Major Forces Affecting Rural Regions in 2020

David Freshwater

doi:10.53098/wir.2020.4.189/01

Authors

David Freshwater David Freshwater, PhD, Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kentucky, 400 Charles E. Barnhart Building, Lexington, KY 40546-0276, United States of America https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7668-0861

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53098/wir.2020.4.189/01

Keywords:

rural development, rural/urban divide, social conflict, rural policy, populism

Abstract

Rural regions in OECD countries have always faced development challenges, resulting from their: reliance on natural resources, small labour forces, and long distances from markets, as well as the effects of globalization. Now, in addition, their development opportunities are further constrained by: climate change requirements, increased economic fragility resulting from COVID and the lingering effects of the 2008 recession, and the uneven impacts of the Internet economy. But, from a rural development policy perspective, perhaps the most important new challenge is the rise of rural populism. While rural areas and people have long been seen as distinct from their urban counterparts, in the last two decades these gaps have grown. Importantly, while the internet and information and communications technology (ICT) were initially seen as providing opportunities to improve social cohesion and link rural and urban people and places, instead they seem to have increased tensions. Because the core values of urban and rural people have grown so far apart, it is more difficult to establish the political compromises that are required to form effective policy. Absent some reconciliation of these social and political differences, it is difficult to see how national government policy can evolve to meet new challenges. Consequently, the likelihood of national governments being able to identify and implement coherent rural development policies is reduced.

References

Champion T. (2007). Defining “urban”: The disappearing urban-rural divide. In: Geyer H.S. (ed.), International Handbook of Urban Policy, vol. 1 (pp. 22–37). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Filene P. (1970). An obituary for the “Progressive Movement”. American Quarterly, 22 (1), 20–34.

Frank Th. (2004). What’s the Matter with Kansas? New York: Henry Holt and Company.

Freshwater D. (2000). Rural America at the turn of the century: One analyst’s perspective. Rural America, 15 (3), 2–7.

Freshwater D., Trapasso R. (2014). The Disconnect between Principles and Practice: Rural Policy Reviews of OECD Countries. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Hodge I. (2003). Mainstreaming rural development policy under the CAP. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 5 (3), 361–378.

Holmes W. (1990). Populism: In search of context. Agricultural History, 64 (4), 26–58.

Isserman A. (2001). Competitive advantages of rural America in the next century. International Regional Science Review, 21 (1), 38–58.

JEC (Joint Economic Committee of Congress) (1986). The Bicoastal Economy: Regional Patterns of Economic Growth during the Reagan Administration. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

Mayhew A. (1972). A reappraisal of the causes of farm protest in the United States, 1870–1905. The Journal of Economic History, 32 (2), 464–475.

Mudde C., Kaltwasser C. (2017). Populism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

North D. (1966). Growth and Welfare in the American Past. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Nugent W. (2009). Progressivism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2006). The New Rural Paradigm. Paris: OECD Publishing.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2010). Strategies to Improve Rural Service Delivery. Paris: OECD Publishing.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2016). OECD Regional Outlook: 2016. Paris: OECD Publishing.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2020). Policy Implications of Coronavirus Crisis for Rural Development. Paris: OECD Publishing. Available: http://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/policy-implications-of-coronavirus-crisis-for-rural-development-6b9d189a/

OTA (Office of Technology Assessment) (1991). Rural America at the Crossroads. Office of Technology Assessment. Washington, D.C.: US Government Printing Office.

Overman H., Gibbons S. (2011). The Future of Rural Policy: Lessons from Spatial Economics. SERC Policy paper 8. London: London School of Economics. Available: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/59234/1/__lse.ac.uk_storage_LIBRARY_Secondary_libfile_shared_repository_Content_LSE%20Spatial%20Economic%20Research%20Centre_SUNAINA%20SERC_sercpp008.pdf

Parker E. (2000). Closing the digital divide in rural America. Telecommunications Policy, 24 (2), 281–290.

Schaeffer P., Loveridge S., Weiler S. (2014). Urban and rural: Opposites no more! Economic Development Quarterly, 28 (1), 3–4.

Schoene M. (2019). European disintegration? Euroscepticism and Europe’s rural/urban divide. European Politics and Society, 20 (3), 348–368.

Ward N., Brown D. (2009). Placing the rural in regional development. Regional Studies, 43 (10), 1237–1244.

Weber B., Freshwater D. (2016). The death of distance? Networks, the costs of distance and urban-rural interdependence. In: Shucksmith M., Brown D. (eds.), Routledge International Handbook of Rural Studies (pp. 154–164). Routledge: New York.

Zerofsky El. (2018). The Gilets Jaunes movement. The New Yorker, December 13, 2018. Accessed June 26, 2020 at https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-complicated-politics-of-the-gilets-jaunes-movement

Zitner A., Chinni D. (2020). How the 2020 election deepened America’s white-collar/blue-collar split. Wall Street Journal, November 24, 2020. Available: https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-2020-election-deepened-americas-white-collar-blue-collar-split-11606219208?mod=politics_lead_pos3