SASKATOON Ñ It is early days in Mark Partridge’s tenure as the federally funded lead researcher on Canadian rural economic development strategies, but already he has some ideas.
The American scholar was lured north of the U.S.-Canadian border last year with an offer to occupy the first research chair in the new rural economy at the University of Saskatchewan.
He said an early conclusion is that rural communities lacking population density or amenities individually might be able to attract industry and retain services by acting together as a common population block.
Read Also
Land crash warning rejected
A technical analyst believes that Saskatchewan land values could be due for a correction, but land owners and FCC say supply/demand fundamentals drive land prices – not mathematical models
“The problem that rural communities face is a lack of population and they don’t have the threshold to attract businesses that will create jobs and reasons for young people to stay,” Partridge said in an interview at his Saskatoon office.
“Rural communities are not used to working together. They are used to competing but I think co-operation as a group of communities working together could be attractive to business looking for customers and workers.”
He said governments and urban populations also must be educated about the reality and potential of rural Canada, which has a bad image in many parts of urban Canada.
“One of the things we need to know is that not all of rural Canada is a basket case, that rural Canada contributes a lot to the Canadian economy,” he said. “I would say urban Canadians have a real misconception about rural Canada. It is not just about agriculture and it is not always about poverty and migration.”
Partridge said his time in Canada has shown him that governments are confused about how to create rural policy. Politicians talk about supporting rural Canada but little changes and the decline continues.
The northern Great Plains native, who specialized in regional economies in the United States, finds potential in Canada’s rural areas that has not been exploited or recognized by governments and business.
But he also warns that not all rural economies are created equal; not all communities will survive.
In more industrialized provinces, it is easier to live in rural areas close to jobs and with higher population densities. Shorter distances and larger populations make it possible to attract processing plants or other jobs. In less populated and more remote regions, that potential does not exist.
“Not all of rural Canada will be able to successfully adapt and survive,” Partridge said. “There are some areas that simply lack the population density, the transportation services and the amenities needed to attract new people or retain existing populations. There simply are areas that cannot be sustained and any sensible rural policy must recognize that.”
The federal government has launched a series of rural consultations to try to figure out an effective Canadian rural policy.
Agriculture minister Andy Mitchell, a former secretary of state for rural affairs, mentions in most speeches that he is committed to making sure rural Canada is as healthy as urban Canada because both are needed. He talks about a “rural lens” on all government policies.
Partridge said governments have yet to figure out how to design effective rural policy.
“At the federal level, they are baffled,” he said.
“They really don’t know what to do yet. I think they would like to be helpful but haven’t quite figured out how yet.”
