Today’s rural communities in United States are very different from those in the past. No longer boasting a predominately agriculture economy, they are in many respects facing the same competitive challenges that other places do. Low-wage foreign competition, accelerating product cycles, and the application of information technologies throughout the economy will continue to generate lots of economic change, for the better and the worse. As will changing workforce demographics and the widespread adoption of the logistics and outsourcing techniques, demonstrated successfully by Wal-Mart and others.
The old formulas of success – maximize your farm subsidies, attract branch plants, and so forth – are less relevant. In fact, Rural America is so diverse, economically, that a uniform “one size fits all” rural policy will likely be counterproductive. So, sub-state regions, counties, small cities, towns and neighborhoods will need to do more – and better with less. They must seek to identify and sustain their niche as they pursue their regionally- and community--tailored strategies. Not all will succeed. But the hope is that for these places that no longer have a strong economic rationale, we can still raise their economic dynamism a few notches. That we can promote a more forward-looking and experimental economic culture and leadership base, encourage regional alliances, create additional jobs, and improve the livability of their regions and communities.
With the federal government sidelined by a giant budget deficit and a war, state governments are critical to sub-state economic development approaches. However, since state governments cannot intervene everywhere, a capacity-building effort is the best way to go – one that seeks to improve the managerial and entrepreneurial talent of their public, private and nonprofit sectors; create a pipeline of new, more educated workers; upgrade the existing workforce; encourage lifelong learning; improve amenities and public services; exercise world-class environmental stewardship and growth planning; and cultivate its homegrown economy. 1
In essence, we are
- Reinventing economic progress (“triple bottom-line”).
- Spurring and implementing a far-reaching devolution of power and responsibilities.
- Crafting state, regional, and local development strategies that generate “real” wealth, along with wider opportunities for all.
These are no small tasks. But it’s what is needed to truly chart economic progress, as opposed to simply easing today’s problems by creating new ones for the future.
Some choices will raise the standard of living but can also harm the environment. Some can make the rich richer, while others would expand opportunities for more. Some can waste the “people’s money” on fiscally irresponsible business subsidies while others can strengthen the tax base.
The goal should not be simply looking for the least painful trade-off. Economic development of the right sort is important. Hence, we should think big.
1 The original version of this argument was developed in a publication (1993) by CFED, titled “Rethinking Rural Development.” Still relevant. Thanks to all those that cobbled together this point of view – Rick Carlisle, Carl Rist, Carol Conway, Joyce Klein, and Mitch Horowitz. The full 70-plus page paper is still worth a read. Rick, Carol, and I co-wrote the booklet.