ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES IN RURAL NORTH DAKOTA COMMUNITIES: SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS

The purpose of this study was to examine the local socioeconomic impacts of new economic development initiatives in North Dakota's rural (nonmetropolitan) communities. This report is the second to present findings from this project; an earlier report analyzed the effects of four new agricultural processing plants on their host communities. This report examines the effects of manufacturing and/or exported services facilities in three communities and presents comparison data drawn from two control communities (i.e., towns that had not experienced the advent of a major new employer during the 1990s). The information from the two groups of development communities and the control communities is compared and contrasted to discern similarities and differences in the effects of the different types of development initiatives and to develop a set of general principles and recommended actions for community leaders to follow when planning for a new employer. The agricultural processing projects were sited in rural counties, developed during the 1990s, and employed at least 40 workers. The communities with other types of economic development initiatives were rural communities where a new nonagricultural employer or an expansion of an existing facility had created at least 40 new jobs during the 1990s. The two control communities were located in rural counties, had not experienced a new nonagricultural employer or expansion with more than 20 new jobs since 1990, and were characterized by economic and demographic trends prior to 1990 that were similar to those of the development counties. In each of the study communities, the authors conducted in-depth interviews with a cross-section of community leaders, with the aim of gaining an understanding of the community (e.g., its population, economic base), the effects of project development, other socioeconomic changes that might have either exacerbated or offset the project's effects, and the community's response to the situation. Representatives of each of the development projects also were interviewed. Subsequently, a short survey was completed by a random sample of residents in each community. Improved job opportunities and enhanced incomes were generally seen as major positive effects of each of the new economic development initiatives. Further, aside from some management and engineering positions, most of the plant jobs appeared to represent employment opportunities for area workers, rather than being taken primarily by in-migrants. Residents' incomes were enhanced both by the plants' jobs and payroll (which often represented second incomes for area households) and by increased incomes for area farmers (in the case of agricultural processing facilities). Because most of the plant jobs were taken by persons already living in the area, the new plants did not lead to substantial in-migration or major population growth in the host communities. Rather, a reoccurring comment by local leaders was that the plant in their community had stabilized the local economy and population. Comparison of population trends in the development and control communities supports the perception of local informants that the economic development initiatives served to stabilize local populations.rural development, community impacts, North Dakota, manufacturing, Community/Rural/Urban Development,

SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS OF AGRICULTURAL AND NON-AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN RURAL NORTH DAKOTA

Information from the groups of development communities and control communities is compared and contrasted to discern similarities and differences in the effects of the different types of development initiatives and to develop a set of general principles and recommended actions for community leaders to follow when planning for a new employer.Community/Rural/Urban Development,

Impacts of Business Development in Rural Communities

The purpose of this study was to examine the local socioeconomic impacts of new economic development initiatives in North Dakota’s rural (nonmetropolitan) communities. The analysis utilized interview, survey, and secondary data from four communities with recently developed agricultural processing plants, three with manufacturing and/or explored services facilities, and two control communities (i.e., towns that had not experienced the advent of a major new employer during the 1990s). Information from the two groups of development communities and the control communities is compared and contrasted to discern similarities and differences in the effects of the different types of development initiatives and to develop a set of general principles and recommended actions for community leaders to follow when planning for a new employer

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES IN RURAL NORTH DAKOTA COMMUNITIES: SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS

The purpose of this study was to examine the local socioeconomic impacts of new economic development initiatives in North Dakota's rural (nonmetropolitan) communities. This report is the second to present findings from this project; an earlier report analyzed the effects of four new agricultural processing plants on their host communities. This report examines the effects of manufacturing and/or exported services facilities in three communities and presents comparison data drawn from two control communities (i.e., towns that had not experienced the advent of a major new employer during the 1990s). The information from the two groups of development communities and the control communities is compared and contrasted to discern similarities and differences in the effects of the different types of development initiatives and to develop a set of general principles and recommended actions for community leaders to follow when planning for a new employer. The agricultural processing projects were sited in rural counties, developed during the 1990s, and employed at least 40 workers. The communities with other types of economic development initiatives were rural communities where a new nonagricultural employer or an expansion of an existing facility had created at least 40 new jobs during the 1990s. The two control communities were located in rural counties, had not experienced a new nonagricultural employer or expansion with more than 20 new jobs since 1990, and were characterized by economic and demographic trends prior to 1990 that were similar to those of the development counties. In each of the study communities, the authors conducted in-depth interviews with a cross-section of community leaders, with the aim of gaining an understanding of the community (e.g., its population, economic base), the effects of project development, other socioeconomic changes that might have either exacerbated or offset the project's effects, and the community's response to the situation. Representatives of each of the development projects also were interviewed. Subsequently, a short survey was completed by a random sample of residents in each community. Improved job opportunities and enhanced incomes were generally seen as major positive effects of each of the new economic development initiatives. Further, aside from some management and engineering positions, most of the plant jobs appeared to represent employment opportunities for area workers, rather than being taken primarily by in-migrants. Residents' incomes were enhanced both by the plants' jobs and payroll (which often represented second incomes for area households) and by increased incomes for area farmers (in the case of agricultural processing facilities). Because most of the plant jobs were taken by persons already living in the area, the new plants did not lead to substantial in-migration or major population growth in the host communities. Rather, a reoccurring comment by local leaders was that the plant in their community had stabilized the local economy and population. Comparison of population trends in the development and control communities supports the perception of local informants that the economic development initiatives served to stabilize local populations

SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS OF AGRICULTURAL AND NON-AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN RURAL NORTH DAKOTA

Information from the groups of development communities and control communities is compared and contrasted to discern similarities and differences in the effects of the different types of development initiatives and to develop a set of general principles and recommended actions for community leaders to follow when planning for a new employer

No association of IL-12p40 pro1.1 polymorphism with juvenile idiopathic arthritis

Background: IL-12p40 plays an important role in the activation of the T-cell lines like Th17 and Th1-cells. Theses cells are crucial in the pathogenesis of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. A polymorphism in its promoter region and the genotype IL12p40 pro1.1 leads to a higher production of IL-12p40. We studied whether there is a difference in the distribution of the genotype in patients with JIA and the healthy population. Methods: In 883 patients and 321 healthy controls the IL-12p40 promoter genotype was identified by ARMS-PCR. Results: There is no association of IL-12p40 pro polymorphism neither in patients with JIA compared to controls nor in subtypes of JIA compared to oligoarthritis. We found a non-significant tendency of a higher prevalence of the genotype pro1.1 in systemic arthritis (32.4 %) and in rheumatoid factor negative polyarthritis (30.5 %) and a lower pro1.1 genotype in persistent oligoarthritis (20.7 %) and in enthesitis-related arthritis (17 %). Likelihood of the occurrence of genotype IL12-p40 pro1.1 in patients with systemic arthritis (OR 1.722, CI 95 % 1.344-2.615, p 0.0129) and RF-negative polyarthritis (OR 1.576, CI 95 % 1.046-2.376, p 0.0367) compared to persistent oligoarthritis was significantly higher. This was also true for comparison of their homozygous genotypes IL-12p40 pro 1.1 and 2.2 in systemic arthritis (OR 1.779, CI 95 % 1.045-3.029, p 0.0338). However, in Bonferroni correction for multiple hypothesis this was not significant. Conclusion: A tendency of a higher prevalence of the genotype IL-12p40 pro1.1 in systemic arthritis and in rheumatoid factor negative polyarthritis was observed but not significant. Further investigations should be done to clarify the role IL-12p40 in the different subtypes of JIA