Energy Choices and the Long Conversation

By David Kay, Senior Extension Associate, Cornell University’s Community and Regional Development Institute (CaRDI)


I once was blind but now I see
American history was not my strong suit in high school. When I entered graduate school some years later, the already fading sign on my new office (an iconic slogan from the not too distant 1960s) prompted me to “Question Authority”. Since I didn’t quite understand at the time how important it was to understand authority in order to question it, I did not read this as an incitement to historical reflection.

Over the years as an Extension Associate at Cornell University, I developed a medley of insights and thoughts about rural and urban, home rule and regionalism, globalism and relocalization, community and identity. Only in the past few years have I begun to understand how these insights are deeply embedded in what some historians have called “the long conversation”.

This long conversation is about the distribution of collective authority in our democracy. About who gets to participate in and decide about which kinds of public decisions.

The conversation predated the founding of the country by more than a century (see for example, the Articles of Confederation of the United Colonies of New England, May 19, 1643). And it famously animated the debates in the Federalist Papers, that enduring treasure trove of wisdom sparked by the frictions between those who believed in dispersing versus concentrating power and authority.

The United Colonies of New England, 1643 (source).

The long conversation is, in fact, a never ending one. It has no universal, timeless conclusion. This realization has been driven home for me by my recent work on energy transitions.

Some controversies raised by our fossil fuel dependency are in no small measure debates about federalism, or the way authority is divided between central and distributed political units.

What is at stake? According to one author:

The choice of regulatory forum often seems to determine the outcome of the controversy. That may explain why Americans have traditionally shed so much metaphorical and genuine blood deciding what are essentially jurisdictional disputes between governmental institutions.

Consider three contemporary energy examples of the tensions raised.

1. High Volume Hydraulic Fracturing (HVHF) for Natural Gas Extraction
Hydraulic fracturing is a technology used to extract oil and gas from “unconventional” reserves of shale and other rocks. State authority dominates regulation of natural gas drilling, but is currently being contested by both federal and local government interests. Federal authority does apply to some aspects of HVHF and many other energy issues. However, the federal Energy Act of 2005 exempted key elements of oil and gas operations from national in favor of state regulation. This outcome is now being challenged.

The authority of states to regulate hydraulic fracturing is also being contested by local governments. In several Northeastern shale gas-rich states, state law appears to “supersede all local laws or ordinances relating to the regulation of the oil, gas and solution mining industries” (NYS Environmental Conservation Law §23-0303(2)).

Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio's state laws feature similar language on the issue. For example, Section 602 of the Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Act provides that municipal ordinances may not ‘“impose conditions, requirements or limitations on the same features of oil and gas operations regulated’ by the Act” (Keneally and Mathes, 2010). 

However, in New York State alone, at least two dozen communities have adopted seemingly contrary bans or moratoria. Within each state, the stage of litigation, appeal, and legal clarity on this issue differs.

2. Electricity Transmission
Power plant siting and electricity transmission rules have evolved with less media attention than hydraulic fracturing issues. But even as the Energy Act of 2005 exempted HVHF from federal review, it stipulated that a federal agency (FERC) would hold siting authority for certain electric transmission lines.

The Act was intended to reduce state and local obstacles, including procedural friction and political resistance, to transmission investment. Indeed, major upgrades in transmission infrastructure are projected as necessary to deliver new sources of electricity; most will be generated in rural areas remote from the point of use.

Supporters of grid modernization have advocated strengthening FERC’s authority further. Others remain concerned that good decisions require state and local oversight.

3. Power Plant Siting
Similar issues surround the distribution of authority over the siting of electricity generating facilities. For example, New York State recently passed legislation that shifts permitting jurisdiction for smaller commercial facilities (25-80 megawatts) to the state (i.e., away from local government).

A wind farm nearArmenia Mountain, PA.

Though not differentiated as to fuel source, the implications for wind energy have been given particular attention. Advocates and opponents alike see the legislation as an effort to facilitate the siting of new wind farms, in part by reducing the influence of localized opposition that holds greater sway under local government “home rule.”

Energy Federalism
These examples of contested regulation show some of the pressures being exerted on the status quo of federalism. What criteria, other than short-term political advantage on a particular issue, are or should be used to evaluate whether authority should be assigned to local, state, or federal government, or some combination?

In the Stanford Environmental Law Journal, Benjamin K. Sovocool (2008) offers a list of organizing principles derived from theories of “environmental federalism”. These include such competing goals as: 

• ensuring all affected by the decision are fairly represented, 
• promoting consistency of rules across political boundaries, 
• avoiding unfair imbalances in political power,
• enhancing accountability, and 
• promoting flexibility and innovation.

Versions of these and other arguments are not hard to find in the Federalist Papers.
 
Americans are “spilling blood” in a jurisdictional war over whether local, state, or federal government should control the fate of hydraulic fracturing. Blood pressures have also risen over who should permit moderately sized electric generating facilities and control the siting of natural gas and electricity transmission corridors. 
 
Not infrequently, advocates who argue for or against federal or state or “home rule” in one context reflexively take the opposite position in another. This may make strategic sense in the heat of battle over specific policy decisions about particular energy technologies or fuels or sites. However, a danger exists for partisans and policy makers who fail to lift their line of sight above the battlefield. 
 
Unless principled arguments about the benefits and costs of rebalancing federalism are considered, the distribution of power and passion that lead to precedent and victory in one arena may well simply set the stage for defeat in another. 
 

David Kay, a Senior Extension Associate with Community & Regional Development Institute (CaRDI), was trained as an economist, works in the Department of Development Sociology, Cornell University, and focuses on land use planning and community/economic development issues. He grew up in California’s burgeoning Silicon Valley but settled in Ithaca, New York, after graduate school, not least because of his growing appreciation of the small city’s uniquely combined scale of community and pace of life.

Visit the Rural Futures Lab website here.

The Intergenerational Transfer of Wealth: A Rural Development Priority

By Jeff Yost, President & CEO of the Nebraska Community Foundation

I get asked frequently, “Why are you trying to save these small towns?” The answer is – I’m not. The only folks who can save a community or change a community are the people who live, work and sleep there.

I grew up on a farm near Red Cloud, Nebraska, the youngest of six children. My parents and two sisters still live there. I graduated from high school in 1986 with 23 classmates. Then, like many other small-town kids, I left.

I followed my five older siblings to the University of Nebraska in Lincoln, earned a B.S. in economics and agricultural business. Before joining the Nebraska Community Foundation in 1998, I spent several years working for then-Nebraska Governor Ben Nelson as a gubernatorial aide and strategic initiative manager for community and economic development. It was important work, but frustrating as well.

Politics is a zero-sum game. I prefer win-win solutions to community challenges. And that’s why I am such a strong advocate for rural development philanthropy.

Rural giving and the transfer of wealth

Right now, rural places have an unprecedented opportunity to transform their communities by harnessing the massive transfer of intergenerational wealth. In 2011, the Nebraska Community Foundation worked with the RUPRI Center for Rural Entrepreneurship (CRE) to update its original Transfer of Wealth Study conducted in 2002. That study was the nation’s first statewide county-by-county analysis. This groundbreaking work changed the mindset of philanthropic leaders across the country. Since then CRE has conducted numerous studies on cities, regions and states all around the U.S.

Young people in Shickley, NE (pop. 341) will benefit from $3 million in endowed assets and planned gifts. The community has already secured 20% of its estimated 10-year wealth transfer, and is working to build a $12 million endowment over the next 20 years.

New scenarios for the transfer of wealth opportunity in the U.S. for the period of 2010 through 2060 range from a high of $91 trillion to a low of $43 trillion. The CRE’s most likely scenario estimates $75 trillion. This wealth may be held in real estate, securities, retirement accounts and other assets.

If we set a charitable giving goal of just 5 percent, nearly $3.8 trillion in new community endowments could be built over the next five decades. Once fully capitalized, these endowments could generate nearly $200 billion annually in new grant making! With the decline in local government spending, philanthropic assets could prove to be a community’s most reliable source of funding in the future.

The transfer of wealth is of critical importance to rural places that continue to experience outmigration. In Nebraska, more than 70 percent of our 534 communities lost population in the last decade, according to the 2010 Census.

A local example

For generations, frugal Nebraskans worked hard and saved money for the future. Most lived their entire lives close to their birthplace. One family might occupy the same property, even the same home, for multiple generations. As we are well aware, this is no longer the case.

Over the next 50 years, our state will experience the largest intergenerational transfer of wealth in its history. The World War II and the Baby Boom generations own more private wealth than at any time: more than $600 billion in Nebraska.

Some of this wealth will go to taxes. Most will go to heirs. Due to outmigration, many of those heirs no longer live where the wealth was built, and may no longer feel connected to those places. Once intergenerational wealth leaves our communities, it is likely gone forever. However, if it is endowed in community funds, it stays in the community forever, with the earnings available each and every year for emerging needs and opportunities.

The exigent issue for Nebraska and other Great Plains states is timing.

In more than half of Nebraska’s 93 counties, the peak years for wealth transfer are happening now or in the next 10 years.

Andy Anderson of McCook, NE has established an endowment
through NCF to support youth entrepreneurship in his hometown.

That is why we are working so hard to promote and facilitate philanthropy in more than 200 communities across the state. We must act now to encourage charitable investment in the future of our hometowns while the window of opportunity is still open. We must teach, encourage and inspire our citizens to give back today, and include their community in their estate plans for tomorrow.

If only a small portion of our wealth transfer – just 5 percent – were given back through charitable gifts and endowed in community funds, Nebraska would have more than $30 billion within 50 years, generating millions of dollars each year to invest in hometowns where young families can prosper.

The Nebraska Community Foundation

The Nebraska Community Foundation (NCF) is helping people across the state achieve this vision.

Ten years ago, 51 communities were building endowments through NCF with total assets of $4.6 million. Today there are 121 with nearly $40 million endowed. Another $43 million in planned gifts will benefit Nebraska’s communities and organizations in the future.

These communities range in size and geography. What they share in common is local leadership committed to building a future for their hometown.

The Nebraska Community Foundation envisions our state as a place where people can reach their highest potential. Where we can live and work close to family and friends and still stay connected to the world. NCF affiliated funds are using their endowment earnings for grants that make this possible:

• Non-traditional scholarships for adults working in the community
• High-quality affordable childcare to help working parents
• Small business development and transition
• Leadership development and volunteer training
• Value-added curriculum for K-12 schools
• High-quality, accessible health care
• Facilities and programs to help our seniors to age in place
• Arts, recreation and public safety to make our communities places where young families can thrive

I am proud that my hometown of Red Cloud is part of the NCF family of community funds. And that it has launched a community-wide effort to foster leadership, entrepreneurship development, youth engagement, and philanthropy. I am especially pleased that my parents are considering their hometown as a seventh child, by including Red Cloud in their estate plan.

Harnessing 5 percent of the transfer of wealth for the future of our rural places is a reasonable, achievable goal!

For more information about NCF and community giving, visit www.NebraskaHometown.org or check out their videos on YouTube. Join the discussion on Facebook, too!

Visit the Rural Futures Lab homepage here.

Photos provided by the author. 

Alternative Energy in the Land of Oil: Who Benefits?

By Adam Blair, Research Assistant, Cornell University’s Community and Regional Development Institute (CaRDI)

As my car crawled west along Interstate 20 in West Texas, the arid October landscape seemed to stretch outward in a quiet perpetuity, punctuated only by the occasional intersection. It was my first time in the Lone Star State, and the magnitude of the Texas plain weighed down on the vehicle in a way that made me feel like a speck on a map. The vacant horizon left nothing but my odometer as a point of reference.

As I approached Abilene that first afternoon, I encountered towering masses of steel sprouting from the ground, their unnatural appearance invoking a sense of disbelief.

This rural landscape that has supported cotton and cattle since the early 19th Century and petroleum since the 20th continues its legacy as a natural resource-dependent economy with the rapid development of commercial wind energy. Now home to thousands of wind turbines generating enough electricity to power over 2.7 million homes, Texas leads the nation in the expansion of this energy source.

But while the industry is creating jobs, boosting local tax revenues, and providing supplemental income to struggling farmers, I found that this burgeoning enterprise has been largely immune from broader questions concerning long-term community and economic impacts. As a student of city and regional planning, I wondered how, and to what extent, local communities were capturing the wealth generated by the wind energy industry. It was also unclear to me how the benefits derived from wind development—monetary or otherwise—were redistributed amongst local populations.

To begin to answer these and other questions for a Rural Futures Lab case study, I first took the time to understand the important rural-urban linkages that support the energy sector of the U.S. Embodied by the string of electrical transmission lines stretching from the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex to the communities west of the Brazos River—the very route I had just driven—the concept is one familiar to many rural policymakers.

Linkages between rural industries and urban consumers have existed for centuries in the United States, encouraged and even directed to a large degree by the construction of the transcontinental railroads of the mid-19th century and the Interstate Highway System of the mid-20th. And as the nation continues its trend of urbanization, the reliance on rural America’s bounty will become even more prevalent. In a foundation paper authored for the Rural Futures Lab in June 2011, my colleagues and I explored this trend in more detail. We predict that an increasing remoteness of energy generation, driven in part by a transition to more land-intensive, renewable forms of energy, will have profound impacts on rural communities.

My interviews with West Texans confirmed many of the concerns we raised in our report, but also highlighted many of the opportunities discussed in Susan Lurie and Michael Hibbard’s recent blog post on the new natural resource economy (NNRE). For instance, while wind development has been embraced by many landowners, the following comment from a West Texas resident demonstrates just one of many difficulties in achieving the balance between natural resource production and protection described under NNRE: “…you’ll find a lot of places in Central Texas that have chosen not to take wind turbines. Some of them call it eye pollution. They get down there and like the rocky areas and like the clear skies and don’t want to see ’em.”

Equally insightful was my conversation with a small business owner in West Texas. He recognized the importance of using tax revenues generated by the wind energy industry to “improve the quality of life” and consequently mitigate some of the negative boom-bust effects discussed in our foundation paper. However, he noted the difficulty in convincing public officials to do anything but provide tax abatements to lure new, outside firms instead of supporting existing small business in the region.

Of course, only history will tell whether Texas’ newest experiment in rural economic development will result in a windfall or washout for local residents and communities. To ensure equitable benefits, it is imperative that new wealth is captured and reinvested in a way that will improve the quality of life for everyone, for this, one rancher reminds us, “is [the] best thing that can happen to a rural community.”

Urban Escapees: The Future of Rural Communities?

By Katie McCaskey, Urban Escapee and small town grocer

Face it: the "city folk" are moving here.

As we enter an increasingly dense urban future, more urbanites will seek solace in calmer quarters—and, instead of embracing fear, rural residents should grab this opportunity with open arms. "Urban escapees" bring a variety of assets to rural America.

I speak as an urban escapee myself. I lived in three major cities before returning to my rural roots. It's a move that did not appeal to me in my twenties but, as I entered my thirties, grew increasingly enchanting. The move allowed my husband and me to buy property and start a business on Main Street, two things that were fiscally out of reach living in a large metro area. And, unlike previous generations, I had the added advantage to bring my job with me thanks to telecommuting.

In short, retirees are not the only city people who are discovering new opportunities in smaller locations. Mid-career professionals are starting to see untapped value in rural areas, and in the "micro urban" pockets of rural downtowns.

Many have mourned the decay of rural downtowns. But people like me—urban escapees who appreciate compact, city living—see a blank canvas of opportunity improved by several intersecting trends in technology, economy, and ecology.

Micropolitan Manifesto

Staunton, Virginia (population 23,000), where I live, is doing an excellent job of recruiting urban escapees with ambitions to start independent businesses. George Bowers Grocery, our business, was the first loan recipient of the Staunton Creative Community Fund, a microfinance organization. The fund was initially financed by the city. It has grown through a combination of public, private, and grant monies from the state and federal level and supported the start of several businesses.

I strongly believe entrepreneurship is the primary way forward for rural downtowns. I also believe that encouraging urban escapees to apply their experience and resources toward revitalization should be encouraged, not feared. My experience working with my husband to build our business prompted me to write the "Micropolitan Manifesto", a call to artists, change makers, and entrepreneurs.

I invite you to read it, share it, and connect with me if you would like to discuss!


Katie McCaskey is author of the forthcoming book, "Urban Escapee: How to Ditch the Commute, Build a Business, and Revitalize Main Street". Sign up at her site to be notified when the book is released.

Photo: Pat Jarrett

Visit the Rural Futures Lab here.

Entrepreneurs and the Creative Rural Economy

By Mary Mathews, President & CEO, Entrepreneur Fund

Anna Anderson and Elizabeth Chapman are typical rural entrepreneurs: that is, they are completely unique. Sisters in their early 30s, they joined their father’s business five years ago in Angora, Minnesota (population: 277). Today, Art Unlimited is a dynamic and growing interactive media solutions, web design, marketing solutions, and graphic design company.

Well before joining the family business, Anna and Elizabeth demonstrated their entrepreneurial spirit. When they were 12 and 13, the sisters wanted animals. Their parents told them that they would need to raise the money to pay for animal feed. The girls wrote a business plan for a boarding kennel and a dog-food distribution business and won a national business plan competition. They then convinced a local bank to make them an $8,000 business loan--without their parents co-signing for the note. Elizabeth still runs the boarding kennel.

I met Anna and Elizabeth at one of the Entrepreneur Fund's “Be Strategic: Grow Your Business” series. During the eight-session, six-month “Be Strategic” series, the sisters clarified Art Unlimited’s company vision, developed a strategic plan for growth, and improved their skills in marketing, finance and operations. They are expanding their customer base into regional and national markets. They are clear about who their customer is and the value Art Unlimited provides. Now they are using the planning tools acquired in “Be Strategic” to help their clients clarify their own vision and strategy. They are adding three new high-quality jobs to their six-person company to facilitate their growth.



At the "Be Strategic" series graduation,
with Anna Anderson and Elizabeth Chapman (two at left)
and Mary Mathews (far right).

 After 30 years of working in rural development, I still regularly ask myself how we can accelerate the growth of our rural economies. How do we create more opportunities for our young people to stay in northeastern Minnesota and northwestern Wisconsin or move back to raise their families?

I believe that the answer lies with skilled rural entrepreneurs. Of course, investments in broadband, workforce education, infrastructure, and capital are critical components of rural development. But entrepreneurs are the ones who are capable of growing strong local companies, building regional wealth, and creating jobs. And they are tomorrow’s community leaders.

Helping Rural Entrepreneurs Succeed

Even for individuals with strong entrepreneurial instincts, skill development improves the opportunity for business success. Since 1989, the Entrepreneur Fund has worked in Minnesota and Wisconsin to identify, guide, and support local entrepreneurs that have drive and ideas. We work to accelerate their skills development and overcome barriers to their growth.

After four years of regional planning, in 2008 the Entrepreneur Fund launched the Greenstone Group initiative to build an organized, intentional system of entrepreneur support for northeastern Minnesota and northwestern Wisconsin. This initiative targets entrepreneurs who have been in business at least two years and have a vision and desire to grow their companies.

In 2003, the Entrepreneur Fund helped Don and Leanne Negley start Rural Living Environments (RLE), in Babbitt, Minnesota. The company specializes in creating supportive living environments for adults with developmental disabilities in a rural setting. We helped them with the initial business plan and start-up financing. Later, a Greenstone Group Business Performance Coach helped Don grow the company. RLE employs 40 people and Don has plans for additional growth.

We have developed and tested tools and activities to guide entrepreneurs toward growth and to measure the resulting changes in their entrepreneurial skills. All Greenstone activities, whether one-on-one or group, share common elements. We believe that entrepreneurs learn best from other entrepreneurs, so we:

• provide networking opportunities,
• build peer-learning groups among entrepreneurs at similar levels of development, and
• include skilled, experienced entrepreneurs in every activity, as coaches and guides to accelerate and enhance the learning that occurs.

In addition, we work collaboratively with other public and private service providers to ensure the entrepreneur has the resources and support s/he needs. 
 
The Entrepreneur Fund also works to support diverse business ownership in the region. For example, our Women’s Business Center hosted its first three-day Women’s Strategy Weekend (WSW) in March. Ten women with existing companies refined their vision and developed strategic plans to grow their companies. 
 

As a result of her participation in WSW,
Art in the Alley's owner plans to expand to several more locations.
Pictured: Tami LaPole Edmunds (owner at right) and her daughter Gwen LaPole

 
Our Vision and Track Record
 
The Entrepreneur Fund’s long-term vision is of a regional culture where being an entrepreneur is an equal choice to getting a job, where young people can chose to stay in rural communities because they see creative opportunities for starting companies or finding jobs, and where the process of entrepreneurial thinking and business cycles are understood. Success is celebrated and a failure is learned from…and the process of creation goes on. 
 
Formerly the Northeast Entrepreneur Fund, the Entrepreneur Fund's development services have helped entrepreneurs start or grow over 1,300 companies since its formation in 1989. It $8 million loan fund has provided $15 million in loans to 450 companies. The Entrepreneur Fund is the developer of the CORE FOUR Business Planning Course® and Be Strategic: Grow Your Business. 
 
The Greenstone Group has so far worked with 150 entrepreneurs running companies with annual revenues ranging from $20,000 to $10 million. Their companies have increased profitability, grown revenues, and found new markets.
 
 
More about the Entrepreneur Fund
 
The Entrepreneur Fund's mission is to develop skilled entrepreneurs who build strong locally-owned companies in northeastern Minnesota and northwestern Wisconsin. We envision a strong regional economy with an entrepreneurial culture that cultivates thriving companies and vibrant communities.
 
The Entrepreneur Fund launched the Greenstone Group in 2008 with visionary support and a 10-year grant from the John S & James L Knight Foundation.
 
 
About the Author
 
Mary Mathews is a social entrepreneur and the founding president of the Entrepreneur Fund. She is a past board chair of the Opportunity Finance Network and Association for Enterprise Opportunity and a current board member of the Duluth Art Institute and NorthStar Aerospace. Mary is a northeastern Minnesota native, former business owner, and an Iowa State University graduate.
 
 
Photos provided by the author.

The New Natural Resource Economy and Rural Economic Development

By Susan Lurie (Oregon State University) and Michael Hibbard (University of Oregon)

 

 

Photo: Susan Lurie – 2012

 

A couple of years ago, while our research team was working on a project in Grant County in deep rural east-central Oregon (read our report or journal article), we had the opportunity to sit in on an “economic summit” for the county. The local extension agent pointed out that the two industries that formed the historic economic base of the county—timber and cattle—were both in long-term, permanent decline.

As a consequence, Grant County—like many resource dependent rural communities—is struggling with loss of jobs and local businesses and wealth, and generally declining community vitality. The problems are mainly due to forces beyond their control, such as globalization and economic restructuring, the dominance of the industrialized commodity production model, and changing societal demands for agricultural and natural resource products.

As we listened to the audience discussion of the presentation, we were struck by something. Everyone present had an abiding commitment to Grant County and was deeply worried about the future of the community. They also had a strong love for rural and small town life, especially as it related to making a living off the land.

A significant segment of the audience saw the only hope for the community in a return to traditional uses of natural resources. That last sentiment was not new to us, of course. What was new to the discussion was the significant fraction of the audience who were interested in considering alternative possibilities for natural resource management. They saw that there may be ways to make a living from natural resources based on emerging markets for products that reflect increasing societal expectations that natural capital should be managed and utilized in a more sustainable manner.

Photo: Country Natural Beef  

As researchers, we decided to look more closely into what this “new” natural resource economy (NNRE) comprises as a complement to traditional uses. We wondered whether it might help create a way for rural communities to think about economic development in response to contemporary economic and social realities.

Problems of Natural Resource-based Economies

The industrialized approach to agriculture and natural resource management—which includes specialization, standardization, and consolidation in pursuit of increased efficiency—has disconnected rural communities from the larger economy. At the same time, societal demands for protection and enhancement of rural communities’ key assets (their natural resources) has led to more stringent regulations affecting production.

Some rural communities with high amenity values have developed alternative economies as sites for tourism and retirement. For most communities, however, the decoupling from the larger economy has been an intractable socio-economic problem, and rural communities continue to lag behind urban areas.

How the New Natural Resource Economy (NNRE) is Different

The NNRE may offer a way out of the dilemma by reframing natural resources as assets to be managed for the long term. It emphasizes a multifunctional landscape that balances agricultural and natural resource production with amenities for recreation and cultural activities and protective natural services such as air and water purification, biodiversity, and flood and erosion control. Activities and businesses comprising the NNRE may not be new; what is new is accounting for them collectively as an emerging economic sector in its own right that can help diversify rural economies and increase local resilience and economic autonomy.

As we probed these ideas it quickly became apparent that the predicament is not limited to the U.S. Most developed countries are facing similar challenges and a variety of policy responses have emerged. To shed light on the U.S. situation, Oregon seemed a good place to start: many rural Oregon communities are struggling with economic change and the rural development grapevine gave us reason to believe there is quite a bit of NNRE activity at work, informally and without any overarching state or local strategy.

Preliminary Research

To get a sense of what types of enterprises currently comprise Oregon’s NNRE and what institutional challenges they face, we conducted a survey and three in-depth case studies of Oregon rural communities. Details of the study and policy issues identified can be found at the Rural Futures Lab website.

In summary, we found that some communities are engaged in NNRE economic development, although it is not typically identified as such. It was also clear that there is generally low or no understanding of how to define and develop a local or regional NNRE strategy in order to overcome existing barriers and foster institutional changes to help rural communities.

As research and action moves forward, it will be important to continue identifying institutional barriers that must be changed in order to encourage and nurture rural NNRE entrepreneurialism. We would like to search for answers to questions about the NNRE such as:

• What other challenges are NNRE enterprises encountering, and what steps can be taken to remove those barriers?
• What examples exist in different contexts that would help rural communities looking for innovative ways of building more sustainable futures?

As we continue to refine our understanding of the NNRE, comparative studies and examples of practicable NNRE economic development policies and programs will help create a framework that can be adapted to local circumstances in order to help the NNRE flourish and, with it, rural communities. 

 

 

Susan Lurie is a faculty research associate in the Policy Research Program at the Institute for Natural Resources, Oregon State University.

Michael Hibbard is Professor Emeritus, Department of Planning, Public Policy & Management, and Director, Institute for Policy Research & Innovation, at the University of Oregon.

Visit the RUPRI Rural Futures Lab here.

Resilience in the Face of Disaster

By Brian Dabson, Director, Rural Futures Lab

Tornadoes and violent storms ripped through the Midwest Plains states this weekend, leaving death and destruction in their wake. Once again, national attention turns to how communities such as Woodward, Oklahoma, and Thurman, Iowa, can rebuild and recover.

A couple of weeks ago, I was in Biloxi, Mississippi and saw the progress that had been made in recovering from the ravages of Hurricane Katrina. Six years on, the rebuilding continues and the stories of the people who survived the disaster in spite of losing their homes and businesses are testaments to the resilience of the communities along the Gulf Coast. Although many people left and have not returned, it is clear that there is a powerful human force at work which drives not only a desire to rebuild but also to create a better place.

In 2007, a tornado leveled Greensburg, Kansas. The city council passed a resolution stating that all city buildings would be built to LEED platinum standards, making it the first city in the nation to do so.

Regional Resilience Issues
Resilience is the term used to describe the process by which communities and regions bounce back after a disaster, and is the subject of a new report from the Rural Futures Lab. Regional Resilience: Research and Policy Brief was prepared for the National Association of Development Organizations (NADO) to review the growing literature on the topic, the approaches being adopted by Federal agencies, and the work of public-private partnerships to improve community understanding and preparedness. The report also includes new analyses of economic, social, and infrastructure vulnerability across the nation.

Here are some of the report’s conclusions:

Research and experience over the past 20 years show a growing understanding of the complexity of anticipating, responding to, and recovering from disasters of all types. It is no longer possible, if it ever was, to focus on a particular type of disaster in isolation, such as terrorism or flooding, because communities increasingly are faced with multiple, and sometimes cascading hazards. This realization demands what is commonly termed an all-hazards approach. Although each hazard presents particular challenges, the processes of preparedness and planning are broadly consistent, and there is general consensus on the main components of these processes.

This map shows the number of FEMA Disaster Declarations per county
against the national average. It covers the time period from 1991 - 2011.

Some communities and regions are clearly more vulnerable than others to disasters, although no community is immune from some sort of threat. Settlements on coastlines, in river floodplains and valleys, in or adjacent to forestlands, on seismic faults, or in the regular paths of major storms can be particularly vulnerable. Some of these communities may well have placed themselves in harm’s way as a result of poor or short-sighted development decisions.

But vulnerability is more than a function of geography, it can also be economic. The disaster may be the closing of a plant or the collapse of a whole industry as a result of changing market conditions or the introduction of new technologies; or it may be a consequence of a natural disaster that has disrupted or even destroyed local businesses. Sustaining businesses and economies has been shown to be a critical part of regional and community recovery but often not give the priority deserved.

Vulnerability can also be social, as the events following Hurricane Katrina very publicly demonstrated. Differential impacts on segments of the population based on race, income, mobility, language capability, and other factors are not only unfair and unjust, but undermine recovery efforts.

National Policy
The federal policy response to disasters has been transformed over the past decade. Driven after 9/11 by heightened concerns over terrorism, it has evolved into an all-hazards approach following Hurricane Katrina and a succession of other major disasters both at home and abroad.

The development of the National Response and National Disaster Recovery Frameworks have brought to the forefront the need for seamless coordination of federal, state, and local efforts to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters. Elaborate processes and structures have been introduced to pursue planning, coordination, training and exercises, and certification across the country.

Interestingly, this concerted federal effort has generated at least two very important initiatives that have engaged collaborations across the private, public, academic, and nonprofit sectors.

• One is primarily focused on the security of critical infrastructure. It is called the National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP), and was published by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2009. 
• The other initiative focuses on building the capacity of local communities and regions to drive preparedness, response, and recovery efforts in line with their own vision for their future. It is called the Community & Regional Resilience Institute (CARRI).

Disasters pay no attention to jurisdictional boundaries or to whether a place is designated urban or rural, metro or nonmetro. But in rural areas, many counties and localities do not have the personnel or technical or fiscal capacity to engage in planning and preparation. Many of these communities may be vulnerable. The national network of regional development organizations represents an infrastructure that can address this capacity and vulnerability challenge.

All regions and communities need to plan and prepare for disasters in ways that are holistic and fully engaging of all sectors of the community. It is fair to say that there is an ingrained suspicion of, if not outright resistance to, the idea of planning across much of America. But as hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, oil spills, wildfires, floods, and other natural and human-made disaster continue to assail our communities, there may be a window of opportunity to recast old and worn-out planning efforts and to help communities and regions see a better future for themselves, with or without a disaster. Moreover, in times of fiscal stringency, where the public sector is less able to function as the principal protector and responder, engaging the resources and talents from all parts of communities and regions may be the best way to proceed.

Visit the Rural Futures Lab here.