Many federal agencies involved in economic development provide special programs for areas of great need. These programs are often implemented on the basis of statistical measures of economic hardship. The underlying rationale for such targeting usually is strongly related to the measure of what is commonly referred to as “economic distress.” The use of terms such as distress is meant to signify the starkly different experiences of communites based on high unemployment, low income, high poverty, unstable economies, population outmigation or othe socioeconomic problems. Despite the unanimity of concern, no universally accepted measure of distress has emerged. A new paper published by the Southern Rural Development Center explores the use of different measures of economic health and distress primarily in relationship to rural aras. The discussion examines three different measures and offers advice about the value of each for economic development and social policy research.