By John Blaser
Editor, NCREL
Too often the problems of violence and substance use are perceived to exist only in urban areas, while rural communities are imagined as small, slow-paced towns free of violent crime and protected from gangs and drugs. Yet the researchers who contributed to this monograph found that rates of violence and substance use in rural areas are catching up to rates reported in urban areas, and in some instances have surpassed them. But the stereotype of rural areas persists, and as a result prevention and intervention efforts either ignore rural areas or - when they do reach "the hinterlands" - use models originally developed for an urban context.
The purpose of both the symposium and this monograph is to explore violence and substance use in rural America, the relationship between the two, the factors contributing to these problems, and the most effective approaches to prevention and intervention. Through research and participation in the symposium, the authors set out to dispel the myths about substance use and violence in rural America, to begin creating a research base on this largely unexplored topic, and to suggest approaches to prevention and intervention for rural communities.
While the individual chapters represent a variety of viewpoints and methodologies, the authors agree that overcoming misconceptions about rural areas is necessarily the first step toward reaching these goals. But they also agree that there is cause for optimism. Just as the problems of rural areas are unique, so too are their strengths. The very quality often cited to distinguish rural areas from large city neighborhoods - a sense of community - can and should be used in successful prevention and intervention efforts in rural areas.
A fundamental premise of this monograph is that stereotypes about rural America - like all stereotypes - are inaccurate, corresponding to our perceptions and biases rather than reality. Indeed, even the term rural America is problematic, because each rural community in America is unique. Joseph F. Donnermeyer points out that "the first step in exploring rural crime is to recognize that one standard definition of rural will not suffice." Daryl Hobbs agrees, arguing that popular images of rural America mask the great diversity of rural communities:
"Generalizations about rural areas (other than small size of towns and low population density) end with one visit to a particular rural place. Each rural community contributes to a rural average, but none is likely to be 'typically' rural."
Perhaps the most persistent image of rural areas, given our current preoccupation with crime, violence, and drug use, is that rural areas offer a safe haven from these problems and that these problems exist only in urban areas. Yet, while the authors agree that rates of violent crime and drug use tend to be lower in rural areas than in cities, they are quick to point out that the gap is closing; that youth gangs have begun to appear in many rural schools and communities; that hate groups such as the Aryan Nation actually originated in rural areas and are spreading to cities; and that rates of substance use and related problems are higher in rural areas than in urban areas for some substances - particularly alcohol. "Suffice it to say that rural-urban differences in usage rates have declined," notes Donnermeyer, "and for some substances the rural population is ahead."
These findings not only challenge the perception that violent crime and substance use are limited to urban areas, but also call into question the belief that all rural violence and substance use originates in nearby cities. Instead, the authors argue that rural areas must look for the root causes of increased violence and substance use in individual rural communities - and it is here that they also must look for the solutions. Reflecting the research of each of the authors, Donnermeyer suggests that these problems are largely the result of recent changes in rural communities themselves:
"While rural crime may suggest the effects of urbanization, it would be incorrect to blame rural crime problems directly on the nearest large city. Rural society is changing. One of the consequences of these changes is that crime levels in rural areas are at historic highs and new problems, such as gangs, delinquency, and drug use by rural youth, have emerged."
Another reason to look for the root causes of violence and substance use within the community itself is that the extent of these problems as well as the causes will be different in each rural community. Again, the authors warn against assuming that all rural communities are the same. Ruth W. Edwards stresses the need for recognizing the differences among rural communities and the problems that they face:
"There is very high variability from one community to another in the degree of drug involvement, what drugs are used most, whether younger or older students are more involved with alcohol and other drugs, and the stability of substance use patterns over time."
Edwards suggests that the variety of problems faced by rural communities requires a variety of solutions. She points out that "rural communities vary considerably, which complicates our understanding of rural substance use problems and increases the need for prevention, intervention, and treatment programs tailored to individual rural community needs."
According to the authors of this monograph, the diversity of rural communities requires a community development approach to prevention and intervention rather than an individual or psychological approach. The special characteristics of rural communities - particularly the stronger "sense of community" and closer social relationships associated with the small geographic scale of rural areas - indicate that a communitywide approach is ideally suited to the strengths of these small communities. Indeed, while Hobbs sees community change as a root cause of the problems facing rural communities, he also sees it as the most effective approach to solving these problems:
"While there has understandably been a strong individual therapy orientation to substance abuse programs, we have emphasized that community changes may not only be a source of the problem, but that a revitalized community may be an important part of the solution."
Hobbs believes that a small, closely knit community is well-positioned to deal with problems as a community. After all, he says, "communities are built on the effective use of their own resources. The most significant of these resources are human: the skills, abilities, and energies of community residents." Even young people, who are often perceived as the source of community problems, can be mobilized to contribute to community development as an approach to prevention and intervention. Hobbs remarks that "a community's youth, with their talent and energy, are a widely overlooked and underused resource." Edwards echoes this belief, asserting that a communitywide approach should involve all community members in addressing the unique problems facing the individual community:
"[E]ach individual community must assess its own problem in order to target the limited resources available. A good, well-implemented, districtwide, basic drug prevention program may show positive outcomes in larger communities, because the program will likely have some elements that affect one or more of the various subgroups across the range of their populations. But rural areas cannot afford simply to take a shotgun approach. . . . The entire community - including students, parents, schools, law enforcement, business people, and others - must understand the full range of substance abuse issues confronting the community."
The need for community development approaches tailored to individual communities suggests a course of action for researchers, universities, prevention agencies, educational organizations, and others interested in rural violence and substance use. Rural communities facing these issues need partners to provide information and resources; to conduct research into the unique problems, characteristics, and strengths of the individual community; and to assist in developing approaches to prevention, intervention, and treatment.
One such partnership is described in this monograph by Susan R. Takata. Takata and her students at the University of Wisconsin-Parkside worked with community members and public officials to research and respond to the emergence of youth gangs in two small Wisconsin cities. In doing so, they became a powerful community resource for these small cities and formed the type of relationship that this monograph hopes to promote.
Takata's research marks a beginning, but it also highlights the urgent need for further study. Because violent crime and substance use in small cities and rural areas represents a relatively new field of study, even the most basic information about rural violence and substance use has yet to be gathered:
While we understand some dimensions of group delinquency in large metropolitan areas, we still know very little about the extent and nature of this problem in smaller cities and rural areas. Important details about the nature, history, organizational structure, and activities of small-city delinquent groups are lacking."
Like the other chapters in this monograph, Takata's analysis suggests the need for further research and knowledge building, as well as the active involvement of partners in rural community development. Even as rural communities begin to resemble their urban counterparts in rates of violence and substance use, researchers and partners are hearing a call to respond. As Donnermeyer writes, "If there was ever an opportune moment for prevention programming to work, it is now and it is in America's rural communities."
Copyright © 1994:
Midwest Regional Center for
Drug-Free Schools & Communities
North Central
Regional Educational Laboratory
Contact:info@ncrel.org
Posted on March 31, 1995
URL: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/drugfree/v1blaser.htm