Ohio Trends
Volume 1, Number 1
July 1999
Ohio's Population Growth
Ohio has been experiencing both a growth in population and what is being termed a "rural rebound" during the 1990s. During the period from 1990-97, the state experienced a population growth of 3.1%. (See Figure 1.) This compares to a population growth of only 0.5% in the 1980s and a 1.3% growth in 1970s. At the same time, during the 1990s, the state has seen renewed population growth in rural areas, particularly in areas near the major cities and in the Appalachian areas of the state.
From 1990-97, the greatest growth in population occurred in the central and southwestern regions of the state. In general, counties adjacent to a major city experienced the greatest growth. This is especially true of the counties that are adjacent to the cities of Cincinnati and Columbus.
The fastest-growing counties in the state during the 1990-97 period were Delaware (30.6%), Warren (23.0%), and Union (20.8%). (See Table 1). In the northern part of the state, Medina (16.0%) and Holmes (13.8%) counties had the largest population growth.
Counties in the southern part of the state that were not a part of the Cincinnati-Hamilton metropolitan area that grew the most were Pike (13.7%), Adams (12.3%), and Highland (11.4%). Counties in the Cincinnati-Hamilton metropolitan area, and their growth rates, are Warren (23.0%), Clermont (15.3%), Brown (15.1%), Butler (12.1%), and Hamilton (-1.7%).
Fourteen counties lost population during 1990-97. Each county that contained a major city ‹ Cincinnati, Dayton, Lima, Toledo, Cleveland, and Youngstown ‹ lost population, except for Franklin county where Columbus is located. The other counties that lost population were Paulding (-1.6%), Allen (-1.6%), and Van Wert (-0.6%) along the western border and Jefferson (-5.3%), Belmont (-2.1%), Monroe (-1.1%), and Trumbull (-0.8%) along the eastern border. In central Ohio, most of the counties gained in population except for Crawford county (-1.6%).
Interestingly, the Appalachian region experienced noticeable growth during 1990 to 1997. Historically, this region lost population until the 1970s when it experienced substantial growth (Thomas, 1996).
The decade of the 1970s is referred to as the rural "turnaround." During this decade, there was substantial growth in low-density nonmetropolitan areas. The 1980s saw slower growth that was more mixed, with some urban and some rural areas showing population increases.
The 1990s are mimicking the 1970s and are referred to as the "rural rebound." Several Appalachian counties (see Figure 1), grew at more than twice the state rate ‹ Clermont (15.3%), Brown (15.1%), Holmes (13.8%), Pike (13.7%), Hocking (12.6%), Adams (12.3%), Highland (11.4%), Carroll (9.1%), Noble (8.5%), Ross (8.5%), Vinton (8.4%), Perry (8.2%), Jackson (7.2%), and Gallia (6.9%).
Rural Turnaround
The rural turnaround began in the 1970s. The migration of metropolitan residents into low-density nonmetropolitan areas during this period affected the patterns of population not only in Ohio but also nationally. The rural turnaround was the result of more people migrating from urban areas to rural nonmetropolitan areas. Migration occurs when there is a change in residence.
Although many factors contributed to the rural turnaround of the 1970s, the main reasons for the migration to rural areas were:
- The decentralization of employment.
- The increase in the numbers of people who are able to move.
- The desire to live in smaller towns and rural areas. (Population Redistribution in the Midwest. 1981.)
Mixed Growth in the 1980s
The 1980s saw a mixed pattern of population change, with some rural and some urban areas gaining as well as some losing population. No clear trend toward either urban or rural areas emerged during this time.
In the 1980s, rural nonmetropolitan areas of the state did not grow as rapidly as in the previous decade.
Rural Rebound
During the 1990s, the rural turnaround has re-emerged with a number of smaller rural counties in Ohio ‹ such as Pike, Vinton, and Noble ‹ growing at more than twice the state rate. This rural turnaround has affected not only counties that are distant from metropolitan areas but also counties that have no urban population.
In general, rural areas have grown more rapidly than cities. This pattern is true for Ohio in the 1990s, especially in the Appalachian region. As a partial explanation of why the population shifted from metropolitan areas to nonmetropolitan areas, these factors were identified:
- Counties that are considered retirement counties had the most rapid growth.
- There was a mild inverse relationship between the population growth and the size of the largest place in the county. In other words, the population growth was targeted to the smaller towns, villages, and areas in the county.
- Counties on interstate highways had only a slightly higher growth rate than other counties that were not on the interstate system.
- Counties that contained a state college slowed in growth, partly due to enrollment leveling off.
- Counties with the highest percentage of employment in agriculture continued to experience an out-migration of people.
These trends were noted for the Midwest region of the United States, including Ohio.
Population Decreases in Urban Areas
For Ohio, of the seven counties containing a major city, Franklin county (Columbus) was the only county that grew in population. The six counties that contain a major city and that lost population were Allen county (Lima), Hamilton (Cincinnati), Cuyahoga (Cleveland), Montgomery (Dayton), Lucas (Toledo), and Mahoning (Youngstown).
This trend of population decreases in the urban areas and increases in the rural areas may be partly motivated by economics and attitudes. Economically, the availability of jobs and the impact of technology may have enticed some people to move to rural areas. Attitudinally, people who chose to move to a more rural setting identified quality-of-life issues and a preference for living in a more rural location as reasons why they sought to relocate (Rebirth of Rural America: Rural Migration in the Midwest, 1980).
Concerns for Rural Areas
Several concerns arise as a result of this rural nonmetropolitan migration. In general, one concern is the heavy flow of elderly residents which constitutes a major part of the migration in Ohio. The elderly may be moving for retirement reasons or because of a desire to return home or perhaps to be closer to other family members. This influx of older residents contributes not only to the aging of the area into which they move but also to an increase in the need for services. Another concern is the extent to which economic opportunities in nonmetropolitan areas will be able to increase fast enough to support large influxes of people.
As a result, rural communities are undergoing many changes, especially political ones. Local governments, which are often resistant to change, may have to develop new policies and programs to deal with the increasing demands. The need for planning at the local level due to the influx of people is critical for local housing, transportation, environmental, and land-use issues.
Sources
North Central Regional Center for Rural Development. 1980. Rebirth of Rural America: Rural Migration in the Midwest.
A. J. SoFranko and James D. Williams, Editors.
North Central Regional Center for Rural Development. 1991. Population Redistribution in the Midwest.
Ohio Department of Development. County Indicators. June 1998.
Ohio Department of Development. Data Line Ohio. 5(4), 1997.
Thomas, D. 1996. Population Tables for Ohio Counties, 1960-1996. Paper.
| Table 1. Ohio's Counties Ranked by 1990-97 Percent Change in Total Population. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| State/County | 1990 | 1997 | % Change 1990-97 |
| Ohio | 10,847,115 | 11,186,331 | 3.1% |
| Delaware | 66,929 | 87,396 | 30.6% |
| Warren | 113,927 | 140,080 | 23.0% |
| Union | 31,969 | 38,634 | 20.8% |
| Fairfield | 103,472 | 121,457 | 17.4% |
| Medina | 122,354 | 141,961 | 16.0% |
| Clermont | 150,167 | 173,163 | 15.3% |
| Brown | 34,966 | 40,243 | 15.1% |
| Holmes | 32,849 | 37,373 | 13.8% |
| Pike | 24,249 | 27,565 | 13.7% |
| Hocking | 25,533 | 28,755 | 12.6% |
| Adams | 25,371 | 28,480 | 12.3% |
| Butler | 291,479 | 326,749 | 12.1% |
| Morrow | 27,749 | 31,080 | 12.0% |
| Madison | 37,068 | 41,486 | 11.9% |
| Highland | 35,728 | 39,814 | 11.4% |
| Clinton | 35,417 | 39,318 | 11.0% |
| Knox | 47,473 | 52,498 | 10.6% |
| Pickaway | 48,244 | 53,218 | 10.3% |
| Ashland | 47,507 | 52,010 | 9.5% |
| Carroll | 26,521 | 28,925 | 9.1% |
| Licking | 128,300 | 139,411 | 8.7% |
| Logan | 42,310 | 45,937 | 8.6% |
| Noble | 11,336 | 12,304 | 8.5% |
| Ross | 69,330 | 75,195 | 8.5% |
| Vinton | 11,098 | 12,034 | 8.4% |
| Geauga | 81,129 | 87,913 | 8.4% |
| Perry | 31,557 | 34,144 | 8.2% |
| Wayne | 101,461 | 109,548 | 8.0% |
| Fulton | 38,498 | 41,324 | 7.3% |
| Jackson | 30,230 | 32,404 | 7.2% |
| Gallia | 30,954 | 33,085 | 6.9% |
| Preble | 40,113 | 42,862 | 6.9% |
| Huron | 56,240 | 60,035 | 6.7% |
| Champaign | 36,019 | 38,221 | 6.1% |
| Franklin | 961,437 | 1,017,274 | 5.8% |
| Portage | 142,585 | 150,792 | 5.8% |
| Shelby | 44,915 | 47,415 | 5.6% |
| Auglaize | 44,585 | 46,965 | 5.3% |
| Wood | 113,269 | 119,156 | 5.2% |
| Hancock | 65,536 | 68,813 | 5.0% |
| Tuscarawas | 84,090 | 88,209 | 4.9% |
| Miami | 93,182 | 97,742 | 4.9% |
| Guernsey | 39,024 | 40,782 | 4.5% |
| Meigs | 22,987 | 23,994 | 4.4% |
| Lawrence | 61,834 | 64,485 | 4.3% |
| Lorain | 271,126 | 282,465 | 4.2% |
| Fayette | 27,466 | 28,599 | 4.1% |
| Mercer | 39,443 | 40,984 | 3.9% |
| Lake | 215,499 | 223,715 | 3.8% |
| Putnam | 33,819 | 35,080 | 3.7% |
| Ashtabula | 99,821 | 103,140 | 3.3% |
| Summit | 514,990 | 531,650 | 3.2% |
| Columbiana | 108,276 | 111,644 | 3.1% |
| Muskingum | 82,068 | 84,539 | 3.0% |
| Morgan | 14,194 | 14,615 | 3.0% |
| Athens | 59,549 | 61,276 | 2.9% |
| Henry | 29,108 | 29,893 | 2.7% |
| Erie | 76,779 | 78,745 | 2.6% |
| Williams | 36,956 | 37,870 | 2.5% |
| Washington | 62,254 | 63,612 | 2.2% |
| Greene | 136,731 | 139,704 | 2.2% |
| Coshocton | 35,427 | 36,156 | 2.1% |
| Wyandot | 22,254 | 22,709 | 2.0% |
| Hardin | 31,111 | 31,724 | 2.0% |
| Stark | 367,585 | 373,719 | 1.7% |
| Ottawa | 40,029 | 40,651 | 1.6% |
| Defiance | 39,350 | 39,932 | 1.5% |
| Marion | 64,274 | 65,115 | 1.3% |
| Darke | 53,619 | 54,318 | 1.3% |
| Richland | 126,137 | 127,762 | 1.3% |
| Sandusky | 61,963 | 62,296 | 0.5% |
| Scioto | 80,327 | 80,756 | 0.5% |
| Seneca | 59,733 | 60,025 | 0.5% |
| Harrison | 16,085 | 16,159 | 0.5% |
| Van Wert | 30,464 | 30,278 | -0.6% |
| Trumbull | 227,813 | 226,082 | -0.8% |
| Clark | 147,548 | 146,185 | -0.9% |
| Monroe | 15,497 | 15,331 | -1.1% |
| Paulding | 20,488 | 20,157 | -1.6% |
| Allen | 109,755 | 107,979 | -1.6% |
| Crawford | 47,870 | 47,089 | -1.6% |
| Hamilton | 866,228 | 851,599 | -1.7% |
| Cuyahoga | 1,412,140 | 1,386,803 | -1.8% |
| Belmont | 71,074 | 69,595 | -2.1% |
| Montgomery | 573,809 | 561,303 | -2.2% |
| Lucas | 462,361 | 451,325 | -2.4% |
| Mahoning | 264,806 | 257,489 | -2.8% |
| Jefferson | 80,298 | 76,014 | -5.3% |
Figure 1. Percent Change in Total Population, 1990-1997
Written by: Rosemary R. Gliem
Maps by: Lori Bolton
Reviewed by: Dr. Don Thomas,
Department of Human and Community Resource Development
Please direct comments, suggestions and corrections to the Data Center.