ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Vet. Sci.
Sec. Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics
Rural–Urban Differences in the Economic Contributions of Veterinary Practices Across 10 States
Provisionally accepted
- 1Department of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, United States
- 2Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, United States
- 3Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, United States
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Objective: Quantify and compare the economic contributions of veterinary services across rural and urban counties in 10 U.S. states, and assess whether rural status is associated with higher veterinary economic intensity. Methods: We conducted a county-level economic contribution analysis of veterinary services using 2023 IMPLAN data. For each county, we extracted direct employment and output and calculated total effects (direct + indirect + induced) and multipliers. Counties were classified by rural-urban status, and log-linear OLS models estimated employment and output per veterinary establishment per 1,000 residents, controlling for county poverty and unemployment rates and state effects. Results: Across the sample, veterinary services generated 75,438 direct jobs and 97,912.70 total jobs, and $7.20B in direct output and $11.94B in total output. Rural counties accounted for 8,010 direct jobs and $706.90M in direct output versus 67,428 direct jobs and $6,489.58M in urban counties. Employment multipliers ranged from 1.25 to 1.38 and output multipliers from 1.57 to 1.70. In regression models, rural status was positively associated with higher employment intensity and output intensity. Conclusion: Veterinary services generate substantial local economic activity with meaningful spillovers. Although urban counties dominate in total scale, rural counties show higher standardized intensity, supporting continued policy initiatives that target rural workforce recruitment and retention.
Keywords: Economic contribution, IMPLAN, Labor, rural, veterinary economics
Received: 02 Jan 2026; Accepted: 10 Feb 2026.
Copyright: © 2026 Neill, Baros and ShalekBriski. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Clinton L Neill
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.