groups, media reports, and the Cooperative Extension Service. Finding better information and making better use of the information available are regular themes in discussions of the policy formulation process and deserve regular examination. Policy coordination and integration is a persistent rural policy issue. Coordination, regardless of its intuitive appeal and real value, can be accomplished only at the cost of diminished freedom of action for some. Historically, and particularly at this moment, coordination is less valued than highly decentralized institutions and jurisdictions each serving relatively narrow clienteles. (JHZ)