Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:37:27.832Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Underemployment as a Criterion for Special Eda Benefits, with Special Reference to Rural Counties*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

James Home  and
Luther Tweeten
James Home
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State University
Luther Tweeten
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A visit by the Director of one of the Economic Development Districts in Oklahoma motivated this study. Because of declining unemployment prior to 1970, several counties in his district had lost special funding under Titles I and IV of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 (PL 89-163). The director contended that substantial poverty and other signs of economic and social distress persisted in previously designated EDA counties, and that a new criterion (specifically underemployment) was needed to gear benefits to real needs.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , July 1972 , pp. 67 - 71
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Oklahoma State Agr. Exp. Sta. Journal Article No. 2362

References

[1]Kampe, Ronald E. and Lindamood, William A., Underemployment Estimates by County, 1960, USDA, ERS Ag. Econ. Report No. 116, Oct. 1969.Google Scholar
[2]U. S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1960, General, Social and Economic Characteristics, Washington: U. S. Gov. Printing Office, 1961.Google Scholar
[3]U. S. Department of Commerce, “Public Works Grants in Qualified Areas Under the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965,” Public Law 89-163, 1966.Google Scholar