In 1960, distress in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region was concentrated in southern Texas, with some of the larger urban areas in South Texas, such as the cities of Laredo, McAllen, and Brownsville, being at the heart of distress in the region. This area of once relatively concentrated economic distress has expanded to include many of the counties along the U.S.-Mexico border in the remaining states of the region, as well as a few counties along the Texas-Mexico border that were not distressed in 1960. Also noteworthy are conditions of economic distress that have developed over time in a number of counties, not directly bordering Mexico, in New Mexico. Thus, whereas distress in the Border Region was largely, at one time, concentrated in South Texas, distress in the region has expanded, growing to include counties that are home to cities such as Nogales, Arizona, Las Cruces, New Mexico, and El Paso, Texas.

That distress has developed in areas such as El Paso and Las Cruces, and remains persistent in some of the more metropolitan locations of South Texas such as Brownsville and Laredo, is perhaps the first indication, aside from growing distress in the region more generally, that factors associated with economic distress in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region are somewhat different than found in other regions of the U.S.

(The logistic regression model in Appendix C related to distress in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region in 2000 indicated that factors having a statistically significant relationship with current distress included high minority populations; low educational attainment; low employment in mining; low employment in agriculture; and low employment in professional services. The second model for the region was different than models for previous regions in that it measured associations between counties being non-distressed in both 1960 and 2000 and counties that entered distress during that period of time. Counties that entered distress shared similar characteristics as those that were distressed in the region in 2000).

To be sure, in the Border Region's distressed counties, median levels of urbanization are actually higher than in the region's non-distressed counties, a trend that is in contrast to all other regions in the U.S. (This includes all historically distressed regions, including the subregions of Appalachia, as well as the historically non-distressed regions of the U.S. as a whole. Note, however, that in the Mississippi Delta Region median levels of urbanization in distressed and non-distressed counties in 2000 were virtually identical). In general, the Border Region has some of the highest rates of urbanization in the U.S., second only to the Mid-Atlantic Region. (This is based upon the entire region. Median county-level urban population in the region is 66 percent. In the Mid-Atlantic Region it is 72 percent. The U.S. county-level median is 40 percent).

Compared to all other regions in this analysis, population growth has occurred most rapidly over time in the Border Region. The region's population more than doubled between 1960 and 2000, growing at a faster rate than in areas often associated with having especially rapid population growth, including the South, the Southwest, the West, and the Rocky Mountain regions.

(In general, the U.S.-Mexico Border, West, Southwest, Rocky Mountain, and South Regions have all seen their populations more than double since 1960, though population growth has occurred most rapidly in the Border Region. See previous footnote for comparison of rates of growth in these 5 regions).

At least some of the population growth in the region is associated with birth rates, which are to some extent higher than in much of the remaining U.S.; the growing population over time has also been at least somewhat associated with legal as well as illegal immigration into the region. (See Gilmer et al. [2001] for information in relation to these particular issues). In the meantime, and as is indicative in the extremely high unemployment rates in some parts of the U.S.-Mexico Border region, job growth has not kept pace with rapid population growth in the region over time. Eight of the ten counties in the U.S. with the highest unemployment rates in the U.S. are found in the Border Region.

(Based upon three-year unemployment averages between 1997 and 1999. The worst ten counties in the U.S. in this regard were as follows, with three-year unemployment rates included in parentheses: Presidio, TX (30.); Starr, TX (26.7); Yuma, AZ (26.7); Imperial, CA (25.3); Luna, NM (25.0); Maverick, TX (24.9); Zavala, TX (21.1); West Carroll, LA (20.4); East Carroll, LA (20.3); Willacy, TX (20.0)).

All but two of these counties had unemployment rates in the range of 4-7 percent in 1960. Similar trends in growning unemployment over time are found in other counties throughout much of the region.

The economic structure of the Border Region is somewhat unique compared to much of the rest of the U.S. This uniqueness is to some extent epitomized by the relatively high number of jobs in border-related activities, including jobs associated with immigration, customs, and border security.

(Of all the regions in the U.S., the U.S.-Mexico Border Region has the highest percentage of its labor force employed in what the census defines as 'public administration." This type of employment is associated with some of the employment activities as cited. Median employment in public administration in the Border Region is 7 percent. For comparative purposes, the region with the second highest employment in public administration is the Southwest, with 5.8 percent employed in such activities. Regions such as the Mississippi Delta, the Great Lakes, the Plains, New England, and Appalachia all have less than 5 percent, and in some cases less than 4 percent, of their populations working in public administration. At the national level, the county-level median is 4.5 percent).

On the other hand, employment in manufacturing is especially low relative to much of the rest of the U.S. Along with the Rocky Mountain Region, the U.S.-Mexico Border Region has the lowest rates of employment in manufacturing in the entire nation. (Median county-level employment in manufacturing in the region is 5.5 percent, compared to 5.4 percent in the Rocky Mountain Region and a U.S. county-level median of 15 percent). While there are some manufacturing jobs in the region that are associated with manufacturing processes in the maquiladoras found in neighboring Mexico, such jobs are far from enough to bring the region in line with rates of manufacturing employment found throughout much of the rest of the U.S.

(For information about some of the manufacturing firms' relationships to manufacturing in Mexico's maquiladoras, see Vargas [2001], where the author discusses relationships between manufacturing between areas such as El Paso, Texas, and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. Also note that many manufacturing jobs in Mexico have actually been lost over the past few years, as manufacturers in the region have moved overseas, to countries such as China, to take advantage of lower wages found in such areas. For more information on trends in the loss of manufacturing jobs in Mexico, see for example Forero [2003]).

Trends related to economic distress and agricultural as well as mining activities in the region are largely in contrast to trends elsewhere in the U.S., though a few issues are of note in this regard. First, the Border and Southwest regions are the only two regions in the U.S. where increased employment in agriculture is associated with lower levels of distress, and indeed they are the only two regions where there is any association between agriculture and economic distress. (See logistic regression models in Appendix C in this regard). Not surprisingly, then, the counties with high employment in agriculture in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region are those typically found away from the border, on the northern edge of the region in somewhat close proximity to the Southwest Region. Many of these counties are in Texas, where ranching activities often help support the local economy. Similar trends are found in the way of mining activities in the region, where a number of counties in the northern areas of Texas have historically had a relatively high number of jobs in the oil and gas industry and have remained non-distressed over time. (For information on some of the particular employment characteristics of such areas, see U.S. Census Bureau "Nonemployer Statistics," available at www.census.gov).

While race was the most important factor related to patterns of distress in virtually all other regions in this analysis aside from Central Appalachia, in combination with other factors related to distress in the region, race does relatively less to explain current as well as growing county-level distress in the Border Region than do other trends, such as issues of educational attainment and occupational structure.

(In the logistic regression models in Appendix C related to distress in the region, race was a relatively weak contributor compared to the other variables in the models. It was the weakest statistically significant contributor in the model related to growing distress, and the second least statistically significant contributor in the model related to current distress).

On the other hand, in the distressed counties in the region, only 54 percent of the population identified as being "White alone" according to the 2000 census, compared to 71 percent identifying as such in the region's non-distressed counties. (These figures are based upon summing across all distressed and non-distressed counties in the region). In general, the Border Region includes a relatively large Hispanic population, and as an entire region it had the largest percent of its population not identifying as "White alone" according to the 2000 census. These figures are based upon summing across the individual counties in any given region. In the Border Region 63 percent of the population identified as being "White alone" according to the 2000 census. (The next closest region was the Mid-Atlantic Region, with 69 percent identifying as such). That the racial structure, regionwide, has a relatively greater share of minorities than is found anywhere else in the U.S., and that the Border is the one region in the U.S. that has witnessed exceptionally growing distress over time, is perhaps indicative of trends associated with race and distress in the U.S. more generally. In short, the region has the highest minority population in the U.S. It is also the region that in many ways has fared most poorly according to this analysis.

In some respects, increasing distress within the U.S.-Mexico Border Region is somewhat more complex than changing patterns of distress found elsewhere in the U.S. The fact that the region was the one historically distressed region that witnessed growing distress over time is perhaps the first sign of this complexity. Of all the regions in this analysis, the Border Region, along with the Mississippi Delta and Central Appalachian regions, has some of the highest levels of poverty in the U.S. Its current levels of PCMI are the second lowest in the nation, with lower levels found only in Central Appalachia. The region also has the most poorly diversified economy in the U.S. (The region as a whole had a diversity index score for 2000 that indicated the region was the least diversified in relation to the entire U.S). These and other various trends do not bode well for the region's future. In the past, economic distress was not as intense as it is in the region today. Of all the historically distressed regions in this analysis, including Central and Southern Appalachia, the Mississippi Delta Region, the Southwest, and the South, the U.S.-Mexico Border Region had the lowest levels of economic distress in 1960. Along with Central Appalachia, it is now the most economically distressed region in the nation.