Rural America is one of the most important parts of American industry. City folk thrives off of the work of small towns regularly throughout the day, especially in agriculture. Unfortunately, many small-town practices are unsustainable and contribute heavily to climate change.
City dwellers often forget that the majority of Americans live outside of metropolitan environments. While giant cities take a huge amount of the blame for climate change (and rightly so), the people who live in those cities tend to ignore the reality of small-town America and leave them out of conversations regarding environmental action. However, not acknowledging how smaller towns can help reverse climate change ignores the power they have in regard to sustainability initiatives.
Rural America needs to be included in this conversation. It’s important that rural communities begin to incorporate sustainable practices into their economies and that we stop looking at such conversations through only an urban lens.
Why Is Rural America Behind When It Comes to Sustainability?
What city people sometimes fail to realize is that sustainability is not convenient. In the case of small towns, it may threaten their economic stability and traditional way of life. Coal miners in small towns felt their livelihood would be threatened with a push for renewable forms of energy — and to be fair, it may have been.
But what makes this true? What makes switching to sustainable practices so inconvenient? These obstacles were listed by the ICMA way back in 2013:
Most Americans live in cities and towns, which face political, fiscal, technical, and jurisdictional challenges when they seek to protect the environment. While the likes of New York, Boston, Chicago, and Seattle have the money, expertise, and regional power base to implement large-scale sustainability programs, thousands of small cities and rural towns struggle to protect the environment.
Digging deeper into this concept, there are four specific obstacles to address as far as sustainability’s acceptance in rural areas. They are as follows:
- Fiscal resources: Many green initiatives are expensive. They could potentially uproot a small town’s economy and well-being if enacted irresponsibly.
- Smaller populations: While more Americans are living outside big cities than in them, the sizes of their communities are small. Smaller populations and fewer resources make it harder for them to enact big changes.
- Conservative ideals: There is sometimes a pushback on renewable energy from conservative communities due to the history of unrenewable forms of energy and certain political affiliations.
- Lack of community support: All of the aforementioned obstacles contribute to a lack of community support for implementing sustainable practices. Without the support of the people affected by organizational changes, sustainable progress will be impossible.
One example is farming. The agricultural industry will have to change in extreme ways to adopt sustainable practices such as land preservation. This could slow down operations and therefore affect overall profit. Without farmer innovation filling the sustainability gap, there will continue to be a lack of progress in this area. But considering the obstacles presented, farmers’ reluctance is understandable.
Rural areas face unique food access challenges, with limited stores and fresh produce often hard to reach. However, sustainable solutions like local farming cooperatives, farm-to-table programs, and community gardens are making a difference. These initiatives reduce food transportation emissions, support local economies, and increase food security. Post-harvest technology can assist with this as well, reducing loss of produce due to damage and increasing efficiency in both handling and storage.
Additionally, promoting SNAP benefits at farmers’ markets and investing in solar-powered refrigeration for remote food storage can create more resilient, eco-friendly food access systems that serve rural communities sustainably.
Solutions to Help Bring Sustainability to the Forefront
How can sustainability be made a primary issue in rural American towns? There are two main ways to do this: making the people in these towns aware of the benefits and proper funding. How can these be accomplished, though?
Embracing sustainability can involve new ways of doing business. For example, in order to facilitate community progress towards sustainability, co-ops may be an efficient way of meeting the needs of all stakeholders involved — the environment included.
Further expanding on the economic benefit of going green, there are publicly available services of which people can take advantage. There are several qualified green projects that may reduce the amount of taxes homeowners owe. They vary from state to state, but some of the basic principles include:
- Solar energy sales and installations
- Wind energy sales and installations
- Hydropower
- Utilization of clean coal
- Electricity via solid waste
- Geothermal electricity production
- Conversion of fuel into fuel cells with plant components
Other options include local organizations and social workers who increase access to food by connecting families with food assistance programs.
Unfortunately, such resources aren’t covered too heavily by the media, and people may not know they’re an option. Spreading the word about such benefits in rural towns might incite people to take advantage of them.
It only takes one person to start this movement. One company taking the step to switch to digital records or using LED lighting within their office spaces can snowball into other green initiatives taken by people as a whole. If places incrementally start using renewable resources, then it can eventually lead to a culture shift to things like sustainable agriculture and investing in alternative fuels.
Places Where Sustainability Has Come to Fruition
In the aforementioned ICMA study, there were a number of places that were noted for bringing sustainable business practices to fruition. Small towns in Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Iowa were commended for purchasing electric vehicles. South Daytona, Florida was noted for its work in water conservation. Homer, Alaska drafted a climate change plan that would reduce emissions.
These towns are all fairly small but, despite the stereotypes, have worked to change things for their communities. What has brought this sustainable mindset to these smaller towns?
The study notes that government implementations were important. In the case of Homer, it was the mayor who first realized that their location made the effects of climate change much worse. He sought ways to improve the situation. Since small towns tend to depend on civilian leadership, they may not latch onto sustainable practices without incentive. The government has the power to do that.
It is still important to recognize that steps, rather than jumps, will be necessary for the purpose of enlisting sustainable practices. You do not want to disrupt a town’s way of life and destroy them economically. People have to eat and make money. However, time is running out for our planet, and the effects of climate change are tremendous. Without moving toward sustainable practices, we will face the consequences.
The potential for small towns to make a big impact on climate change isn’t being utilized enough. If we are able to get the help of public officials, attract some financial aid, and debunk the misconceptions that halt progress in these towns, then rural America would be able to play a crucial part in this environmental revolution.
