Is 'Smart Rural' Just Urban Gentrification in Disguise?

The phrase 'smart rural' has been making its way around the global development sector for some time now. It is often used to describe a new wave of strategies aimed at modernizing rural areas through the introduction of digital technology, infrastructure development, and innovative agricultural practices. However, some critics argue that the 'smart rural' trend is nothing more than urban gentrification in disguise. This blog post seeks to explore this argument.

What is 'Smart Rural'?

Before we delve into the controversy, it is worth defining what we mean by 'smart rural'. Fundamentally, being 'smart' in this context refers to the use of modern technologies and innovative practices to enhance the quality of life and improve economic outcomes in rural areas. These technologies and practices can range from digital farming tools and renewable energy systems to efficient transport networks and e-commerce platforms.

'Smart rural' strategies are typically driven by both public and private sector actors with the aim of making rural areas more sustainable, productive, and attractive places to live and work. Proponents of the 'smart rural' movement argue that these strategies can help to reverse the trend of rural depopulation and economic decline by providing new opportunities for growth and development.

The Link Between 'Smart Rural' and Urban Gentrification

To understand the criticism of 'smart rural' as a form of urban gentrification, we first need to understand what gentrification means. In its original context, gentrification refers to the process by which lower-income, often marginalized communities in urban areas are displaced by wealthier residents and businesses. This displacement is usually accompanied by the renovation of deteriorating urban infrastructure and the introduction of higher-end amenities and services.

Critics argue that 'smart rural' strategies can inadvertently lead to a similar process of displacement and inequality in rural areas. They suggest that the introduction of modern infrastructure and digital technologies can make rural areas more attractive to wealthier urbanites, who may then choose to move to these locations, driving up property prices and changing the character of the local community.

In addition, critics warn that 'smart rural' strategies can exacerbate existing social and economic inequalities by privileging those who have the resources to take advantage of new opportunities, while leaving behind those who do not.

Case Studies: 'Smart Rural' or Urban Gentrification?

Let's take a closer look at some real-life examples to better understand this debate.

Case Study 1: Rural Broadband in the UK

In recent years, the UK government has made significant investments in rural broadband infrastructure with the aim of bridging the 'digital divide' between urban and rural areas. However, some critics argue that this has led to a form of digital gentrification.

In many rural areas, the arrival of high-speed internet has attracted a new wave of residents from urban areas, who are able to work remotely thanks to the improved connectivity. This has led to a rise in property prices and rental costs, making it increasingly difficult for long-term rural residents to afford to live in their own communities.

Case Study 2: Eco-Villages in Spain

In Spain, the 'smart rural' trend has taken the form of eco-villages - rural communities that seek to live in a sustainable way through the use of renewable energy, organic farming, and other green practices. These eco-villages have become particularly popular among wealthier urbanites seeking a more 'authentic' and sustainable lifestyle.

However, the influx of wealthier residents has also led to rising property prices and a shift in the character of local communities, leading some to argue that this is a form of rural gentrification.

How to Avoid Rural Gentrification

While it's clear that 'smart rural' strategies have the potential to lead to rural gentrification, this does not mean that they are inherently problematic. There are several steps that policymakers and practitioners can take to ensure that 'smart rural' development is inclusive and beneficial for all members of rural communities.

• Community Involvement: Ensuring that rural residents are actively involved in the planning and implementation of 'smart rural' strategies can help to ensure that these strategies meet the needs and aspirations of the local community.

• Affordable Housing: Implementing measures to protect and promote affordable housing can help to prevent displacement and ensure that all members of the community can benefit from new development.

• Local Economic Development: Focusing on local economic development can help to ensure that the benefits of 'smart rural' strategies are distributed more evenly. This could involve supporting local businesses and entrepreneurs, or investing in skills training and education for rural residents.

• Social Services: Providing accessible and affordable social services, such as healthcare and education, can help to ensure that all members of the community can benefit from 'smart rural' development.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while there are valid concerns about the potential for 'smart rural' strategies to lead to rural gentrification, this does not mean that these strategies are inherently flawed. With careful planning and a commitment to social equity, it is possible to use 'smart rural' strategies to create more sustainable, productive, and inclusive rural communities. However, it is essential that these strategies are designed and implemented in a way that respects and responds to the needs and aspirations of rural residents.