Search

Public opinion research has revealed decided preferences for living in rural areas and small towns, and proponents of population deconcentration have interpreted this as support for their policies. This study, based on a national sample, yielded similar results, but when we introduced the additional possibility of a preference for proximity to a larger city, then the rural areas preferred were found, for most respondents, to be those within the commuting range of a metropolitan central city. Although persons wishing to live near large cities were found to be looking for the same qualities of living sought by those who prefer a more remote location, these findings are not, in general, consistent with the argument that public preferences support strategies of population dispersal into nonmetropolitan areas. Instead they indicate that most of those who wish to live in a different location favor the peripheral metropolitan ring areas that have, in fact, been growing rapidly by in-migration.

The incidence of annexation, the growth in the original area and in the area annexed, and the proportion of growth due to annexation between 1950 and 1970 are analyzed for U.S. cities grouped by size, metropolitan status, and region of the country. Over this period, annexation was a principal means of population growth for incorporated places outside the Northeast. Though often associated with metropolitan growth, annexation was even more important in the growth of nonmetropolitan cities. Overall growth differences by size of place, metropolitan status, and decade (1950--1960 or 1960--1970) could not be explained by the incidence and nature of annexation.