It seems almost paradoxical to consider that one of the looming challenges facing rural Pennsylvania is population decline.

By its very nature, “rural” translates to fewer people inhabiting a given geographic area. That paucity of population is a big part of the appeal for those who choose to live in the relative tranquility of the Commonwealth’s countryside.

But the delicate balance between rural charm and demographic challenges is beginning to tip in an increasingly concerning direction. While the allure of open spaces and solitude continues to attract some to rural areas of the state, the broader trend is the continuation of a decades-long population slide — a shift that carries significant implications for the future of the state’s rural counties.

Moving the needle

A study released by the Center for Rural Pennsylvania (Center) in October 2023 projects that by 2050, the population of the state’s 48 U.S. Census-designated rural counties will shrink by 5.8%.

That indicates an acceleration of a downward trend that began as far back as the 1960s and ’70s, according to Dr. Kyle C. Kopko, executive director of the Center, a bipartisan, bicameral legislative agency that serves as a resource on rural policy for the General Assembly.

“On top of that, there are fewer young people and more senior citizens,” Kopko says. “That’s going to create a wide range of policy pressures and is one of the reasons we have had workforce issues in recent years.”

To address these challenges and stabilize the slide, state lawmakers last year created the Rural Population Revitalization Commission, an outgrowth of the Center. Kopko, the commission’s chairman, says the 15-member group is a fact-finding body tasked with making policy recommendations and attracting and retaining rural residents.
 

Last fall, the commission hosted 10 listening sessions in rural communities statewide to share demographic data and seek local input.

“The trends that we’re talking about here have been decades in the making,” Kopko says, “so it’s going to require a concerted effort over time to address them. The trick is, first of all, we’ve got to start small. We have to be able to identify some pretty concrete solutions here that are pragmatic and can move the needle in the right direction.”

While issues vary from region to region, Kopko says some of the most frequently cited areas of concern center on housing and community infrastructure, childcare, elder care, broadband access, and health care.

Finding a balance

The ability to retain youth is another universal concern, he says.

“We want to ensure our young people realize that there are opportunities in rural areas, and we want them to stay and be the next generation of leaders,” Kopko says. “Unfortunately, when it comes to things like youth retention, we don’t really have a lot of great information as to why young people want to stay or want to move away.”

While “brain drain,” a phenomenon in which educated people migrate from their hometown to work or live in another location — usually for higher wages or more opportunities — contributes to declines in rural population, it’s not the main factor, according to Kopko.

“What’s really driving population change is the birth and death balance,” he says. “Yes, there are migration issues that we need to worry about, but the fact that we have an older population and fewer young people is the No. 1 driver right now. We’re simply having smaller families, and we’re not at the 2.1-births-per-woman replacement rate.”

Over time, this population decline could lead to serious consequences.

“It’s not going to be a pretty picture,” Kopko says. “That’s why we’re trying to take action now. At some point, some of these communities are going to have severe contraction of their economic base and their tax base.”

Even though Pennsylvania is shedding rural residents, even while making slight gains in urban counties, primarily in the southeastern part of the state, rural living remains appealing to many.

“Pew does surveys from time to time asking respondents if they could live in any type of environment — rural, suburban, metropolitan — what would it be?” he said. “And rural always gets the plurality of answers.”

The attractions to country living are obvious: natural beauty, outdoor recreation, clean air, less traffic, slower pace and, generally, a lower cost of living.

“They’re beautiful communities,” Kopko says. “These are places where you have excellent quality of life. You get to know your neighbors. You can make a real contribution in these types of areas. You’re also going to have a sense of history, charm.”

Ready to listen

But drawing people to those areas to stem the population decline is much more complex than simply touting the benefits of rural living.

“The first thing we have to determine is if a community even wants to go that direction,” Kopko says. “That is something that has to be addressed at the local level. And this is why we want to make local capacity such an important early goal of the commission.

“If a community wanted to attract new residents but it doesn’t have the ability to market or plan for that, it’s not going to get very far.”

With the commission’s listening sessions complete, the group has started holding hearings to gather additional public input.

“We’re going to be out in the communities, and these are all open meetings for folks to come out and talk with us,” he says. “It’s necessary that we hear regional perspectives and ideas on what would benefit their communities.”

Kopko also encourages rural residents to provide feedback and suggestions to the commission directly at commission@rural.pa.gov. They can also visit rural.pa.gov to learn more about the Center for Rural Pennsylvania, the commission and upcoming hearings.