Comprehensive Planning for Sustainable Rural Development

Concern among state legislators about rural development and rural land use is not new. In many states, agriculture remains an important feature of the economic, cultural, and political landscape. As rural incomes, populations, and prosperity have declined, states have adopted a variety of policies in response. Rural land and development policies in most states, however, are often more symbolic than influential, poorly integrated, and grossly misguided (Audirac, 1997). For rural areas, very few states mandate or facilitate rural comprehensive planning, often due to opposition from rural legislators. Farmlands (cropland and grazing land) constitute the largest share of land use by acreage in the country and have an even higher share in the rural areas (USDA, 2000). Although a relatively smaller and decreasing part of the overall economy, farmland uses employ 21 percent of the nation’s workforce (including processing, wholesale and retail trade of farming goods) and about 7 percent of nation’s workforce in production (2002 numbers). Therefore, focusing planning on urban land use alone is unfortunate, because rural areas, perhaps even more than their urban counterparts, have much to gain from comprehensive planning. In today’s decentralized economy, urban and rural economies are no longer dichotomous. Metropolitan regions are growing faster in land area than in their population and put immense pressure on exurban, mostly rural land for development (Diamond et. al. 1996). At the same time, remote rural areas face population loss due to more efficient, mechanized tools of farming and continued growth in urban areas as a result of agglomeration economies. Spatial variations in regional land use patterns are becoming more continuous. However, this article uses a broader urbanrural distinction characterized by different land uses and discusses policy alternatives for states to achieve a more sustainable approach to land use. We also discuss the basic economic rationale for more focused land use policy in rural areas. The existing array of state programs that address rural land use and development is long and varied. Popular programs include tax relief (such as farm tax assessment programs), agricultural districts, right-tofarm laws, agricultural zoning, purchase and transfer of development rights, small town economic development programs, and urban growth management. In general, these programs have three primary objectives: farmland preservation, urban growth containment, and small town economic development. While each of these various programs has its technical merits, the objectives of each are also based on significant fallacies regarding conservation versus preservation, the threat of urban growth, and the most effective approaches to economic development.