Tuesday, February 27, 2007

The "Field of Dreams" Theory

According to a report on Morning Addition (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7599105) , a controversy is brewing in South Dakota over a proposed highway that would link rural towns in western South Dakota to a NAFTA expressway that will terminate in Denver. The hope is that traffic from the Heartland Expressway (http://www.heartlandexpressway.com/) will spill over and cause development throughout the southwestern portion of the state in what many people are labeling a “Field of Dreams” theory. The plan would cost an estimated $90 million and would bring a major 4-lane expressway to areas that are currently inhabited by mostly cattle and grass. While the effects that interstate expansion can have on development patterns have been largely affirmed since the first interstates opened up in the 1950’s, the sustainability of this type growth has proven to be nonexistent. Politicians seem quite adept at handing out band aids for bullet wounds, using short term, two-dimensional approaches to remedy problems whose roots spread across generations and draw from several different societal issues. It’s true that building a major highway will create a number of new jobs, and it’s also probably true that it will open up a corridor for new growth, but these benefits will probably only last for one or two generations. Hot Springs, South Dakota is facing the same problem that many small towns across the nation deal with, declining population and stagnating economies. The nature of the national economy is changing, and has been changing for well over a decade, and it is within this context that small towns should begin to formulate their solutions. We are finding that the nature of work is shifting, and location is becoming less of a consideration for many businesses, take India or China for example. These towns, it seems, should begin looking at how they can create an infrastructure that will be supportive of the future of business, instead of trying to jump on the tail end of a trade agreement.

1 comment:

Andrew Trippel said...

I agree with Nate's comments overall, but his post does make me wonder how we should consider "future business" in the context of sustainable development. I'm not sure that free market economies and sustainability share the same values set and motivations. Unfortunately, economies drive community development and not vice-versa.