Posts Tagged ‘brain gain’

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)

Brain Drain or Brain Gain: We need to learn more

February 5th, 2010

Ben Winchester’s research on “rural brain gain,” has drawn some interesting responses in North Dakota. Based on an article titled “Report suggests ‘brain gain’ instead of brain drain,” which appeared in the January 28, 2010 Grand Forks Herald and was reprinted in the January 30, 2010 Fargo-Moorhead InForum, I’d have to say North Dakotans don’t find a lot of applicability in Winchester’s research for their state.  (If you are into negative comments, you’ll want to check out the comments at the end of the InForum article.)

Does Minnesota research apply elsewhere?

The skepticism begins with North Dakota demographer Dr. Richard Rathge who questions the applicability of research about rural Minnesota compared to rural North Dakota.  As he notes, people are more inclined to move to rural places that are high in natural amenities (e.g., West Central Minnesota) than to places with few natural amenities (e.g. North Dakota).

No doubt.  USDA research supports Rathke’s assertions.

But my gut still tells me that there’s something to Winchester’s research.  I’ve personally witnessed numerous examples of people who move to Miner County to raise their children.  The number of people moving in may not be as high as that Winchester found in his study.  But they definitely didn’t move to Miner County for the natural amenities.

And that’s why Winchester’s research is valuable.  We need to better understand what groups of people are moving to rural communities, and what’s their motivation.  Just saying young people are moving out isn’t good enough.

Does the term “Brain Drain” hurt marketing efforts?

When I originally raised the question “Should we banish ‘brain drain’ from our vocabulary?” in a blog post a couple weeks ago, I was trying to figure out if the term “brain drain” does more harm (in promoting our communities) than good (in raising awareness of a problem). I’ve yet to reach a definitive answer.

Based on what I’ve read in the Grand Fork’s article, I’ve concluded that Rathge would say that the question is mute.  At the end of the Grand Forks article, he is quoted saying:

“Here in North Dakota, we’ve seen many decades of outmigration of young adults. Community builders have been talking for decades about ways to hold them, including being positive rather than negative.”

“The bottom line is we need to provide opportunities for people who want to stay. We have to be serious about economic development in North Dakota.” (source: Chuck Haga, “Report suggests ‘brain gain’ instead of brain drain,” Grand Forks Herald, 1-28-09)

It’s more than a job

Getting serious about economic development in rural communities is vitally important.  But it requires a strategy that is more complex than new business recruitment alone.

That’s what I like about the research being conducted by Dr. David Ivan with his “Can small towns be cool?” project.  The themes he identifies in his presentations (which I outline here) offer rural communities a model for rural economic development worth consideration.

So, whether it’s brain drain or brain gain in our communities, I hope we’d all agree that it is something we ought to pay attention to.

Note:  Access to the Grand Forks Herald and Fargo-Moorhead InForum articles may require individuals sign up for a free membership with Forum Communications have been archived.  I did notice it has been reprinted and can be read on the Farm Bureau site.

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

No vision, No resources

January 19th, 2010

Last week I had an interesting conversation on Twitter concerning a ReImagine Rural blog post I wrote titled “Should we banish ‘brain drain’ from our vocabulary.” The post focuses on Ben Winchester’s research suggesting much of rural Minnesota is experiencing an in migration of college educated adults age 30-45.

The Twitter conversation emerged when Joe O’Sullivan (@jaosullivanx) a reporter from Watertown, SD, sent me a tweet saying, “I see people here who grew up rural return 15 years later w/ degrees. Positive development, but can you bank on it?”

My response was, “B Winchester tells us that there are more who move back than we realize. But that’s also why we need (to) intentionally work at it.”  Later I sent him a second tweet with a link to a report that highlights the importance of rural communities being intentional about developing people attraction strategies. 

Joe responded writing, “I like. But it seems that communities have either a lack of vision, or resources, or both. How do you get around that?”

 

“…lack of vision, or resources, or both” 

It’s a valid point and good question.  In making the statement, I think Joe is trying to bring “reality” into the conversation about the future of rural communities.  Too many of our rural communities don’t have a vision for the future and they don’t think they have any resources.  So what do we do about it?

My mind was flooded with thoughts, which would have required a 2-3 page essay to convey; something Twitter’s 140 character limit prevents.  Instead, I paired my thoughts down to, “No doubt! And add determination. No easy answers, but I’d say use appreciative inquiry and stick with it. What do you think?”

I recommended appreciative inquiry because I firmly believe that every community has assets.  They just need to approach their vision for the future by leveraging existing assets.  In many ways that’s what we did in Miner County, and assets started multiplying exponentially. 

I also mentioned determination because community and economic development work is fraught with frustration; economic growth seldom happens in a flash.  Only those with determined community leaders emerge successfully.

I hope that my advice was good, but I realize that I’m no expert on the subject.  What works in one rural community is not universally right for all rural communities.   So, let me repost the question here:  How do you get around rural communities who lack vision and resources or both?

 

Photo credit:  BozDoz - Flickr

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

Should we banish “brain drain” from our vocabulary

January 8th, 2010

In his report “Rural Migration:  The Brain Gain of Newcomers,” Ben Winchester tells us that many parts of rural Minnesota are experiencing a brain gain with new residents age 30-45 moving in.  This is a very important occurrence because rural areas tend to lose younger individuals as they go off to college. 

For those who haven’t read the report, I want to share a few insights Ben sent me via e-mail. 

First, Ben’s research leads him to believe the trend he discovered in Minnesota is widespread across the Rural Midwest, including South Dakota.  While I trust Ben’s academic prowess, I’d still like to see some research to support it.  After all, my South Dakota heritage tells me that all the good stuff happens to Minnesota and not South Dakota.

Second, he highlights a point made explicit in his report:  Over half of the residents moving to rural communities come with college degrees.  This trend has helped raise the educational attainment level of rural communities.  In other words, the communities are getting smarter, not dumber, which leads to his last point.

Finally, using the word “brain drain” to describe the rural population movement creates problems for us as we try to move rural communities forward.  As Ben writes, “the use of negative language to describe the dynamics of our small towns (brain drain, outmigration) makes it difficult to foresee a way forward for our rural people.” 

This last point is one that I’ve long agreed with.  From my economic development specialist’s perspective, using “brain drain” creates a marketing challenge.  Why would we expect outsiders to look positively at our communities when we imply that the smart people are all moving away?

But I’ve continued to use the phrase anyway for a couple reasons.  First, even though it’s negative, the phrase helps focus our attention on the issue of young people moving out of our communities.  And second, I’m not aware of a term to replace it with.  

Ben and I hope to get together sometime in the near future to discuss this and other issues.  I’m open to the possibility of banishing the word from my vocabulary.  But before I do, want to throw the topic out to our readers here at ReImagine Rural. 

Should we banish the phrase “brain drain” from our language?  And if so, how can we continue to focus attention on the need to create change in our rural communities so that they become more attractive places for young people?  What do you think?

Photo Credit:  spierzchala - Flickr

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Rural | Comments (15)

Rural “Brain Gain”! It’s true

January 6th, 2010

A few weeks ago, Jennifer Gumbel, a Gen Y lawyer from Le Roy, MN commented on a Minnesota Public Radio forum that she thought her rural communities was experiencing “brain gain” rather than “brain drain.”  In other words, young people are staying and moving into her community at a higher rate than those moving out. (see more on this here) 

Well, it looks like her intuition was right.  The University of Minnesota’s Extension Center for Community Vitality has produced a report titled “Rural Migration:  The Brain Gain of Newcomers,” which support’s Gumbel’s claims.

Using a “simple cohort technique” to analyze population growth and decline, the study found that many rural Minnesota communities are experiencing an in-migration of adults in age cohorts of 35-49.  Definitely a positive trend.  And when these new residents move in, they often bring children, causing an increase over time in the class sizes in rural schools.  This trend points out the importance for rural communities to develop “people attraction strategies” targeting young adults in their child rearing years. 

The report doesn’t analyze why residents were attracted to these rural Minnesota counties, but it does offer analysis conducted by the University of Nebraska. This research of why people age 30-44 have moved to the Panhandle region suggests they do so because they want:

I’m definitely over simplifying the analysis of the “Rural Migration:  The Brain Gain of Newcomers” report, so I hope readers will dig in deeper.  (BTW, I found it to be a very readable report.) I hope that someone will eventually study the specifics of why people are moving to these rural Minnesota communities and why they are not moving to others.  I suspect employment plays a key role, but I doubt that it the only factor.  The report has also left me hoping to discover current trends in rural South Dakota.  Could we have a “brain gain” and not know it?

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

Are you toiling in the urban mailroom?

December 22nd, 2009

As I mentioned in my previous post, there is a lot of insightful information in this Minnesota Public Radio virtual forum.  I shared some of the best themes and comments in that post, but I wanted to pull out one comment for publication by itself.

Late in the conversation, Jennifer Gumbel (10:52) provided the following insightful comment:

I feel I live in an area that is brain-gaining… SE MN. I’m originally from Sioux Falls and have lived in the Cities and in Des Moines. I now live in Le Roy, MN and work in Preston as an attorney. My professional and personal life is more fulfilling in many ways than my big city classmates. I have more responsibility on more interesting cases. I’m a homeowner and live next to a State Park. I have the opportunity to play part time in a symphony. I see many of my colleagues or friends who are originally from this area returning. I couldn’t be happier to be in a small town.”

Wow!  What an endorsement for rural Minnesota.

What Jennifer suggests is an often overlooked attractor to rural places:  Many talented young people who migrate to the city often end up toiling in the mailroom, while their rural counterparts are taking on real responsibilities right away.

Obviously, that’s not universal for every person and job, but it’s important to note because we know Gen Y is very interested in being given responsibility.  If I were recruiting a young person to work in a rural community, I would definitely emphasize this point.

And congratulations to Le Roy and Preston, MN.  Sioux Falls’ loss is rural Minnesota’s gain.

 

Photo Credit — libraryimages - Flickr (Preston, MN 1874 — click to enlarge)

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Community Engagement, Gen Y, Rural | Comments (0)