Documenting Poverty, Economic Distress and Challenge in North Carolina

The term poverty in and of itself does not fully describe the hardship faced by individuals surviving in it. The lack of safe and quality housing, inadequate education, choosing between health insurance and food, these are some of what persons living in poverty manage on a daily basis. UNC Center for Poverty, Work and Opportunity recently published a study with funding from Z Smith Reynolds Foundation titled Documenting Poverty, Economic Distress and Challenge in North Carolina. This report describes the history of economic decline that characterized North Carolina for so many years. It then moves to the great strides North Carolina has made in education and the tremendous population growth and demographic changes North Carolina has experienced. However, it asserts that there is still much to be done.

Most of the population and economic growth in North Carolina has occurred in metropolitan centers like Charlotte, the Triangle and Triad. Because of this, when people think of poor areas in the state, they naturally think of rural North Carolina. However, that is not completely true. According to the Center’s report, rural areas in North Carolina have witnessed, “…persistent patterns of economic distress. But the state’s poorest census tracts are more likely to be located in large metropolitan areas that are, otherwise, on average, more prosperous. These communities have generally higher poverty, child poverty, and unemployment rates, and lower high school graduation, average income, and homeownership rates, than their rural counterparts.” There are concentrations of poverty within our cities that are just as, if not more, economically devastated as rural counties.

As the study points out, this is the danger with looking at a whole county for poverty figures. Take Wake County for example, the Area Median Income (AMI) is $79,000 a year. But, some segments of Wake County have an average income of less than $27,000 a year. Looking at a county as a whole for poverty indicators hides the pockets of poverty within the county that need services. Instead, counties should be broken up into smaller districts to analyze poverty rates.

When looking into possible interventions, there should be both person-based and place-based economic strategies used to decrease poverty rates. Person-based strategies are programs similar to Section 8 and public housing; whereas, place-based strategies include community development using multi-faceted approaches including economic incentives to developers.

North Carolina has a unique arrangement of needs: rural areas with patterns of economic distress, urban concentrations of poverty, and communities that are experiencing situational poverty due to the economic downturn. We must be willing to provide services unique to the need and location. North Carolina has made impressive steps forward. Using some of the tactics outlined in this report and others, we can help our beloved state continue to grow and thrive.

To read the full study, click here.