Posts Tagged ‘social capital’

Building a winning team

February 11th, 2010

Build or buy?  That’s the central question asked in the article titled “Building a winning team” that recently appeared in computing.co.uk.  More specifically, the article uses a professional sports analogy to question whether IT companies should invest in developing their staff (build from within) or hire professionals from outside the company (buy talent) when filling leadership positions.   

The article has me thinking about how this issue applies to rural communities; what’s the best way for rural communities to fill job openings such as economic development directors, city managers, utilities managers, and even educators?

One study says build from within

Back in 2001, I read an article recommending that community development organizations hire local residents for job openings because a study had shown that hiring from within the community produced better long-term results.  The study claimed that local hires tended to be more committed to the cause, stayed longer in their jobs, and often tapped into existing relationships within the community to get the job done.  The study stuck with me because I was newly hired from within the community to work on economic development and housing issues. 

While I believe the study has merit, I also have witnessed many rural community development organizations benefit from talented economic development professionals who moved into the community for job openings.  It causes me to wonder if there really is a perfect answer. 

I wish I had saved that article citing the advantages of hiring locally; if some is aware of similar research, I hope they will share it. 

Personally, I think the success of a job candidate, regardless of occupation, probably depends most on their passion and determination - two characteristics that also say a lot about the success of a community. 

Where’s the magic?

But I want to throw out one more point for consideration that moves us back to the professional sports analogy.  The success of professional teams often depend less on whether the team builds its own players or hires free agents than on the blend of talent that is assembled and how they interact.  It’s a sort of magic that emerges when talented teammates bond with each other.   

I think the dastardly New York Yankees (sorry I’m a Minnesota Twins fan) are a good example.  The Yankees won the 2009 World Series because they had the money to blow assembling the best free agents possible. But that same strategy has not always yielded the same success for the Yankees, as evidenced by their dry run over the last decade. 

Rural communities are in a race for talent.  Buy or build, I’ll let you decide.  But at the end of the day, I think the relationships that exist between the newly hired, their coworkers, and community members adds something special to the mix that helps produce outstanding results. 

Sociologists call it social capital…and most preach that it’s a critical part of building a winning community. 

 

Photo Credit:  Affiliate - Flickr 

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

10 Reasons “Third Places” matter to Rural Communities

January 26th, 2010

Admittedly, I go a little overboard on emphasizing the importance of “third places” to the future of rural communities, but my gut tells me they play a more vital role in the social and economic wellbeing of our rural communities than most people give them credit for.   

For those who haven’t heard of them before, third places are where people meet and socialize outside of their homes (first places) and their work (second places). Sociologist Ray Oldenburg is credited with drawing attention to third places through his influential book, The Great Good Place.  Back in January 2009, I wrote this post titled “Does your Community need a Coffee Shop and other Third Places?”  It’s still one of our more popular posts here at Reimagine Rural.    

Lacking in any of my previous writing about third places, however, is a comprehensive explanation of how third places impact the economic wellbeing of small, rural communities - or any community for that matter.  For that reason, I’ve produced the following resource guide to illuminate why rural communities must get serious about their efforts to develop strong third places in their communities. 

10 Reasons Third Places Matter to Rural Communities

1. Third places are cool…and rural places could stand a little cool. It’s no secret that young people today crave “cool” environments to live and hang out. What receives less attention, however, is research that suggests Gen Yers often choose where to live before seeking permanent employment; and that “coolness” plays a role in this decision making process. If true, this tells us that for rural communities to attract young people, they need to develop some cool places young people crave. And what better way to do it than by creating a place where young and old can get together. (Another article on the subject can be found here.)

2. Third places introduce new people to the community. I’ve noted in previous posts, how important it is for new residents and visitors to feel welcomed by a community.  Wall Street Journal writer Gwendolyn Bounds offers a personal perspective of how Guinans, an Irish pub, welcomed her into the Garrison, NY community and played a critical role in her choice to move there. As Bounds came to frequent the pub, “regulars” at Guinans taught her (a former NYC resident) a great deal about how to live in a rural community (i.e. use a chain saw, fix the plumbing, and deal with the snow). It’s possible that new residents can become a part of a community without a third place, but third places seem to make the process a lot easier.

3. Third Places improve the quality of life in a community. Quality of life means different things to different people. Some say quality of life requires a community to have a strong “night life.” Other, say it requires safe environments. But as this research suggests, people who live in communities with third places perceive the quality of life in their community as being higher than those who live without them.

4. Third Places are good for tourism. When people go on vacation they are typically looking for a unique experience. More and more, they also want that experience to be authentic. In other words, they want to get a sense of a community’s character, rather than an image developed by a corporate marketing department. If your community has a scenic wonder like the Grand Canyon, or man-made attraction like the Mall of America, you may not need to worry about a third place. But as tourism expert Roger Brooks of Destination Development Inc. notes, third places are a part of each community’s “brand” and can become places where locals and visitors meet each other. If you want further proof on the importance of third places to tourism, just look at what the Irish pub has done for tourism in Ireland.

5. Third places can help improve the business climate in your small town. Increasingly entrepreneurs need to work from anywhere and at anytime. That’s why cell service, broadband internet, and wifi accessibility are vital infrastructure to any rural community. But does your community have a place where entrepreneurs can meet with clients and business partners, take advantage of technology, and remain connected to the office? If not, your community may be frustrating entrepreneurs more than you realize.

6. Third places stimulate creativity. I work from home quite a bit. Sometimes, the solitude becomes deafening, and I need to be around people. I’ve discovered that in addition to combating isolation, third places help stimulate both my productivity and creativity. Surprisingly, I’m not alone. I recently learned that J.K. Rowlings turns to cafés for inspiration while writing her monumental Harry Potter books. Now she’s creative! (And just think what would happen if a third place in your community inspired the next Harry Potter series.)

7. Third Places help people age in place. Back in the 1990s, the Rural Learning Center focused on developing senior housing options (like independent and assisted living) in our community because we learned that helping seniors age in place was important to their quality of life. F. Kaid Benfield recognized that same issue in this blog post where he emphasized that communities who follow smart growth principles should develop third places for seniors that they can walk to. The point here is that seniors need to be active and engaged. That could be accomplished with a senior citizens facility. But a more efficient use of resources would involve developing third places where all generations visit.

8. Third Places can help create jobs.  Cooltown Studios has published numerous blogs posts about third places in urban areas.  I particularly like this post, which highlights how third places help build conversations that lead to entrepreneurial thinking, a requirement for growing our economy.   On one hand, saying that third places lead to job growth is a bit abstract for me, but I do believe it’s a good reminder that entrepreneurs need places to network and build conversations in order to generate new ideas that will hopefully lead to job growth. 

9. Third Places will never be replaced by social networking sites like Facebook. There’s a school of thought suggesting that physical third places are being replaced by virtual ones. In other words, Facebook is the new third place. Now let me be clear: I believe rural communities should consider developing an online social networking strategy as a part of their economic development work. It’s a great way to connect with people both inside and outside your community. But as Mary Newsom writes on Citiwire: online social networks as third places are “mere metaphors for the real thing.”

10. Third Places help build conversation …. and conversation leads to trust. One of the beautiful things about quality third places is that they bring together people of all socio-economic backgrounds. As conversation emerges in a third place, people begin to know, understand, and trust each other. Sociologists call this bridging social capital and have recognized its importance in community and economic development in rural places. (As this paper suggest, bridging social capital is the entry point for strengthening your community socially and economically.) On a basic level, most of us can appreciate that whenever people come together for open conversation, they begin to trust each other. And when people trust each other, it’s a lot easier to get things done in our communities.

I’ve been thinking and writing about the importance of third places in rural communities for a couple years now, and I’ve really noticed the growth of good resources being published online. In addition to sharing some of those resources as links above, I’ve attempted to save my favorites to my Delicious account.  Even though I’ve saved over 60 recourses, I know the list is incomplete. 

That’s why I’d like to ask for your help.  Feel free to check out my list of favorites on Delicious, but just as important, please share your favorites with me.  And don’t think that my “10 Reasons Third Places are important to Rural Communities” list above is complete either.  I plan to revise the list in the near future, and include your thoughts and new discoveries in it.

 

Photo Credits:

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Community Engagement, Economic Development, Quality of Life, Rural, Uncategorized | Comments (6)

Reinventing restaurants (and rural communities)

January 13th, 2010

There’s no doubt that good restaurants are important to rural communities.  They make rural communities more attractive places to live.  They often serve as “informal meeting places where community is built” (e.g., third places).  And they often improve the local economy by giving people a place to spend their money locally. 

My guess is that Reuben Wentz must appreciate the importance of a good restaurant.  The 93-year-old retired farmer recently gave $500,000 to his hometown of Napoleon, North Dakota (pop. 857) to create a new community-owned restaurant.   

The restaurant replaces the old, deteriorating building that housed the community’s previous community-owned restaurant.  It sounds like they’ve got a good thing going with the restaurant.  Its features include:

It’s also home to the Logan County Economic Development Offices, which set up the foundation that manages the restaurant.  I bet many of Napoleon’s neighboring communities are envious.

It’s important to attract people

It sounds like the community is excited about the restaurant.  The Bismarck Tribune quotes foundation board member Jennifer Schumacher:

“It was such a moment of joy. I thought - I think we all thought - this is such a turning point for Napoleon,” she said. Without much debt to service, the new venture should succeed, she said.

“We have a new drug store, young people are moving in and wind towers are going up. With such a beautiful restaurant here in Napoleon, we can do it,” Schumacher said. (source: Lauren Donovan, “Napoleon benefactor builds restaurant for community” Bismark Tribune, 12-2-09) 

That’s economic development

Any community seeking to attract young people (Gen Y) has to evaluate the availability of local food services.  It’s something they look for when choosing a community to call home. 

With this in mind, I’ve been thinking about how the Napoleon might leverage this restaurant effort for further economic development.  Two thoughts have emerged:

First, what can be done to foster a true “third place” atmosphere, making it a place where people of all ages and backgrounds meet for conversation?  We know that conversation between people of varying backgrounds in third places can lead to greater community trust (e.g. bridging social capital).  But third places don’t magically emerge.  They take thoughtful consideration and effort.

Second, could the community-owned restaurant be leveraged to create a local foods initiative?  Perhaps, they could make a commitment to buying locally raised foods.  The kitchen could also be a “shared use kitchen” that helps entrepreneurs develop new food products. 

Both of those ideas will take more effort and possibly more financial capital.  They may or may not be right for Napoleon.  But rural communities need to think like this to maximize their economic development efforts. 

Small towns also need people like Reuben Wentz who are willing to invest in their community’s future. 

Note:  Thanks to John Crabtree of the Center for Rural Affairs for making me aware of this story in their January newsletter.   Readers may also be interested in past ReImagine Rural stories about community owned grocery stores. 

Photo Credit:  FreeWine - Flickr  

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Agriculture, Community Development, Economic Development, Gen Y, Rural | Comments (3)

Social Media: Are you still a doubter

October 1st, 2009

Michael Gass makes a bold statement in a post for Social Media Today.  In an article titled “IBM Study: The end of advertising as we know it”, he writes:

“The next 5 years will hold more change for the advertising industry than the previous 50 did.”

Well, maybe that’s not such a bold statement to anyone who has been paying attention.  At the Rural Learning Center, we caught onto this idea about a year ago - and we are far from early adaptors on the subject.

Still I run into rural community leaders all the time who think investing time and effort into figuring out a social media strategy is a waste of time.  Or maybe I should say, they think it’s something that will go away — sort of like they hoped e-mail would about ten years ago. 

In case you are one of those who is not convinced about the importance of a social media strategy, I’d recommend you watch above following video.  And when you watch it, keep in mind that social media is not just about advertising and marketing.  It’s really about:

building conversations,
that in turn lead to relationships,
and eventually help build trust. 

And that is something every community can benefit from. 
 

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

Why do I write this stuff

September 16th, 2009

 I have to admit that lately I’ve been questioning why I spend so much time writing stuff about rural communities.  After all, couldn’t I make a bigger impact on the rural communities if I spent my daily efforts working in a rural community like I used to? Could I do more if I were an economic development director in a rural community?

But yesterday at the Rural Housing Playbook Conference, Joe Fiala of the On Hand Development Corp. in Miller, SD reminded me that there is value in having blogs where people can dream out-load, and where we can ask questions that seldom get asked.  Questions like “Does your community need a coffee shop?”

 

What Joe told me

I think Joe and I had only meet once before, so I was surprised when Joe came up to me and said that he was both a regular reader of ReImainge Rural and that he occasionally used a blog post to generate conversation with his board members at meetings. 

Instead of uttering, “Seriously?” (which probably showed on my face), I thanked him and asked how he was using it to generate conversation. 

He explained that he occasionally prints off a post, gives it to board members, and asks them to talk about it.  For instance, a while back he gave them a copy of “Does your community need a coffee shop?” and asked them to think about where new residents and younger people in Miller go to socialize and why having such a place would be important.  I was impressed to hear that they were talking about the role coffee shops play in community development work.  It’s the type of stuff most economic development groups don’t think about. 

 

The coffee shop idea didn’t make the cut

Later in the conversation, Joe somewhat sheepishly admitted that they are not actively working to develop a third place in Miller.  I think Joe didn’t wanted to hurt my feelings, but he was honest in saying it did not make their list of projects to work on.

Far from hurting my feelings, I was ecstatic.  Something I had written had caused an economic development group to “reimagine” their work.   They were digging in, conversing, and rethinking what they wanted their community to be like.  To me that’s incredible.  (By the way, that’s the “U Process” at work.)

Admittedly, I think every community needs a coffee shop that serves as a third place. I think they increase the community’s social capital that will in the long run help the community get more things done.  In other words, community members are less likely to waste their time fighting each other over the projects they are working on, resulting in increased productivity. 

But that doesn’t mean that I think Miller’s economic development group should invest their time and energy into making it a reality.  They may have more important stuff to work on, and should be congratulated for just thinking about it.

 

Ok, I am a little disappointed

If anything disappointed me about our conversation, it was that neither Joe or his board have joined in the conversation on ReImagine Rural. 

When we created the tag line “Building a deep conversation about the future of rural” we did so did so because we believe that generating conversations is key to building a brighter future for rural communities. 

Never have we felt that our experiences at the Rural Learning Center provide us with all the answers.  Nor do we believe that others should be “listening” to us.  Rather it’s about raising issues, asking questions, sharing ideas, and rethinking the future.  And that’s where Joe (and you) come in. 

I could tell from our short talk that Joe can contribute to the conversation.  I asked him if he’d consider posting comments about the importance of third places.  I’m hoping that he’ll even write a guest post or two someday about other subjects.  If he does, I’m confident that his contribution will help someone else who is wrestling with similar issues. 

 

It takes time

I know that it takes time to write comments or guest posts for blogs.  And I know that it can take time away from the more immediate projects that everyone is working on.  

In fact, as I reflect on the questions I posed at the top of this post, I think that’s what I’ve been wrestling with.  Is there value in writing about rural community issues as I do on this blog?  Or should I be spending my time “doing” something as I try to help rural communities. 

Only time will bear an answer, but for now, I’m going to keep plugging away.  The one thing that I am sure of, however, is that rural communities across America will benefit from YOU joining the conversation. 

 

Note:  If you want to join the conversation, feel free to send me an e-mail at mike@ruraltransformations.com

 Photo Credit (top right): limaoscarjuliet - Flickr

 

 

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Economic Development, Housing, Rural, Training and Events | Comments (0)

Social Capital through the Front Porch

July 30th, 2009

Like I mentioned in my last post, many people see development possibilities as a good way to invest in, and grow, their towns.  So, what makes a new urbanism neighborhood so much better than your standard subdivision?  (Find out what Hercules, CA has to say here, and what Stapleton residents think here)

The American front porch was a great tool for encouraging socialization.  Families would spend nice evenings on the porch, waving to passing neighbors or offering them a glass of iced tea or lemonade and a chair to sit down in.  Before lives were more hectic and evenings were spent at karate practice, people enjoyed a quiet evening together with friends and family.  The neighborhood kids would play together on a whim, and not a scheduled play-date.

Many new home buyers remember this care-free aspect of their childhood, and want to give their children the same opportunity.  From what I have seen, many members of Gen Y see subdivisions and cul-de-sacs as idealistic and sterile places with no real character.  These subdivisions are based on the car with large garages dominating the streetscape, wide roads to accommodate those cars, and are located far from work and shopping, making the car a necessity in all daily tasks.

New urbanism neighborhoods are no longer based on the car in the garage, and instead are focused on the people in the homes.  Lots are set up “long and skinny,” encouraging homeowners to locate the garage at the back of their property, with access from the shared alley.  Roads are narrower to encourage slower traffic, which in turn encourages people to start utilizing the front yard as a safe place to play and the neighborhood a safe place to walk.  In these neighborhoods the front porch is making a comeback.

One of the great things about rural communities is that people tend to know and care about their neighbors.  When neighborhoods are built in a way that encourages connectivity, neighbors and communities start to reap the benefits.  Communities start to build social capital by connecting neighbors to one another.  And, as I have discussed before, connecting new people to others in your community is essential in keeping those newcomers in your neighborhoods and happy. 

 

Photo courtesy of Seabrook, WA, another very neat town that was created using New Urbanist principles.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Community Development, Community Engagement, Housing, Quality of Life, Uncategorized | Comments (3)

Will Gen Y ruin local community?

May 15th, 2009

Go to any meeting in a rural community and it is easy to recognize that Gen Yers (and Gen Xers as well) are not engaged in community activities.  At least this is true if we are talking about traditional community activities like a community club, chamber of commerce committee, or church committee. 

Obviously, part of the problem is that we have an older population in many rural communities, but it’s also true that Gen Y just doesn’t get involved like young people may have in past generations.

Today, I stumbled across a post by a Gen Yer (Rebecca Thorman) who asks:  “Will Gen Y ruin local community?”  At the heart of her question is the acknowledgement that although Gen Yers have “the best of intentions to be a part of the communities” they call home, there are “a number of conflicting events that contribute to a lack of involvement in local community.” 

The post lists the following as some of those factors:

Interesting stuff.  And it generated some interesting comments as well. 

 

What’s going on here?

I heartily agree that Gen Y is not engaged in traditional community activities like older generations.  If we (all of us old people) attempt to meet them in the world where they feel comfortable-the online world-I think we have a better shot at engaging them.

Research tells us that Gen Yers look at technology as an extension of themselves.  That’s a tough concept for many of us to understand, but what it means is that Gen Yers see technology tools like texting, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc. as the extension that enables them to talk to their friends. So, while Gen Y may refuse to attend a community meeting, that doesn’t mean they cannot “be there” via an on-line tools. 

 

So why hold a meeting?

And let’s be honest for a minute.  While older generations think that face-to-face conversations at meetings are necessary to “get things done,” they don’t always allow for everyone to be a part of the conversation.  You know what I mean.  You’ve been to that meeting where you really want to contribute your ideas, but get locked out of the conversation by one or two individuals with dominant personalities who control the conversation. 

 

For some time now, I’ve been captivated by the Renew Newcastle movement because it began as an on-line conversation through Facebook.  People in the community were interested in revitalizing the central business district, and Facebook became the forum that facilitated the discussion.  The movement has grown into an organized effort with its own website, but the community still exists on Facebook. (Read more about Newcastle here.) 

The point is that older generations feel we need face-to-face community meetings, but those meetings have strengths and weaknesses.  If we want Gen Y to be involved, we may need to engage them via social networking tools.

 

Will Gen Y ruin local community?

I don’t believe Gen Y will “ruin” local community.  But there’s no doubt in my mind that Gen Y will change how we experience it. In the years to come, we will do more and more community work on-line; and that’s not all bad because life is all about change. Who knows, maybe we’ll even accomplish more doing it that way.   

 A more important question to me, however, is:  Will our rural communities be willing to encourage Gen Y’s involvement. 

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Community Engagement, Gen Y, Rural | Comments (2)

Third Places in the blogosphere

May 8th, 2009

As mentioned previously, I believe third places help build social capital within a community, make a community a more attractive place to live, and help develop a sense of place.  It’s probably a stretch to say they can solve every problem in a community, but I think third places are pretty important. 

We haven’t spent much time talking about third places lately, so I thought I’d provide a quick highlight on a couple references that I have stumbled across in the blogosphere lately.

First, Daryl Phillips, Executive Director of the Hickman County Economic Development Association, discovered our original post about third places and writes about the role third places play in his community. 

Second, the eclectic blog titled Our Third Place was launched in February.  To date, seven posts populate the site, providing first hand experiences of third places. 

Third, an older post on The Greater Great Washington blog describes how a third place can help make a community more attractive and walkable. Granted it references Washington, DC, but I think there is still some applicability for rural. 

These are but three of the innumerable posts about third places that have come to my attention.  In the future, I’ll try to do a better job of bringing them to your attention as well.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, In the News, Quality of Life, Rural | Comments (0)

Does your community need a coffee shop and other Third Places?

January 14th, 2009

During an economic development planning meeting in 2004, several high school students claimed our community (Howard, SD) needed a coffee shop.  That statement confounded most of the adults in attendance.  “What do you mean? We’ve already got two,” a community leader retorted, referring to the town’s two small cafés. 

Beyond the obvious differences between a coffee shop and a small town café, most of the adults in the room missed the point the students were making:  Younger people enjoyed going to larger communities to hang out in coffee shops.  If we wanted our community to be a place for their generation, we needed a coffee shop. 

To my disappointment, the coffee shop idea didn’t make the final cut on our prioritized list of projects, deferring instead to more traditional “job creation” strategies. At the time, I thought a coffee shop would serve as an excellent “amenity”, making our community more attractive to both Gen Y and newcomers.  I’ve since learned that there’s a lot more going on in coffee houses than coffee and conversation.  And I have sociologist Ray Oldenburg to thank for this discovery.

 

Coffee Houses are “Third Places”

It has been two decades since Oldenburg invented the name “third places” in his influential book The Great Good Place to describe informal gathering places like cafés, pubs, bookstores, community centers and main streets.

To Oldenburg, third places carry out important community building functions that cannot be fulfilled by “first places” (our homes) and “second places” (our places of work).  They become the places where people develop personal relationships and a sense of community.  Without them, families are left to sit at home and watch television by themselves. 

Oldenburg goes into great depth explaining the community building functions carried out by third places.  We’ll talk about them more in later posts, but for now I’d like to focus on helping readers recognize third places in their own communities– not all cafés, pubs, bookstores and community centers meet the qualifications of third places. 

 

Characteristics of Third Places

Third places come in many forms, but Oldenburg identifies eight characteristics that third places share:

 

Howard’s new Third Place

Last summer (2008), three entrepreneurial ladies opened a coffee shop in Howard called Higher Grounds.  I’ve been watching it ever since and have concluded that it is developing into an outstanding third place.  It really seems to be filling the need people have to experience a sense of community, which may explain why it’s a success. 

So, what about your rural community?  Do you have any good examples that you can share?  I’d really like to create a list of unique third places.  Hopefully, these examples can serve as an inspiration to residents in rural communities that currently lack strong third places.

 

Other resources on coffee shops and third places

Note:  Photo courtesy of Elisa Sand of the Madison Daily Leader

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Community Development, Gen Y, Quality of Life, Rural | Comments (7)

First know your threshold — then beat the odds

December 31st, 2008

Does your community have enough residents to support a hardware store, or a restaurant, or grocery store?  There are no easy answers to these questions, but a recent publication from South Dakota State University offers some important insights.

Titled “Threshold Levels for Selected Rural South Dakota Retail and Service Business” the report focuses on the population levels (called thresholds) that are necessary for retail and service oriented businesses to succeed in rural places.  For instance, the report suggests that communities need approximately 952 residents in order for a full-scale restaurant to stay in business.  

The report applies only to South Dakota’s most rural counties, and is intended to help rural community leaders and entrepreneurs figure out what types of businesses will most likely succeed. 

Why’s the information important?

I appreciate this report, prepared by Mike McCurry, Saileza Khatiwada and Trevor Brooks of SDSU’s Rural Life and Census Data Center, because this type of information is typically available only to urban economic development professionals.  Without it community leaders and entrepreneurs are often left to determine these issues by comparison:  “If a flower shop can make it in Community X, then it ought to be able to make it in our town because we’re about the same size,” people will reason.

While threshold analysis is valuable information, the report cautions that other factors including geographic location, access to highways, and other demographic information affect the success and failure rates of businesses.  In other words, threshold analysis is just one tool rural community leaders and entrepreneurs should use in their decision-making process.  I believe there are two additional factors that are critical to this decision-making process.  Let me explain.

The Entrepreneur Factor

In 2002, Howard’s only hardware store closed.  The threshold calculator indicates that 3,636 people are needed to support a successful hardware store. With a town population of around 1,000 people in a county of only 2,800, Howard should not, by this analysis, be able to support such a store. 

The hardware store did reopen a year-and-a-half later, and today it’s doing very well.  Probably better than ever.  This story might just be an anomaly, but I don’t think it is. While population is important, the people who own and operate the store are far more important.  Are they hardworking, creative, good community members? Howard was lucky that the answer to these questions were “yes”.

The Community Support Factor

There is also a second factor that’s very important - how committed is the community to supporting that store?

In 1996, Howard High School students began an effort to raise community awareness about the importance of local spending.  The students sent surveys to each community member, drew conclusions based on the data they collected, and presented their results to the community. Those efforts have helped produce steadily growing sales within the community every year since.  In other words, the residents buy more locally than they once did because they understand its importance to the community’s wellbeing. 

The threshold analysis provided in the report is a great starting point.  Individuals should look at the threshold number, and then adjust it up or down depending on the specifics of the community.  Location and demographic features are important, but if you ask me, the abilities of the entrepreneur and the commitment of the community to support local businesses are even more important.

At the end of the day, wouldn’t it be great if more communities could beat the odds of the threshold analysis!

   

Note:  Before publishing this post, I contacted Mike McCurry at SDSU with several questions, which he graciously answered.  In answering one question, Mike noted that the high percentage of seniors and high levels of “social capital” may enable some businesses to succeed when population levels are lower than the threshold. 

I was very impressed with Mike’s rapid response, and would encourage people with additional questions to contact him at (605) 688-4899 or sdsudata@sdstate.edu.  You can learn more about the “SDSU Rural Life & Census Data Center” at http://sdrurallife.sdstate.edu/

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

« Older Entries