Archive for the ‘Community Development’ Category

What does “rural” mean to you?

September 2nd, 2010

Have you ever asked a young adult, “What does ‘rural’ mean to you?”  Thanks to the GoTeach South Dakota program, I recently asked that question to a group of college students who have made the decision to teach in rural, high need schools in South Dakota.  To make the activity more interesting, I asked them to draw their thoughts on a map of South Dakota.  Their responses were very interesting.

What did they think?

The responses ranged from inventive to … interesting.  One respondent drew a lawn mower, suggesting that rural meant “slower traffic” and that it was ok to drive a lawn mower down the street because it wouldn’t be holding up traffic.  Another person drew a deer being shot by a stickman with a caption “Hello supper,” representing the opportunities of outdoor recreation offered by rural places.

There were some less flattering responses like, “I’m bored,” and “there’s no shopping.” Other responses were more positive including, rural community are made up of close-knit families and unique small towns. 

The most common response showed the cities of Sioux Falls and Rapid City being crossed out, representing that the entire state was rural except for these two communities. 

Overall, I thought it was great to see the diversity in their responses.  I see elements of each of them in the rural communities I have lived in. 

A few more thoughts

As I returned to work following the event, a quote that has hung on my office wall for the last 5-6 years caught my attention.  It originates from a study published by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation titled Perceptions of Rural America, and goes like this:

 This means that perceptions of rural America are centered on a series of dichotomies - rural life represents traditional American values, but is behind the times; rural life is more relaxed and slower than city life, but harder and more grueling; rural life is friendly, but intolerant of outsiders and difference; and rural life is richer in community life, but epitomized by individuals struggling independently to make ends meet. Rural America offers a particular quality of life including serenity and aesthetic surroundings, and yet it is plagued by lack of opportunities, including access to cultural activities.”  (source:  Perceptions of Rural America, W.H. Kellogg Foundation,  2002)

 

Dichotomies - both good and bad

I keep the phrase on my wall because it reminds me of the challenges of marketing and branding rural communities.  It reminds me that people react differently to phrases like “everyone knows each other in a small town.”  For some it conjures up images of safety and familiarity; for other, it suggests small towns are like Peyton Place.  The reality is that there’s a little of both in all rural communities. 

At the end of the session with the students, I offered two bits of advice:  (1) dig deeper into the stereotypes,  both positive and negative, that we hear about rural communities, and (2) reject the notion that all rural communities are the same.  I think that’s advice we can all benefit from. 

 

Note: The GoTeach South Dakota program is a federally funded Teacher Quality Partnership grant aimed at increasing student achievement and developing high quality teachers for high need areas. The program includes comprehensive education, training, support and professional development for teachers recruited to serve in qualifying school districts.

Photo Credit:  KTPUPP - Flickr

Tags: ,
Posted in Community Development, Rural, education | Comments (2)

Why rural communities need artists

August 20th, 2010

If I were in charge of giving out awards at the Midwest Rural Assembly, I’d give Becky McCray the “Best Tweet” award.  While listening to Deb Marquart speak about the role of artists in communities, Becky tweeted:

“Grow more artists, not just corn and athletes. Artists are the ones who reimagine a place, help create the future. Deb Marquart #mra10“

And if I were able to give out a “Most Insightful” award, I’d give it to Deb Marquart.  I’ve been thinking about the role of the arts as an economic development strategy lately, but Marquart tuned me onto another potential impact artists can make.  We need artists to help us solve the significant problems facing rural communities.

Marquart described artists as problem solvers, with a gift for looking at the world differently than the rest of us.  We need artists to bring those problem solving skills and perspective to the table as we deal with the economic and social challenges confronting our rural communities.  It’s key to helping us reimagine our futures. 

There was a lot of wisdom in Marquart’s words, so I attempted to recapture some of it in a short interview following her presentation.  You can watch that video below.

 

(Source:  “Deb Marquart on Why Rural Communities need Artists,” Youtube, Rural Learning Center, Aug. 16, 2010)

I think Marquart is right in her assessment of artists, especially if it includes a wide definition of the term.  Sadly, our communities don’t include artists enough in our community work.  Even worse, we make little effort to cultivate their development in our schools and communities. 

Later in the day, I participated in a discussion about the importance of teaching entrepreneurship to young people.  It was at that moment that I began to think about potential connections between artists and entrepreneurs.

Similar to the way Marquart views artists, I’ve always looked at entrepreneurs as problem solvers; they see an economic problem and attempt to find a business solution.  It’s got me thinking there’s a connection between teaching art and teaching entrepreneurship.  Perhaps programs and classes that cultivate artists could help grow more entrepreneurs, and vice-versa. 

Whether it’s artists, entrepreneurs, or someone else, we need to harness the energy and skills of people who bring a different perspective to the table and are good at overcoming obstacles.  Our reimagined future depends on it.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Rural, education | Comments (1)

Why’s this place boring?

August 19th, 2010

Deb Marquart immediately captured my attention on Monday at the Midwest Rural Assembly.  During her keynote presentation “Reimaging Place,” she explained to the audience that she left her hometown of Napoleon in rural North Dakota as a teenager because it was boring.  As she wrote a book about it as an adult, however, she discovered it was anything but boring.

The statement raised an interesting idea:  Do young people need to write a book in order to appreciate their hometowns? 

Although that question is a bit out there, it might not be as farfetched as one might think.  I’ve actually witnessed first-hand how young people can develop a connection to their community through writing activities. 

 

The Value of Place Based Education

Back in the late 1990s and early 2000s, Mary Stangohr, a talented English teacher at Howard H.S. (SD) embedded place based education in her classroom.  In one of her units of study, Mary had her students read Broken Heartland by Osha Grey Davison, a book detailing the impact of industrial agriculture on rural communities. 

Whether they agreed with the author’s assessment or not, the book connected with most students because they could see similar trends in agriculture happening around them.  In some cases, it connected on an emotional level as some students saw how these changes impacted their parent’s farms, businesses, and places of employment.  It even opened the door for young people to talk to adults about issues that seldom get discussed.

But Mary didn’t end the project with reading the book.  She brought in a community historian who shared engaging stories about growing up in the community.  She took students on field trips to places like to Vilas, SD where students were able to visually experience what life was like in a town back in the 1920-30 before its population shrunk from 400-500 to 19 people today.  And then as a capstone, she required students to write a paper or produce a multimedia project that shared what they had learned.  

I’m not sure if student’s scores on the grammar section of mandatory testing increased as a result of the project.  But I’m positive that the activity encouraged them to dig in and connect more deeply to the subject, and that certainly made them better writers.

 

It’s more than good learning

Beyond the value of helping students become better writers, the project had another impact; Mary’s students came to understand their community better, and I think in many cases, to develop a deeper emotional connection to their hometown. 

In her own way, this is what Marquart shared with her audience at the Midwest Rural Assembly.  She grew up in her rural North Dakota community without knowing much about it.  Sure, she knew the people who lived there.  She knew they worked hard to eke out a living.  But she didn’t know the personal stories that made her community rich. 

Without those stories, it’s easy for any place to appear boring.

 

Photo Credit:  National Rural Assembly - Flickr (Shawn Poyter - permission granted)

Tags: , ,
Posted in Community Development, Gen Y, Rural | Comments (1)

Brain Gain: calling on all “bright spots”

August 13th, 2010

I’ll be attending the Midwest Rural Assembly next Monday.  One of the aspects of the Assembly that I appreciate most is that in addition to the policy talk, it’s a great opportunity talk with rural leaders from around the Midwest.  This year, I’m particularly interested in learning about communities that are successfully addressing the issue often referred to as “brain drain.”  

By now, most everyone has heard about “brain drain.” Miner County, SD is a classic example of the phenomena:  for decades now, young people have graduated from high school, left for college, and settled in cities where opportunities appear to be more abundant. 

The phrase captures our attention today more than ever before because rural communities appear to be losing their “best and brightest” at a time when economists are recognizing the importance of “human capital” as a driver of economic development. 

But as Ben Winchester, a research fellow for University of Minnesota Extension , has noted this is only part of the story.  Many rural communities are experiencing a “brain gain” as people age 30 to 49 begin to move back to rural communities to raise families.    (source: “Rural Migration: The Brain Gain of Newcomers,” Ben Winchester)

We need to be intentional

I find Winchester’s research significant because this trend is occurring without most people knowing it.  Just think of the results if more communities decided to be intentional and work at attracting new residents.  I’m already aware of numerous efforts of this nature. For instance:

Clinton County, Ohio appears to be doing a nice of changing their community brand as a way of attracting young people. They’ve created the Clinton County Fellows program and are challenging young people to come back and do something special in their hometown.

I’ve also been very impressed with the work of the Next Generation initiative of the Gogebic Range of Iron County, Wisconsin and Gogebic County, Michigan.  They’ve developed a four pronged approach that includes youth retention, new resident attraction and new resident retention.  

While these Midwestern projects deserve attention as “bright spots,” I’m also interested in efforts further west as well.  My friends at the Strom Center have identified some good work in the oil country of North Dakota, and I just learned of another effort emerging out of the Upper Minnesota Regional Development Commission.  I’ll dig into these bright spots in the future. 

Look me up at the MRA

As I stated earlier, I’m hoping other people attending the Midwest Rural Assembly share my interest in the subject and will look me up.  I’ve even included a profile picture in case we haven’t met. 

If we don’t meet before hand, I think there’s an opportunity Monday afternoon from 3:00 - 5:00 for us to get together as well.  If I understand the agenda correctly, the session is intended as an opportunity for people to gather around topics of interest, identify what is working well, and then talk about policies that need further attention.  I intend to stand up and identify my interest in “people attraction and retention.”  If enough people are interested, I’m sure we’ll generate some good discussion.

I’m really looking forward to the event, and I hope you are as well. 

 

Note: I’ll be Tweeting (@Michael_Knutson) using the #MRA10 hashtag, and hopefully blogging from the event on Reimagine Rural.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Rural, education | Comments (0)

Rural America: Who’s getting younger?

August 5th, 2010

I doubt anyone is surprised by this news, but information published on the Daily Yonder confirms that much of the rural Midwest has continued to age.  Not all rural Midwestern counties, however, followed this trend.  Some got younger, including a handful of counties right here in South Dakota.

That’s good news for each of the counties that became younger.  But it’s also good news for those counties that became older; hopefully we can learn from these hipster counties.

What does the Daily Yonder article say?

Produced by Roberto Gallardo, the Daily Yonder article focuses on the proportional change in population under age 25 of all rural counties in the U.S during the last decade.  As the map to the right indicates, most rural counties (shown in red) experienced a decrease in the percentage of young people; those identified in blue became younger.  (source:  “Rural America inthe 2000s: Age,” Roberto Gallardo, Daily Yonder,  July 21, 2010.)

In total, nine rural South Dakota counties experienced an increase in the percentage of young people.  Those counties include:

Looking at the list, I’m a bit surprised.  I had expected to find Beadle and Brown Counties on the list, two counties benefiting from major new business startups in recent years, and reservation counties, where birth rates are typically higher.  I’m also surprised by just how “typical” these counties are.  Strike Clay and Brookings Counties, which house our state’s two largest universities, and the remaining counties are very similar to most rural counties in eastern South Dakota.

Why’s this important?

This research is timely for me because it comes on the heels of “The Rural Growth Trifecta” study, the most recent of a long line of studies emphasizing the importance of outdoor amenities to rural community development.  Comparing maps we can see that all of the South Dakota communities that grew younger rank low on the outdoor amenity scale used in “The Rural Growth Trifecta” study.

If outdoor amenities are key to attracting people to rural communities, and I agree they are, then why are these lower amenity counties getting younger?   I don’t have the answer to this question, but I’d sure like to know more.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Community Development, Rural | Comments (0)

Creative Class: Rural Massachusetts style

July 30th, 2010

The Boston Globe reports that the arts have saved the rural town of Pittsfield in western Massachusetts.   After losing a GM plant, the community of 45,000 residents invested in attracting the Barrington Stage Company and building a strong arts community as a central part of its economic development strategy. 

As the Boston Globe article states:

“Once-vacant buildings in downtown Pittsfield are filling with galleries, theaters, residences, and restaurants. North Street, the city’s long-depressed main drag, now hosts regular street festivals, open houses, and art shows that draw thousands of residents and visitors. People are starting to believe that Pittsfield is an attraction, rather than a moribund pit stop on the way from Tanglewood to Mass MoCA.” (source:  “The Art of Saving a City,“  David Filopov,  Boston Globe, July 24, 2010.)

Sounds like the creative class theories of Richard Florida have worked in this rural community. 

Not everyone is buying this talk

Some community leaders, however, oppose the strategy and don’t think it’s been successful.  Dan Bianchi who recently lost a close election to become the community’s next mayor is quoted in the article saying: 

“It’s great that we attract the arts and support it,” he said. “But you can’t point to one significant business that relocated as a result of arts.”

Business relocation.  If that’s the only measurement for the strategy, this strategy is bound to be viewed as a failure.  After all, the major emphasis of the strategy is attracting people who will create their own business ventures. 

I like what Pittsfield has done.  It sounds like it makes a lot of sense for the community. But I’m not sure it plays out the same in small, rural communities in the Midwest.  After all, a town of 40,000 in Massachusetts is very different from the small towns that make up Midwestern landscape. 

It has to be authentic

Here I turn to advice offered by Dr. David Ivan of Michigan State University’s Land Policy Institute, and a presentation he made at the 2009 Small Town & Rural Development Conference  titled “Can Small Towns be Cool?”  While lifting up cultural and artistic sectors as a part of economic development strategies, Dr. Ivan acknowledged that successful cultural efforts “are genuine, often organically-driven by creative individuals within the community.”

Dr. Ivan goes on in the presentation to highlight how efforts to build the arts must be “authentic” in order for them to be successful. 

“Authentic” is very popular word in the marketing community today.  It suggests you can’t try to promote yourself as something you are not. 

Answering “what’s authentic?” is not easy.  But I think it’s something communities should be thinking about if they chose to consider the development of the arts as a part of their economic development strategy.

 

Photo Credit:  bvcphoto - Flickr, Sculture, Pittsfield, MA
Note:  Thanks to the Daily Yonder for bringing the Pittsfield story to my attention.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Rural | Comments (1)

Is Your Community Hard to Leave?

July 23rd, 2010

The phrase, “Money can’t buy happiness,” may have just taken on a whole new meaning.  According to a 2007 study done by Nattavudh Powdthavee at the University of London, when a person has less social interaction with neighbors and family members, it takes a much higher income to make him or her as happy as another person who interacts more often.  Powdthavee says in her paper, “There is substantial evidence that social relationships promote happiness for the individual.”  ”This paper explores…the satisfaction with life gained by an increase in the frequency of interaction with friends, relatives, and neighbors.”  

Powdthavee used completed British Household Panel Surveys from 10,000 randomly selected people for this research.  She found the satisfaction level of the average person who is more socially active was equal to the satisfaction level of making an extra £85,000 ($127,500) a year for someone who didn’t interact with friends or family often.  But, “Actual changes in income,” she clarifies, “buy very little happiness.”

Powdthavee goes on to say both a higher income and solid social relationships take a large investment and certain people will place a priority on either money or friendship based upon which one they feel with have a larger impact on their happiness. 

So, what does this mean for small rural communities? 

To me it firstly says that vibrant small towns have a opportunity to gain an advantage over suburbia and large, urban apartment buildings:  we know and interact with our neighbors.  Powdthavee’s study found that happiness took a significant jump when people started talking with their neighbors at least once a week.

Secondly, our communities often have civic or volunteer groups that are always willing to add another member to their board or committee.  Powdthavee also found many other studies have shown that people who socialize often with those outside of their household are the happiest; they have chosen to invest in social capital. 

Lastly, a most importantly to me, this study points out the downfall that occurs in many communities:  If a person cannot connect to his/her neighbors, become part of a group in the community or have family close by, it takes a very large sum of money (found to be a sum up to 9x a person’s annual income in the Powdthavee study) in perceived happiness to keep them in that community.  If they have no one to connect to it is very easy for them to be lured away by a job with more money or the idea of a more welcoming community. 

As we have mentioned before in this blog, connecting new comers to your community is vital.  And I will admit this is probably one of the hardest things for a community to do.  Is your community doing something to welcome and connect new residents?  If so, please share.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Community Development, Community Engagement | Comments (4)

Are “red marks” teaching you to aim low?

July 21st, 2010

Lately, I’ve been writing about a topic - talent attraction — that I feel I don’t know enough about.  It’s a topic that I have both a passion for and a lot of ideas about.  Unfortunately, I still feel inadequate at sharing these ideas because I know that a lot of people are critical of the concept, especially as it applies to small, rural communities.

In short, I’m afraid of being told, “How dare you, this is terrible.”

Those words – ”How dare you, this is terrible” — by Seth Godin stuck with me as I watched a short video titled “Seth Godin on how schools teach kids to aim low.” The video highlights Godin’s thoughts about how we train the creativity out of young people, but it speaks to individuals of all ages. 

 

 

(Source:  PSCSvideos, “Seth Godin on how schools teach kids to aim low,” YouTube, May 5, 2010)

Watching the video reminded me that I need to have the courage to overcome the uncertainty created by the “red marks” of people who don’t believe in the future of rural communities.  It reminded me that it’s ok to stretch the boundaries of my writing, sharing ideas that may be a bit unconventional .  In fact, it’s reminded me that I have to take on this task if I hope to be a resource in the effort to build a deeper conversation about the future of rural communities.

My guess is that I’m not alone in needing this reminder.

In many ways, rural community leaders everywhere have been taught by decades of decline to accept criticism as “truth” and as Godin suggests, to “aim low.” 

Godin’s advice doesn’t give us permission to become modern-day Don Quixote’s;  we still need to listen to and learn from the “red marks” of our critics.  But in the process, we can’t let those comments bury the creativity and innovation that can emerge from a willingness to tackle the issues.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Rural | Comments (2)

Rural Learning Center launches Engage:SD

July 19th, 2010

When I talk to people about rural communities developing a social media strategy, I often have Miller, SD’s Facebook Page in mind.  Over 1100 people have “liked” their page, and people comment on it regularly.

Although one might not notice, the page is administered by the On Hand Development Corporation. It’s a great example of how a rural, nonprofit organization can use a social media platform, like Facebook, to engage people and create a sense of community.   

We’ve enjoyed spreading the news on ReImagine Rural about how Miller and other rural communities (like Ord, NE, and Clinton County, OH) are using social media.  It’s been a good first step in building awareness about how rural organizations and communities are taking advantage of social media. 

But we’ve also been looking for an opportunity to do more.  Today, the Rural Learning Center is excited to announce Engage:SD.

 

What is Engage:SD?

Engage:SD is a “capacity building” project intended to help South Dakota nonprofits learn how to use social media effectively. Thanks to support from the South Dakota Community Foundation’s Nonprofit Enhancement Project, the program is free to all South Dakota nonprofit organizations. 

Here’s how it will work.

First, nonprofit employees, board members, and volunteers are invited to participate in a series of 8 free webinars (view the list of webinars here.)  Intended as an introduction to social media, participants will learn how to engage their constituents with social media. 

Second, participants will learn the skills necessary to operate specific social media tools like  Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, Wordpress, and Delicious at a one-day, “hand-on” workshop.  To make travel easier, we’re offering one workshop in eastern South Dakota, and the other in western South Dakota. Dates and locations are still pending.  Participation in the webinars is not required, but it is encouraged.

And finally, we’re offering an opportunity for five nonprofits in the state to receive in-depth technical assistance in developing a customized social media strategy that works for them.  In addition, these five organizations will receive $2500 grants to develop branding materials with branding extraordinaire Bobbie Gaukel of One8y Creative.  Selections of these organizations will be competitive, and nonprofits will be required to provide a $500 match to be eligible. 

 

Stay connected and learn more

People seeking to learn more are encouraged to check out the details at www.EngageSD.com.  The webinar series will begin July 27, and online registration is required. 

If you’ve got questions, Lindsey and Mike are responding to messages sent to engagesd@rurallearningcenter.org, as well as sharing resources on their Facebook Page - www.facebook.com/engagesd.

It should be a lot of fun, and we’re hoping you will participate.

 

Note:  A special thanks is due the South Dakota Community Foundation and the “South Dakota Nonprofit Enhancement Project” for making Engage:SD possible.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Community Engagement, Economic Development, Rural | Comments (1)

No outdoor amenities: What do you do?

July 16th, 2010

If you live in a rural region with natural amenities, you’re in luck.  According to a study titled “The Rural Growth Trifecta: Outdoor Amenities, Creative Class and Entrepreneurial Context,” rural communities with natural amenities are positioned well to grow a knowledge economy.  Unfortunately, the study paints a bleaker picture for rural communities who don’t possess those amenities.  Sadly, that’s most of the rural Midwest where I live.  It leaves me wondering: could the future of our rural communities be decided simply because we are sans mountainous views or serene beaches?

The Study

At its core, the study (conducted by scholars David McGranahan and Timothy Wojan of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Dayton Lambert of the University of Tennessee) attempts to better understand the opportunities for economic growth in rural communities by examining the synergies created by connecting outdoor amenities, talent, and entrepreneurship.

There’s a lot of good stuff in the article, but I’ll just highlight the major points for now.

I’ve been wrestling with the findings of this study for over a week.  Deep in my heart, I know that rural communities who don’t possess loads of natural amenities can become places where talented people want to live.  I had hoped to conclude this post with advice for communities with low amenities.    But I’m not ready to offer that quite yet. 

One comment I will make today, however, is that talent attraction in rural communities without abundant natural amenities needs to look different than talent attraction in those communities with abundant amenities - much like urban and rural talent attraction strategies must follow different forms.  But the devil will be in the details. 

So, I’m curious what you think.  Whether it’s a gut reaction or an example of a low-amenity rural community that breaks the mold, your thoughts would be appreciated.  It’s too important of an issue for us to not talk about.

Update:  Cory Heidelberger at Madville Times has provided some analysis on the subject.  Check out his post titled “Boost Rural Entrepreneurship:  Build Bike Trails.” 

Tags: , ,
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Rural | Comments (6)

« Older Entries