Rural Maine, according to our State Planning Office, is represented by 30 of the state’s 36 “extended communities.” Eighty percent of our 493 municipalities are located in these 30 identified rural areas. With all but a few exceptions, these communities face increasingly difficult, complex issues: a rapidly evolving – and some times unpredictable – new economy, changing rural demographics and problematic growth patterns, as well as environmental and natural resource stewardship concerns. It is of paramount importance, therefore, that the incoming Gov. John Baldacci’s administration gives special policy attention to “rural development.” A state of Maine rural policy in its own right, indeed, is long over due.

This cannot be a policy of myopic short-term fixes and catering to special interests. We need a comprehensive policy initiative that is driven by the vision of a rural Maine where both “quality of life” and “quality jobs” can be achieved in all rural regions of our great state – from the barrens and shores of Down East, to the mountains and woods of western Maine and the potato fields of northern Aroostook; where rural citizens earn livable wages from employment in successful local businesses; where both human and natural assets are appropriately used to create wealth that can be retained locally; where every citizen has access to life’s essentials: affordable housing, health care, child care, transportation, education and job training; where community agriculture, small businesses and corporate enterprises work in concert to drive community development.

During the last decade, we have learned important lessons – in Maine and from other parts of the nation – about what works well, and produces results, in rural development. These lessons point to important principles, that can help guide the formulation of a state of Maine rural policy initiative. These include, for example:

. The importance of place-based policies within a regional framework cannot be overlooked. Shift the policy focus from sectors (e.g., agriculture, forestry and fishery) to regions; emphasize “community” and “place.” Sectoral needs can be more effectively responded to in the context of place. Similarly, existing economic development resources and social services, as well as education and job training programs, can be strategically coordinated and targeted for greater effectiveness. The regional Children’s Cabinet of the King administration offers a model that can be emulated for rural development.

. Strengthen civic capacity in small rural places. We cannot underestimate the importance of local institutions, local strategic thinking, and local leadership to the building of vibrant rural communities. New programs and policies can be promulgated in Augusta, but they must be implemented and sustained in the state’s rural communities. Skilled civic engagement is an essential precondition to making any policy work effectively on the local level – be it for growth management, healthy communities or rural entrepreneurial development.

. Promote asset-based approaches to rural community development. Capitalize on such Maine assets as community agriculture and local entrepreneurial potentials as drivers of rural development.

. Close the digital divide. Make telecommunications and information technology affordable and accessible to the rural underserved. This is the dual issue of infrastructure and application: build it first, make it affordable, and then provide training and technical assistance to the rural user – for example, the home based business owner.

. Ensure strategic coordination of state policies and programs affecting rural areas. There are myriad state programs providing services and resources to rural communities. But there is no integrated, coherent rural focus in the state public policy process. What is needed is not more government, but a new way of “governing” to compel the state to seek new, effective ways of doing the business of rural development. What would be the best way for the Baldacci administration to launch such a policy initiative? For starters, let me suggest four action steps the new administration can take – almost immediately. None requires enormous resources, but all need a show of political will and leadership.

. Convene a Blaine House Rural Policy Conference as soon as possible – inclusive of all voices – to help develop consensus on long-term policy goals for rural Maine and formulate a multi-year strategy for their implementation.

. Establish inter-agency strategic rural investment action teams of key staffers from departments with rural program responsibilities – from DECD to Agriculture and Marine Resources; from Human Services to Education and Labor; from Conservation to Environmental Protection and the State Planning Office. Assign these teams to distressed rural areas of the state to help ensure coordinated, strategic targeting of existing resources in ways that are responsive and accountable to the voices of local places.

. Seed a program of regional laboratories for innovation in rural development, and then leverage private sector and foundation funding for its long term support. Use the lessons garnered from the efforts of these regional laboratories efforts to further inform and shape state rural policies.

. Effectively employ the Maine Rural Development Council as a fulcrum for rural policy coordination. The Maine council has been around since 1991 as a part of the National Rural Development Partnership. The latter was established for the explicit purpose of building the capacity of the states and rural communities to engage in strategic rural development efforts on the local level by facilitating collaboration among federal, state, local, tribal governments and the private sectors. We are already in place in Maine; use us to serve the needs of rural Maine.

Robert Ho is the executive director of the Maine Rural Development Council. For information on the work of the Maine Council, visit http://mrdc.umext.maine.edu/.