Three Stories that Changed How I Understand the Importance of Rural America

By Alan Okagaki, Senior Fellow, Rural Futures Lab

After casting about in the community development world for the last 25 years with CFED and ShoreBank Corporation and as an independent planning and evaluation consultant, I was looking for something fresh, new and promising.  Around that time, Brian Dabson recruited me to be part of the Rural Futures Lab.  As he explained his thoughts about the Lab, I found myself getting excited about this new project in a way I hadn’t in years.  In this blog, I’m going to relate three stories which suggest what I think is at stake for rural America and why the Lab is so important. 

               

The first story is an Associated Press article released July 28, 2011, that ran with the headline “Rural America is disappearing; population share hits low.” It reports that the share of the United States population living in rural areas had fallen from 20% in the 2000 census to only 16% in the 2010 census.  It cites demographers who predict that “by midcentury, city boundaries (will) become indistinct and rural areas grow ever less relevant. Many communities could shrink to virtual ghost towns as they shutter businesses and close down schools.”  My perception is that this negative viewpoint is becoming increasingly prevalent among policy makers and the general public – or at least those people who spend much time thinking about rural America.  Metropolitan areas are seen as the centers of economic strength, innovation, and growth; they are the future.  Rural areas are perceived, at best, as along for the ride and, at worst, as a drag on economic growth and a cost sink for social services, transfer payments, and public subsidy. 

               

The second story is the report entitled Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World (2008) written by the National Intelligence Council.  It highlights a set of global trends that have huge implications for rural America.  According to this report, global population will grow by 1.2 billion people by 2025, putting pressure on energy, food, and water resources.  Demand will outstrip supply.  The World Bank project that demand for food will increase by 30% by 2030, putting even more stress on land and water resources.  Climate change is accepted as a given: the pace at which it occurs and the places it affects most will define winners and losers.  The report anticipates that agricultural losses will mount.   One major question is whether an energy transition away from oil and gas will be completed by 2025.   The report believes that all current technologies are inadequate for replacing the traditional energy architecture on the scale needed.  In sum, resources will become an increasingly prominent part of the transnational agenda and will have significant security and geopolitical implications.

               

My take-away from the Global Trends report is that rural areas and the assets and services they provide will become more and more important in the future.  As clean water becomes scarcer, rural watersheds and groundwater will become more valuable.  As world demand for food grows, productive agricultural lands are precious.   London, New York, and Hong Kong may be the largest global financial centers, but they are not going to be centers for carbon sequestration.  And we are already seeing the contributions that rural areas are making towards renewable energy.    

               

My third story goes back to 1971 and to the state of Montana where I’ve lived most of the last 30 years.  The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation released the North Central Power Study, which called for building 42 coal-burning power plants in the Northern Great Plains.  It portrayed eastern Montana as a “national sacrifice area” for energy production.  The plan would have devastated farming and ranching communities – massive strip mining, depletion of scarce water resources, air pollution, high power transmission lines.  Not surprisingly, the North Central Power Study helped catalyze the creation of the Northern Plains Resource Council, a state-wide coalition of ranchers, farmers and environmentalists committed to protecting water quality, family farms and ranches, and rural ways of life.  Northern Plains continues to this day, with nine local chapters each concerned with a set of local issues.  The intent of these rural advocates is not necessarily to stop resource development but to ensure that development be done responsibly and respects their communities and the land.

               

The first two stories suggest a paradox: rural resources and assets are becoming increasingly important at a time when rural areas are depopulating and falling off the public radar screen.  One can make a plausible argument that our long-term economic competitiveness will be contingent on protecting and making highly productive use of our rural resources which in turn will enhance our geopolitical positioning.  The third story begs a series of questions about the relationship between rural people and rural landscapes, between rural communities and major economic interests, and about the abilities of rural communities to control their destinies. 

               

There is no question that rural America will be subject to major changes over the next 20 or 30 years.  Articulating how these different factors can play out in the future– the economic utilization and conservation of rural resources, the relationships between urban markets and rural areas, the roles that rural communities play in shaping their economies, landscapes and lives – is the major task of the Rural Futures Lab.  This is an exciting and significant endeavor.      

What do you think are the best ways to change the negative narrative about the future of rural America? How does your rural area contribute to national prosperity? Do you feel that your community or region is in control of its destiny?

Alan Okagaki is Senior Advisor for Growth and Impact Strategies at Enterprise Cascadia (a community development financial institution serving Oregon and Washington) and Senior Fellow with the Rural Futures Lab. He recently moved to Seattle for his work with Enterprise Cascadia, but his heart remains in Montana where he lived in a rural community for 30 years.

Visit the Rural Futures Lab website here.

Photo credits: Street scene, Cornfield

The Quandary of Defining Rural

By Kathy Miller, RUPRI Program Director

What is rural? It sounds like a simple question, but ask 10 people and you’ll get 10 answers. Worse, ask 10 policymakers and you’re likely to get 20 answers. What makes this such a contentious and difficult dilemma? Largely, it falls to where the funds are – everyone wants a piece of an ever diminishing source of public funds for rural development.

Common rural definitions & their challenges

There are lots of ways that rural is defined for data-related purposes. The Census Bureau makes the official definitions of the words “urban” and “rural.” These are based on the population density of census blocks and block groups. Under these guidelines, urban areas have populations of 2,500 and higher, and anything not defined as urban is rural.

While the Census definitions are the official designations of rural and urban places, these pose significant problems for the purposes of targeting resources to rural areas. Many people argue that some “urban” places – such as small towns with as few as 2,500 people – are really more rural in character. But how do we agree on the appropriate threshold? Also, these areas are drawn for the purposes of statistical tabulations – there is no governmental jurisdiction that operates these census-defined areas. Furthermore, these are boundaries that are delineated only once per decade.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), recognizing these challenges, created the Core Based Statistical Area classification, designed to represent “functional regions” around urban areas. Counties are used as the basis of these areas. Counties are classified as:

·         Metropolitan, a county with a core urban area of population 50,000 or more plus surrounding counties linked through commuting ties;

·         Micropolitan, a county with a core urban area of population 10,000 to 49,999 plus surrounding counties linked through commuting ties; and

·         Noncore counties, the residual set of counties that don’t meet the criteria for metropolitan or micropolitan.

These OMB definitions are popular designations, and do indeed have strong merit. However, counties create a difficult geography to classify, particularly in the west where counties can be expansive. It is very difficult to classify a county as one thing – counties are not urban or rural, they are urban and rural. In fact, over half of all rural people actually reside in counties that are classified as metropolitan. And an image of the Grand Canyon, located in a metropolitan county, is often used to illustrate this challenge.

Thinking regionally

While it is absurd to call the Grand Canyon an urban area, this classification does have significant merit when considering more regional approaches to economic development. OMB does not intend for these designations to be utilized as strict delineations, but rather as functional regions. By definition, these areas contain a broad spectrum of territory, from the most urban to remote rural places.

Micropolitan areas in particular represent small cities and towns that act as important regional growth hubs for broad rural territory that surround them. We should not dismiss these designations because they are county based, but we should embrace these designations for their purpose, representing how regions interact and functions.

Most would agree that we rarely cross an invisible line where urban territory becomes rural territory – a drive outward from a central city will present a gradual change. Thus represents the problem. Rural and urban are a continuum – not discrete concepts. We are forcing a line in the sand when we create a firm definition of rural. The truth is, there will always be some place left just beyond the arbitrary line we draw.

The answer, then? Ultimately, there isn’t one – nor will there ever be. But in an area of declining public resources and monumental challenges, we need to worry less about who is rural and who isn’t – for these places are no more isolated in reality than the definitions try to make them. Communities need to recognize, and welcome, the interrelationships with surrounding areas and learn to function as regions.

How do you define “rural”? What is your community's experience with various qualifying criteria for rural programs? How do you define the region where you live? 

Kathy Miller is the Program Director for RUPRI. When she’s not wrestling with rural data issues, she raises chickens, turkeys, and cows with the help of her two girls and husband in Blackwater, Missouri. Contact her at miller@rupri.org.

Visit the Rural Futures Lab at our website.

How Does Youth Engagement Support Rural Economic Development?

By Craig Schroeder, Director of Youth Engagement, RUPRI Center for Rural Entrepreneurship

From my work with entrepreneurial rural communities across the country, I'm convinced that youth are essential to real and lasting economic revitalization. Young people add much more than just numbers to a community:

• Many young people are entrepreneurial by nature with lots of energy. They start new businesses, and with the support of their community can transition existing businesses to the next generation. 
• Young adults who move to your community are often well-educated, technology-oriented, and possess a variety of experiences, fresh ideas, and contacts that can be leveraged in a variety of ways to advance community and economic development.
• Young families purchase many goods and services that benefit local businesses, and they support local schools, libraries, and health care services.
• They build new or renovate properties to provide homes for their families, positively impacting the appearance of your community, property values and local tax revenues.

Here are just three examples of how investing in youth engagement can positively impact rural economic development:

• Youth can be the spark of entrepreneurial energy that communities need to get on their feet and forge ahead, renewing optimism among adults as well. An example is an entrepreneurship program that encourages youth and young adults to start new businesses with the support of their community. In David City, Nebraska, an investment by the local community foundation in an entrepreneurship education curriculum several years ago resulted in a robust program for middle school to high school age students to develop their business ideas with the encouragement of the community. At the conclusion of a recent middle school entrepreneurship camp, I asked the participants how their experiences had impacted their views about staying or returning to their hometown in the future. Without hesitation, a 5th grade student responded, "You know, before this camp I didn't see many job opportunities here, but now I see a whole bunch of business opportunities!"
• Many young people have technology savvy, which can be a tremendous resource for helping existing businesses compete more effectively in our increasing networked economy. Or, they may start new businesses that use technology as a backbone for bringing new wealth and jobs to their community.
• For each alum a community attracts home, the actual impact on population is an increase of not one, but potentially three or more, as these young adults get married and have, on average, two children, as reflected in U.S. Census data.  I have met many young couples in my travels where one spouse was from the local rural area and married a total newcomer. They moved back to begin their family where they felt safe with good schools for their children.

Yet despite these tangible benefits, sometimes it is difficult to get decision makers to invest in youth engagement as an economic development priority. Their response is often, "We need to create jobs now!" I understand this perspective in the current economic climate, but I would argue that youth engagement is a strategy that can complement traditional economic development activities in addressing the real and systemic challenges many rural communities have faced for many years: out-migration, depopulation, and economic decline.

Youth engagement is a long-term strategy, but it can also result in short-term outcomes that build momentum in your hometown. One important tool we use to help local leaders understand the potential youth hold for their community is an assessment of youth perspectives about their hometowns, future education and career goals, and their desire to stay or return to their hometown. An outcome that often surprises adults is just how many youth would like to live in their hometown if there were good career opportunities available. Recent Center surveys including over 25,000 middle-to-high-school-age youth found that 50% are open to staying or returning home in the future.

The good news is that our research also indicates that if just 5% to 15% more young people return home on a sustained basis, they can stabilize population loss due to outmigration, and help to revitalize their hometowns with their energy and entrepreneurial drive. This is due in large part to the 3:1 exponential impact young families have on population and their contributions to economic revitalization, noted previously.

The youth survey can also help in assessing your community's youth engagement opportunities. Once you have evidence that young people are interested in staying or returning home, and what is motivating this interest, you can then work with youth to pursue strategies that will have traction and make sense for your community.

There are many ways to engage young people in your hometown. Some examples include considering their opinions and needs on local issues, investing in youth-led community projects and adding youth representation to local leadership. By partnering with local schools, communities can expand youth engagement with investment in youth entrepreneurship education and preparation for specific career and business opportunities locally.

How do you work with youth in your community? What are the challenges and opportunities that you see?  What questions do you have about this approach to rural economic development?

To learn more about how the Center for Rural Entrepreneurship can assist you in working with young people and attracting them home, please contact Craig Schroeder at craig@e2mail.org.

Visit the RUPRI Rural Futures Lab here.

Shining a Light on Rural America

By Brian Dabson, Director of the RUPRI Rural Futures Lab

Rural Futures Lab Director Brian Dabson greets President Clinton at CGI America.

An unusual amount of light has shone on rural America this summer.  I am not referring here to the baking sun, but to the number of sightings of intense and committed rural folks from across the country gathering at major conferences in the Midwest:

·         June 28-30: The first of these was the Rural Assembly, where 340 rural leaders and advocates from every corner of the U.S. met in St. Paul, Minnesota under the banner of “Building an Inclusive Nation.” This was a high-energy conference with 24 breakout sessions ranging from health care, transportation, broadband, education, immigration reform, and housing to philanthropy and social media. 

·         June 29-30: Overlapping this – in time but only marginally in representation – was the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) America conference in Chicago. CGI America was dedicated to finding imaginative ways to speed national economic recovery after the Great Recession.  One of 10 tracks was the “New Rural Economy,” where 50 invited participants with experience and expertise in entrepreneurship and economic development, community development financing, food systems, and philanthropy met to identify and commit to actions to create jobs and stimulate investment. 

·         July 25-27: The Council of Foundations convened 170 representatives from community and private foundations at its third annual Rural Philanthropy conference in Kansas City.  Here the themes centered on creating and capturing philanthropic services, influencing public policy, and building a new rural economy. 

Also this summer, the White House Rural Council began its work.  The Council, chaired by Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, is charged with coordinating rural programs across the Federal government and making recommendations for investments in rural areas. The goal is to create jobs, stimulate rural economies, and improve quality of life. Cabinet members and senior officials from across the Obama Administration are conducting listening sessions in a variety of localities and feeding back their learnings into the Council deliberations. It is significant that Secretary Vilsack made an appearance at the CGI America and Council on Foundations conferences.

All of these gatherings appeared to be successful and energizing, even though they differed markedly in their approach, motivation, and style.  As one of few people who played a role in all three events, I am left wondering what they added up to when all has been said and done. 

The key lesson for me is that the convenings in St. Paul, Chicago, and Kansas City provided ample proof of the breadth and depth of knowledge, skill, and commitment that resides in rural America.  As a complement, the White House Rural Council is evidence of high-level government interest in rural America.  All of these efforts are undoubtedly part of what we at the Lab see as the new, positive narrative for rural America. 

But it will be important for there to be some tangible outcomes from all this talking and sharing. I thought three themes were clear from these summer gatherings, which resonate well with our thinking at the Rural Futures Lab.

·         We know that the human, natural, and produced assets of rural America are vital to the long-term prosperity and security of the nation. We must be wise stewards of these assets, providing food, energy, and other natural resources for the long-term and in ways that will create a better future for all rural Americans.

·         We know that rural people, organizations, and institutions have no choice but to look for ways of pooling resources and expertise to make things happen.  The new rules of the game demand regional collaboration, both to attract private sector investment and to make connections between rural regions and urban centers in order to achieve economic competitiveness.

·         We know that rural America is changing.  There are large shifts in the distribution and composition of the population – some places are growing, others are struggling to survive. The faces of rural America, particularly among the young, are becoming increasingly diverse.  If we are to make rural America an attractive place for the next generations to thrive and prosper, then we have work to do to convert our assets into opportunities and to make better use of our human and institutional resources. 

Perhaps next year, these themes should be those adopted by the Rural Assembly, CGI America, and the Council on Foundations so that there can be added impetus to both convey these messages to larger audiences, but more importantly to achieve action on the ground.   In that way, shining bright lights might help us see our future together rather than blind us to what is possible.

Did you attend any or all of these conferences? What do you think? How can we make best use of the ideas that emerged?  Do you have other ideas as to what is important to create a positive narrative for the future of rural America?

Brian Dabson is the director of the Rural Futures Lab.  Contact him at brian@rupri.org.

Welcome to the Rural Futures Lab

Welcome to the Rural Futures Lab!  Through the Lab we aim to encourage a future-oriented conversation about where rural America is heading and what we have to do to make life better for the 50 million people who live and work there. 

Rural America is home to highly productive agriculture, to abundant conventional and renewable energy resources and to an extraordinary array of natural amenities.  If these can be managed sustainably in ways that offer economic opportunities and improved quality of life for rural people while safeguarding the integrity of these resources for future generations, then rural America will be the foundation for ongoing national prosperity and global leadership. 

This vision for rural America is based on historical trends as well as future predictions from many sources.  On my desk is a report from the National Intelligence Council published nearly three years ago.  The report, Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World¸ represents an effort by the intelligence community to identify the key drivers and developments likely to shape world events a decade or more into the future.  It is not a forecast but a thoughtful means of starting a conversation about how the choices we make now might play out down the line.  

One section of the report, Scarcity in the Midst of Plenty, is particularly relevant to the work of the Rural Futures Lab.   The authors see the international system being challenged by growing resource constraints as the global population expands by another billion. The situation will be further stressed by growing urbanization, greater per capita consumption as developing countries emulate Western lifestyles, and climate change. 

Of course, it doesn’t take too much imagination to conjure up a Doomsday scenario.  Nations may well continue to adopt a “growth-first” mentality leading to widespread environmental neglect and degradation, coal may still be the dominant energy source, the control of oil reserves may still be central to geo-political power, and solutions, either technological or political, may not have been found to blunt the effects of climate change.  But that need not be the path we accept for the United States.  In fact, these global stresses could provide real opportunities for rural America.

Whether these opportunities can be grasped – and who grasps them and how – are the overarching themes for the Rural Futures Lab.  For rural America to fully participate in the food, energy, and resource transformations on the horizon will require substantial investment in rebuilding the physical, educational, and civic capacity of rural communities and regions – and the will to imagine and work toward a better future. 

We invite you to explore this website, contribute your thoughts and ideas, and to be part of what we hope will be a fast growing network of champions of a new rural narrative.

Brian Dabson is the director of the Rural Futures Lab.  Contact him at brian@rupri.org