Rewriting the Rural Narrative:
the “Brain Gain”
of Rural America
Ben WinchesterSenior Research Fellow
All rights reserved. University of Minnesota Extension is an equal opportunity educator and employer.
What is our future?
Deficit ApproachFixing things that can’t or shouldn’t be fixed
No More Anecdata!
anecdata (noun). information
which is presented as if it is based
on serious research but is in fact
based on what someone thinks is
true
1900-1950
• Mechanization of agriculture
• Roads and transportation
• Educational achievement and population loss
• Church closings (Delafield)
1950-1990
• Main street restructuring
• School consolidations
• Hospitals closings
The rural idyll
“Agriculture is no longer the mainstay of the rural economy.”
The Media Idyll Persists
Who are you going to find in a small town when you
travel to small towns in morning and afternoon?
Photo by Denise Peterson
Rural is Changing, not Dying
• Yes, things are changing
• Small towns are microcosms of globalization
– Many of these changes impact rural and urban areas alike
(not distinctly rural)
– Yet more apparent in rural places
• Survived massive restructuring of social and economic
life
• Research base does NOT support notion that if XXXX
closes, the town dies
– In Minnesota only 3 towns have dissolved in past 50
years
Rural Rebound
• Since 1970, rural population increased by 11%
– Relative percentage living rural decreased
26%
203,211,926
(53.6m rural)
308,745,538
(59.5m rural)
Rural Rebound
• Since 1970, rural population increased by 11%
– Relative percentage living rural decreased
• Nationally, 1990 and 1999, 2.2 million more
Americans moved from the city to the country, than
the reverse.
• Population loss figures many times include formerly
rural places not designated as urban
Population Change1990-2000 2000-2010
Does decline mean decline?
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
We have generally examined total population
change from year to year (or decade to decade)
Stevens County
Mobility
Between 1995 and 1999,
43% of MN residents (46% of households) moved
(HH counties: low=27%, high 52%)Low=Lac qui Parle, High=Benton
U.S. Census Data
Dig Deeper
Simplified Cohort Analysis
This is not the usual model:
population
+ births – deaths
+ in-migration (estimate)
– out-migration (estimate)
1990 2000
If we have 20 children 10-14 in 1990,
we expect 20 young adults aged 20-24 in 2000.
Group the population by age
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Unde
r 5 year
s
5 to
9 yea
rs
10 to
14
year
s
15 to
19
year
s
20 to
24
year
s
25 to
29
year
s
30 to
34
year
s
35 to
39
year
s
40 to
44
year
s
45 to
49
year
s
50 to
54
year
s
55 to
59
year
s
60 to
64
year
s
65 to
69
year
s
70 to
74
year
s
75 to
79
year
s
80 to
84
year
s
85 yea
rs a
nd o
ver
Expected
Actual
The First Glimpse
EDA Region 4, Minnesota
Population Change 2000-2010
Cohort Age 30-34, Percent Change 1990-2000
Cohort Age 30-34, Percent Change 2000-2010
Corroborating Evidence?
Total School Enrollment
in Collaborative Region
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
1988
-89
1989
-90
1990
-91
1991
-92
1992
-93
1993
-94
1994
-95
1995
-96
1996
-97
1997
-98
1998
-99
1999
-00
2000
-01
2001
-02
2002
-03
2003
-04
2004
-05
2005
-06
2006
-07
School Grade Cohort
Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4
If you have 100 students enter First Grade in 1997-98,
we expect 100 students to enter Second Grade in 1998-99.
What do we observe?
Source: U.S. Census Bureau,
Minnesota Department of Education
Cohort Size by Year of Entry
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
17001 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
11
12
Grade
1988-89
1991-92
1994-95
1997-98
2000-01
Cohort Growth between
grade 2 and 6
1988 107 7.5%
1991 58 7.1%
1994 20 1.7%
1997 34 3.1%
2000 45 4.6%
Rural Brain Gain Trend
• The growth is primarily in the 30 to 49 age group – this in-migration into rural communities can be just about equal to that of the out-migration of youth – the “Brain Drain”.
• These people are bringing children aged 10-17.
• There is an interchange between core urban, suburban, and rural places.
• This interchange (loss and gain) is necessary for influx of new ideas to cultivate social capital.
Buffalo Commons ResearchDr. Randy Cantrell and Cheryl
Burkhart-Kriesel
University of Nebraska
Newcomers: Why?
Simpler pace of life
Safety and Security
Low Housing Cost
Newcomers: Who?
• 36% lived there previously
• 68%(MN) 40% (NE) attain bachelors degree
• 67% (MN) 48% (NE) household incomes over $50k
• 51% (MN) 43% (NE) have children in household
• They are generally leaving their career
• Underemployed in current situation
• Yet, Quality of Life is the trump card
Newcomers: Future?
• 77%(MN) 60% (NE) say they will be living there 5 years from now.
• The % is lower for younger people.
• Those who rate community as friendly and trusting have higher %
• Expectation of staying related to job opportunities and security, feeling of belonging, suitable housing, opportunities to join local organizations, and others.
Changing Types of Involvement -
The Social Organization (historical)
• Place-based
• Broadly focused
• Word of mouth
Green & Haines. 2007. Asset Building and Community Development
Changing Types of Involvement -
The Social Organization (present)
• Cover wide geographic area
• Narrowly focused goals/
self-interest
• Diverse social interests
• Technological – social media
The people today are challenged in “connecting” with the existing social infrastructure.
Green & Haines. 2007. Asset Building and Community Development
2000-2010
% Population Change: -4%
% Nonprofit Change: 3%
Selected characteristicsRedwood County, Minnesota
1995 2000 2005 2010
Number of Nonprofits 169 174 164 180
Number Filing 990 45 55 55 106
Revenue (of Filers) $10,780,956 $14,341,882 $14,238,414 $13,426,373
Assets (of Filers) $20,517,910 $25,428,609 $31,293,114 $33,776,986
Governmental Units 54 54 51 51
Total Organizations 223 228 215 231
Population, Total 16,815 16,059
Population Age 18+ 12,351 12,042Groups per 1,000
people 13.6 14.4Revenue per
Organization $63,793 $82,425 $86,820 $74,591
Revenue per Person $6.67 $6.19Population per
Organizational Role 18 17
Note: The “Number filing 990” generally indicates filing by
organizations with gross receipts of $50,000 or more.
2000-2010
% Population Change: -8%
% Nonprofit Change: 4%
Selected characteristicsRenville County, Minnesota
1995 2000 2005 2010
Number of Nonprofits 139 148 156 154
Number Filing 990 35 38 42 81
Revenue (of Filers) $8,633,195 $9,464,006 $12,216,523 $14,978,965
Assets (of Filers) $35,478,208 $86,523,847 $22,698,725 $27,592,626
Governmental Units 45 45 43 43
Total Organizations 184 193 199 197
Population, Total 17,154 15,730
Population Age 18+ 12,602 12,074Groups per 1,000
people 11.3 12.5Revenue per
Organization $62,109 $63,946 $78,311 $97,266
Revenue per Person $5.07 $8.06Population per
Organizational Role 22 20
Note: The “Number filing 990” generally indicates filing by
organizations with gross receipts of $50,000 or more.
The trend, continued
• The movement of people is consistent and large, it’s not all about outmigration.
• Those moving to rural areas are in their prime earning years.
• Isn’t this a net BRAIN GAIN?• High levels of entrepreneurship and small business
ownership.
• This has been happening since 1970s• This movement has occurred without a concerted
effort to recruit or attract them.
Economic Impact of Newcomers
• The surveyed newcomers reported $6.6 million in household
income in 2009 and 2010. This equates to an average
household income of $66,000.
• New, expanded, or relocated businesses owned by the
newcomers reported spending $108,000 in the region.
• The total economic impact of the surveyed newcomers’
business and household spending is $9.1 million, including 174
jobs and $7.2 million in labor income (including wages, salaries,
and benefits).
• The survey was not random, and therefore the results cannot be
generalized beyond the study region, the average newcomer
household contributed $92,000 in economic activity to the region
in 2009 and 2010.
The analysis is based on 99 newcomer households that
represent 150 working-age adults and 14 newcomer-owned
businesses.
Core Research Questions
• Who are we losing and who are we gaining?
• What are the “sticky” challenges?
• Attraction: Requires local leadership (housing,
schools, government, nonprofit)
• Retention: How do we invest in newcomers?
– Socially – communities with high % newcomers
– Economic – What is the economic impact of
newcomers? What is the ROI?
Source: “For Nearly Half of America, Grass is Greener
Somewhere Else”. Pew Research Center
Cohort Lifecycle
Avg. American moves 11.7 times in lifetime
(6 times at age 30)
Recruitment and Retention Strategies
• No sound research here, in the process of
DISCOVERY
– Mileage reimbursements
– Profiles of newcomers in newspaper
– Community supper (best $150 ever spent)
– Nonprofit creation assistance
– Marketing Hometown America
THE Opportunity of a Lifetime
THE Opportunity of a Lifetime
THE Opportunity of a Lifetime
Redwood County
% of Owner-Occupied Homes
0-10 years 30% Age 65+
10-20 years 20% Age 55-64
20-30 years 21% Age 45-54
Renville County
% of Owner-Occupied Home
0-10 years 28% Age 65+
10-20 years 21% Age 55-64
20-30 years 23% Age 45-54
Rewrite the Narrative
• National societal preferences to live in small
towns and rural places
• Not everyone is leaving small towns
• A new urbanity is found in formerly rural
places (Mankato, Willmar)
• The trend continued in the 2000s, albeit
slowed
– Fuel prices high, mortgage crisis
– Vacant housing down
Recruitment vs Retention
• Recruitment involves people
– Regional, individualistic
– People attraction strategies
– Middle of everywhere
– Small numbers mean big things
• Retention involves places
– Social and economic integration, place-making activities
– Rural survival skills
• Traditional marketing techniques struggle with this
distinction
“On the Map” Strategies
• The region – newcomers look at 3-5 towns
• Housing is economic development
• Newcomers want to establish a personal
connection to the region
• Engage with real estate agents to track
motivations and interests of newcomers
Employment Strategies
• Less about EMPLOYERS and more about
EMPLOYMENT
• Build upon existing connections to metro
businesses that are allowing skilled
employees to telecommute
• Identify and build upon the auxiliary skills
• Integrate business transition planning
Data Sources
National Center For Charitable Statistics
• Historical number of nonprofits by type
– http://nccsweb.urban.org/tablewiz/bmf.php
• List of Nonprofit Names
– http://nccsweb.urban.org/PubApps/statePicker.p
hp?prog=geoCounties¶m=q
• Nonprofits by Zip Code
– http://www.melissadata.com/lookups/np.asp
Midwest• Independence, Iowa (housing incentives)
– http://www.absolutelyindee.com/new-resident-housing-incentive-program/
• Iowa New Movers Study
– http://www.cvcia.org/content/projects/8.migration.and.population/ind
ex.html
• Dakota Roots http://dakotaroots.com/
• Nebraska Rural Living http://www.nebraskaruralliving.com/
• Norfolk Area Recruiters http://www.norfolkarea.org/
• South Dakota Rural Enterprise http://www.sdrei.org/bringbak.htm
• Wayne Works http://www.wayneworks.org/
• South Dakota Seeds http://www.dakotaseeds.com/
• Rural By Choice (Kansas) http://www.ruralbychoice.com/
Brain Gain Landing Page
http://z.umn.edu/braingain/
Symposium Proceedings
http://z.umn.edu/ruralmigration/
Rural Issues and Trends webinars
http://z.umn.edu/ruralwebinar
