This
is a repost of a article by this author originally posted elsewhere
in May of 2009
The
Senate report on Rural Poverty is much
more than
that and has sparked so many thoughts about the difficulties that
rural areas face that I will be talking about this report for some
time. I urge all of you, both rural and urban, to read
it if for
no other reason than to understand the diversity within that
designation.
One
observation within that report said :-
“Sending
a clear signal to rural dwellers in all provinces means finally
recognizing the
obvious fact that rurality does not just mean agriculture and that it
deserves its own place in the
government's decision-making process …………..”
This brings me to the
question as to what exactly do we mean by “rural”, a
definition that even the Senators had difficulty with. They, for the
sake of simplicity, split it into near urban, far from urban, and
remote. It is of course much more complex than that, I think that we
in Grey Bruce, as a “rural” area need to understand and
accommodate these subtle differences that make up our population. It
is the melting pot, assimilation or multiculturalism debate on a
different level!
Here in Grey Bruce we
do not have any “remote” areas (although I suspect there
are those in some areas of the peninsular that may have doubts about
that.) and so I will try and describe some of the possible types of
“ruralitys” in our area and what may be their focus. Let
us see if we can find a common goal or two where we can all pull
together for the betterment of all. For the purposes of clarity I
will refer to those outside of any community (i.e rural route mail)
as “RR rural”, those in small communities with minimal
services as “near rural”, those within small to medium
communities with most services available as “small urban”
and larger communities will full services as “urban”. You
will see right away that just trying to decide the differences in
these areas and referring to them highlights the difficulties in
simply referring to our whole area as “rural”!
Lets first look at
“agriculture” and other “RR rural”
businesses, their size, needs and sustainability vary greatly. From
the Corporate owned or controlled large farm or intensive livestock
operations to the small family owned and operated mixed farming or
market garden operation, to the service and supply businesses large
and small that primarily rely upon “RR rural” and
agricultural customers, they each have different impacts upon their
surrounding community. Do they employ local residents, do they buy
their goods and services locally, do the practice sustainability in
both their financial and ecological activities?
Next comes the “other”
rural residents, they too are a mix. From the retired farmer or
longtime rural resident to the urban retiree or commuter, from those
that have found work in the local community to those who need or want
to spend their days in larger urban centers, from the cottage crowd
to the conservationist, each has their own take on what is “rural”
and what needs to be done to sustain the area.! A similar mix will of
course exist within the “near rural” villages and indeed
the “small urban” villages, but I would suggest that as
the available services increase, the definition of rural to them will
change, as will their needs and wants. Is water and sewer available,
are jobs & groceries available within walking distance, do they
need more than one vehicle (or any vehicle), do they own a property
they must upkeep or do they rent. Here we start to see more small
business, corner stores, craft shops and so on. Some may even want it
to become more “urbanized” You can see the dynamics are
changing.
Finally we move to the
“near urban” and “urban” (yes, “near
urban” is included again for the difference is not clear cut.)
where both the mix of residents and their needs and wants can be
considerably different from that of their neighbors just a few miles
down the road, and yet we all say that we are living in the “rural”
area called Grey Bruce. You perhaps now see my difficulty in coming
to grips with the term “rural”.
So my questions to each
of you is this :- What does “rural” mean to you? Do you
consider yourself a “rural resident”? What are the things
that bind us, and the things that give us difficulty. What common
goals across the entire area can we focus on to improve out
“sustainability” without changing the “rurality”
of our area. Do we need, or want to, protect the small villages and
RR rural areas from development or disappearance?
I sign myself “Rural”
so you can guess where I stand!
EDIT – Further
information added in 2011...
Statistics
Canada has introduced some new nomenclature to the world of Canadian
population data.
From
now on small towns and villages as small as 1,000 will no longer be
grouped together with places like Ottawa or Toronto and be classified
only as “urban areas”.
Places
with more than a 1000 people and a density of more than 400 people
per sq. kilometre will now be identified collectively as “population
centres” these will be sub-divided into three groups as:
Øsmall
population centres being those between 1,000 and 30,000 people;
Ømedium
population centres being those between 30,000 and 100,000 people;
and,
Ølarge
population centres being anything over 100,000.
“Rural
areas” in the Statistics Canada meaning remains all territory
not meeting the two tests of greater than 1,000 people and with a
density of at least 400 people per sq. kilometre.
Further
explanation can be found at
Statscan
Rural
Ontario Institute says 'This
move is welcome and should help with better interpretation of
statistics the agency provides. (This won’t really help
in any way with the misguided government shift to do away with
the mandatory long form census that occurred this past summer,
despite widespread appeals to rethink the matter. That is still
going to be a problem for people seeking to understand rural
realities.)
We
certainly regard rural Ontario as more than just the territory being
farmed or sparsely populated northern geography – small
population centres are certainly part of what we see as rural. When
we look around rural Ontario we view a rich fabric of small towns and
communities interwoven with the countryside and surrounding forests,
we see the interdependence of our social, economic and environmental
systems and the many mutually beneficial relationships between
country and city. We understand the need for categories but
have the perspective that people don’t divide their lives so
neatly and many rural folk, the goods we produce and use, as well as
the energy, air and water we rely on cross back and forth across
those boundaries every day.
No comments:
Post a Comment