How technology is shaping rural economic development — conversations, reports, and case studies

The first case study delves into the challenges and obstacles that rural communities face when applying for federal funding programs to support tech-based economic development. In Ada, a city of around 17,2000 located on Chickasaw land in southeastern Oklahoma, local leaders relied on close partnerships and brought in outside expertise as they managed  limited local staff capacity, secured a community match, grappled with complex funding processes, and navigated relationships in a small community.  Read the case study.

Portsmouth, a city of over 18,250 in Scioto County, Ohio, offers insight into how rural communities can harness a varied array of funding sources to facilitate the staffing, programming, and physical space needed to foster a digital economy ecosystem. Ecosystem leaders gained financial support from private donations, grants from foundations, the federal government, and regional agencies, as well as ongoing community sponsorship. And they did so by creating a clear vision of their work, building deep relationships with funders, and taking advantage of capacity-building opportunities. Read the case study.

In the southwestern Wisconsin city of Platteville, population roughly 12,000, partners across sectors and disciplines came together in an effort to establish thriving tech-based economic development and a cohesive digital economy ecosystem. From higher education, to regional economic development, to business, the central leaders in Platteville’s endeavors all served a unique and purposeful role in fostering tech entrepreneurship and bridging the “town-gown divide.”  Read the case study. 

The case of Red Wing, Minnesota, exemplifies how a rural community can take a regional approach to tech-based economic development. Red Wing is one of several rural places across southeastern Minnesota that is interconnected by the Entrepreneurs First (E1) Collaborative, which helps connect aspiring entrepreneurs to resources and services that are dispersed throughout the region. Operating on a level that goes beyond town lines has helped to break down silos between organizations, facilitate knowledge sharing, build a broad network of entrepreneurs and supports, and create more tech-centric work opportunities. Read the case study.

The fifth case study offers a comparison between two places that are at different stages of their tech-based economic development: Ruston, Louisiana, and Newport, Arkansas. As a city of 22,100 in northern Louisiana, Ruston is home to Louisiana Tech University, while Newport is a small city of 8,000 in northeast Arkansas that is to Arkansas State University-Newport, a local community college. Ruston began receiving grants to support tech-based economic development in the early 2000s, while Newport started its efforts in 2020. In both places, the higher education institutions offer three central types of resources for the digital economy: partnership, physical infrastructure, and a talent pipeline. Read the case study.

The first brief explores the subject of how technology is changing the future of work. From automating routine tasks, to causing a shift from a job-based mindset to a skills-based mindset, to favoring workers with specialized skills, to creating new digitized tasks, automation and artificial intelligence-enabled technologies are altering the ways in which work is conducted around the country. The report offers insight into the implications of this new future of work for rural places. Read the report.

This brief offers insight into data and economic trends related to what we have learned about remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic. The history of remote work traces back to the early 1970s, and this brief delves into the phases of remote work, as well as providing insight into the ways that race, education level, and age factor into a rural workers’ ability to pursue remote work. It concludes with a series of recommendations for rural leaders to consider when creating economic and workforce development strategies and programs. Read the report.

The gig economy — which refers to work arrangements like independent contracting, freelance, and self-employment that are not considered to be wage or salary employment — is increasingly comprising a growing portion of the broader American economy. With a specific lens toward rural places, this brief addresses the reasons why the gig economy is expanding, the costs and benefits that it poses for both workers and firms, and why the gig economy presents an opportunity to rural economies. It concludes with six recommendations for how rural leaders can leverage the gig economy to their advantage of rural people. Read the report.

The fourth brief tackles the topic of automation — a subject that is often negatively  portrayed as a major threat to rural America. But automation also presents an array of opportunities for rural places, and this report assesses how automation has impacted, is impacting, and will continue to impact rural America, including its different effects upon occupations, industries, and regions, as well as workers of varying education levels, races, and genders. This report provides four recommendations for rural leaders to consider in future economic and workforce strategy development. Read the report.

The fifth and final brief offers an economic and spatial analysis of where innovation is occurring across the U.S. While the innovation economy has been disproportionately dominated by major metropolitan areas, technology is shifting the economic dynamics that lead to innovation, and broadening the potential for digital economy innovation in rural places. This brief provides insight into the urban-rural gap in innovation, the economic dynamics that led to this inequity, and how technology is altering these dynamics. It concludes with four recommendations for rural economic development policymakers and practitioners. Read the report.