Retirees on the move are boon to some rural communities

Mar 26, 2008
Retirees on the move are boon to some rural communities
Two Cornell researchers have found that in New York, 12 counties -- of which nine are rural -- have more older adults moving in than moving out. In particular, Yates, Essex, Warren, Delaware, Sullivan and Greene counties, red on the map, have high in-movement of older people. The gray counties have low-to-moderate in-migration.

Older people who move to rural retirement destinations are sometimes called "grey gold" because of the boon they are to the local economies. But the newcomers also drive up housing prices and can have other negative effects on communities, two Cornell researchers have found.

When retirees move to town and buy homes, for example, the researchers found that affordable housing becomes less available to such service professionals as teachers and nurses.

"Almost 10 percent of Americans aged 60-plus migrated between 1995 and 2000, with a disproportionate share of them moving to rural communities," said Professor David Brown, who conducted research on retiree migration with Senior Research Associate Nina Glasgow. Both are in the Department of Development Sociology in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at Cornell.

The researchers will publish the results of their nationwide study in a forthcoming book, "Rural Retirement Migration" (Springer Publishing), in May; they focused on their New York state findings in a recent issue of "Rural New York Minute," a free monthly publication produced by Cornell's Community and Rural Development Institute.

The researchers found that 12 New York counties -- of which nine are rural -- have more older adults moving in than moving out. Yates, Essex, Warren, Delaware, Sullivan and Greene counties, in particular, have high in-movement of older people.

Older in-migrants, say the researchers, tend to be "young old" (between ages 60-74) and have more education and higher incomes than the long-term elderly populations in rural areas.

"They have a positive impact on the real estate market and on construction, provide financial and technical assistance to a wide array of civic needs, volunteer in a diverse set of activities, and they invigorate the arts and cultural scene," write the researchers.

What remains to be seen, however, is whether the in-migrants will become a drain on communities as they age and require more local services.

"So far, our findings indicate that they are not moving elsewhere," said Glasgow, "and we found that 30 percent of in-migrants have adult children living nearby."

Source: Cornell University

Explore further: Best of Last Week – First map of hidden universe, pursuit of compact fusion and new clues about the causes of depression

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Understanding migrant labour in Canada

Oct 09, 2014

Though it's not quite the hot-button issue it is in the United States, Canada has been wrestling with migrant labour since well before Confederation. The country has seen wave after wave of immigration, with ...

The overlooked history of African technology

Oct 06, 2014

In the border region where Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and South Africa meet, indigenous hunters have for centuries made and used an impressive array of tools. There is the bow, made from giant raisin trees and ...

Climate change affecting species

Sep 30, 2014

The Global Change and Sustainability Research Institute (GCSRI) and the Wits Rural Facility (WRF) hosted a top climate change scientist, Professor Camille Parmesan, who delivered a talk to staff, students ...

Recommended for you

Secrets of dinosaur ecology found in fragile amber

17 hours ago

Ryan McKellar's research sounds like it was plucked from Jurassic Park: he studies pieces of amber found buried with dinosaur skeletons. But rather than re-creating dinosaurs, McKellar uses the tiny pieces ...

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Argiod
not rated yet Mar 27, 2008
When the prices of property in a neighborhood because someone pays a lot for one property in that neighborhood, I consider that exploitation. In no way does the price of one property in any given neighborhood make any of the rest of the neighborhood worth a penny more that it already does. It's as if I were to walk up to an open air market and arbitrarilly pay ten dollars for an apple, and all of a sudden the price of apples goes up to ten dollars. I've seen it worked such that a wealthy developer goes to a depressed area and pays an outrageous sum for one property after buying up a large tract of properties in the same area. In this way, he gets a lot of properties cheap, and upon paying the grander sum for one property, he has just increased the value of the others, often making millions in the process by artificially inflating the 'value' of the neighborhood. This should be considered unethical, and outlawed.