Thinking Out Loud on Rural Innovation

(Intending to be a little provocative here, and inviting your commentary/comment posts and references too!)

A recent report by Michael Kane Associates for the Two Rivers Ottauquechee Regional Commission and East Central Vermont Economic Development Council cites "appropriately innovative" as one of seven characteristics of the region's creative economy. They write,

Innovation remains a key driver of rural economies, but not the popular notion of innovation driven by universities and research and development and measured by patents. The Region embodies a creative type of user innovation that is driven by changing interests, needs, and markets, by the increasing importance of participation and experience, and by social media and the affordability of desktop technologies like 3-D printers.

A couple of responses:

• We need rural innovation to be fused with research and development driven by university partnerships, measured by patents sure - but also health and well-being, access and affordability, cultural output and contribution, entrepreneurship and venture formation among others.

• The characterization of user-centered innovation driven by "changing interests, needs and markets" is not a point of differentiation for Vermont. This is the story of our global moment, from Nairobi to Newfane. For better or for worse the same observation can be made for New Hampshire, Northwestern Massachusetts and rural areas where new tools are engendering new ways of doing things.

• Participation and experience is a throw away indicator. Its important to differentiate adaptation from innovation. Rural economies are kept afloat on a hardening platform of wealthy landowners (including second home owners), established rural businesses, peri-farm incomes (second household incomes from teaching, sales, etc) and debt. Pointing to the survival tactics of indigenous creativity misses the point that too many small and medium-sized establishments are falling behind; those that bring existing jobs and market networks to rural areas fare better.

I believe that there are three key ingredients to growing Vermont's creative industries:

• Risk-tolerant "production"capital, the financing that goes into risky projects - whether a film, a game, or any other original work that requires up-front financing while assuming uncertain performance in the marketplace.

• Affordable production facilities, whether for painters or 3D capture artists, a concrete pad and a water-tight roof with turn-key utilities are essential prerequisites for getting work done.

• Supports for market access, in the same way that the State provides support to food and agriculture establishments to get their work into shows like the Big E, creatives need support to get their work to out of state markets like Pax East, Game Developers Conference, and film festivals.

Ten years ago the Council on Rural Development also authored a report geared to shift economic development planning to embrace the reality and the potential of Vermont's creative economy. No less effusive than the Kane report, the Council concluded:

Our cultural expressions and heritage are central to the fabric of each and every Vermont community. They [also] act as a powerful economic engine that inspires innovation, creates jobs, and produces revenue throughout the state.

At the time, the report observed that the creative economy employed 14,000 Vermonters – 4.5% of the state’s workforce. Today that number has grown to 9 percent, a doubling in a single decade. The Kane report suggests that fully 25 percent of these creatives thrive in the East Central Vermont Economic Development District alone.

What has not changed are the tools - policies and resources - available to creatives to experiment, fail, adapt, and succeed. To innovate.

At some point we'll need to get past the episodic spilling of ink and get down to the business of retooling our economic development culture, analytic frameworks and toolkit. This will require a fundamental public reorientation toward risk. In an old Yankee culture this will be tough. Perhaps this is where the silver lining to the ECVED report lies: the alteration of indigenous cultural DNA through in-migration and the adaptation pressures of new tools like Kickstarter (Milkmoney! Designbook!), Facebook (Ello!), MassChallenge (LaunchVT!), and TED (Woodstock Digital Media Festival!).

These will be exciting times for Rural Innovation. What are the drivers that you think can shape the opportunity and success?