No description available.

No description available.

published_or_final_version / Comparative Asian Studies / Master / Master of Arts

published_or_final_version / Asian Studies / Master / Master of Arts

This dissertation analyzes the economic and political transformation of America’s rural heartland after World War II. Examining the predominantly white, Protestant communities of southern Iowa and northern Arkansas, this dissertation shows how a prolonged economic crisis in the countryside gave rise to a grassroots pro-capitalist movement that came to dominate rural politics. Between 1920 and 1970, mechanization and scientific advancements pushed productivity in agriculture to remarkable levels. With capital investments replacing demand for labor, fewer workers were needed in farming. As job opportunities in agriculture disappeared, millions of people left rural areas. Country schools, churches, and businesses struggled to survive as populations dwindled. Many who stayed in rural communities suffered from widespread unemployment and poverty. Starting in the 1940s, small-town businessmen and state development experts proposed to solve this crisis by industrializing the countryside. Local boosters argued that newly acquired factories would stabilize rural areas by providing jobs for unemployed farmers and attracting new residents to small communities. Manufacturing payrolls were also expected to help local businesses by increasing consumer spending. In order to attract industrial plants, small-town business leaders modernized rural infrastructure—such as roads, sewers, and electrical systems—and improved civic institutions—including schools and hospitals. In the mid 1950s, these efforts began to pay off, as corporations started locating branch plants in rural areas. During the 1960s and 70s, rural America experienced an industrial boom, as many corporations left urban industrial centers in search of cheaper labor, lower taxes, and weaker unions. In the crucible of this campaign, small-town business leaders forged a unique political ideology that revolved around the imperatives of industrial development. To finance community and infrastructural upgrades, boosters argued for robust state and federal spending on vital improvements. Likewise, local elites favored economic planning over the free market, believing in rationally directed development. In order to lure capital investment, small-town business leaders manipulated the tax code to benefit corporate interests, while supporting legislation, such as anti-union right-to-work laws, that hampered organized labor. Local boosters also championed various governmental reforms meant to maximize efficiency and eliminate waste, concluding that this would produce enough revenue to fund necessary community improvements without raising taxes. In total, small-town business leaders believed that the central role of the American government was to spur capitalist development and private business growth. During the 1950s and 60s, small-town business leaders in southern Iowa and northern Arkansas campaigned to bring manufacturers to their communities, while also promoting their political vision within the countryside. As many depressed rural communities gained industrial plants during the 1960s, small-town business politics gained widespread popularity. In the late 1960s, the rural and small-town electorate united behind business backed “middle of the road” Republican politicians. Led by presidential candidate Richard Nixon, the GOP achieved a decisive political victory in 1968, winning electoral contests throughout America’s rural heartland. Since then, rural Americans have remained solidly Republican. However, GOP domination has been far from total. Starting in the mid 1970s, centrist Democrats competed for the rural electorate by embracing an economic agenda similar to their GOP rivals. After 1975, rural voters helped foster a bipartisan pro-business consensus, as both parties appealed to the countryside electorate by promising to spur economic growth with corporate friendly policies.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 2008. / Title from first page of PDF file (viewed July 10, 2008). Available via ProQuest Digital Dissertations. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 370-386).

Several studies have documented the positive impact of post-apartheid development programmes on economic livelihoods in South Africa. This study explores the impact of post-apartheid policies with a focus on differences across geographical types (geo-types). In this study, I first analyse the design and implementation of key post-apartheid government policies through the lens of urban bias and synergist development theory. Next, I use national-level household survey data from the 1997 October Household Survey (OHS), the 2002 General Household Survey (GHS), and the first (2008) wave of the National Income Dynamics Study (NIDS) to describe key trends and differences in demographic and socio-economic characteristics across geo-types. In doing so, the data reveal large differences between rural and urban areas. Although a few socio-economic disparities have narrowed somewhat since 1997, most differences remain substantial in 2008. The research also finds that the „rural‟ and „urban‟ binary categories provide an incomplete portrait of socio-economic realities in South Africa. More specifically, the four-geo type data identified in the NIDS 2008 uncover significant differences within rural and urban areas which make households located in tribal authority and urban informal areas more vulnerable to poverty.Using poverty and regression analysis, the study concludes that geo-type of residence and other correlates of socio-economic well-being have a significant impact on differential poverty risk across geo-types. Importantly, even after controlling for a range of observable characteristics, geo-type of residence still has a significant effect on the probability that an individual resides in a poor household. Given these findings, the study advocates further research into factors influencing poverty risk in particular geo-types and more careful attention to differences across geo-types in both research and policy-making. / Thesis (M.Dev.Studies)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 2011.

Vast disparities exist between China’s rural and urban areas. Throughout the history of Communist Party rule, ever-widening rural-urban inequality, problems with migration to the cities, and the threat of rural unrest have afflicted the countryside. Efforts by previous administrations have largely failed to solve the nation’s rural problems. China’s current leaders are determined to tackle these issues by means of a change in the direction in policy: the new focus is on sustainable development and social justice rather than rapid economic growth. At the same time, the central government hopes to strengthen the Communist Party’s power base and reduce potential threats to its ongoing reign. While the new policy direction is expected to improve the standard of living of China’s rural people and reduce social conflict in the short term, it may be insufficient to bring peace and satisfaction among the people in the long term.

Call number: LD2668 .T4 1958 O97

No description available.