One without the other? A Closer look at Rural-Urban Interdependency
Question: Does urban Canada “need” rural Canada today or are we able to function well without strong linkages?
In my opinion, Yes. Although I have not much context nor background information of Canada’s Rural-Urban relationship, I feel that there is an intrinsic connection between the two regions which ensures their mutual survival. Firstly, I want to start off with a personal experience which highlights the significance of the rural. Next, I will further postulate that rural-urban linkage is a necessity for the development for both areas with the aid from the concept of Urban-rural interdependence. Lastly, I will present two arguments (one for rural-to-urban dependence and another for urban-to-rural dependence) which presents this strong linkage between the two regions within the Canadian context.
Coming from Singapore, a developed nation-state with 100% of the metropolitan population, her economy thrives entirely on service and tertiary sector. Due to the geographical area and location, Singapore faces the absence of natural resources, extremely limited area for land use heavy economic activities such as farming (0% in agriculture). What does this mean? Singapore has almost no spaces that are considered to be rural. Therefore, Singapore is highly reliant on her imports of foodstuffs and consumer goods.
Public housing in Singapore
I vividly recall the spread of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza (bird flu) in Asia during in 2005 which highlights this dependency on foreign imports. Singapore faced widespread food shortages (especially for avian products) during this period. Luckily for us, as the virus begin to lose its foothold, imports resume which solved the food shortage crisis. Therefore, I feel that urban regions’ development and lifestyle can be sustained without a stable supply of necessities. Where does this come from? You guessed it, the rural regions.
Photo source
Now I would like to introduce the concept of Rural-Urban Interdependence.
“Urban-rural interdependence includes spatial links to the movement of people, goods, money, and information between urban and rural areas including roads and railways, and sectorial links (interdependence between agriculture, industry and services). Rural-urban interdependence is important for poverty alleviation, sustainable rural development and urbanization. Strong linkages can improve the living conditions and employment opportunities of both rural and urban populations. Domestic trade and the adequacy and efficiency of infrastructure are the backbone of mutually beneficial rural-urban relationships and of the success of the relationship between urban and rural areas (Bekker, 2000).”
In a way, I feel that this concept draws heavily from the Core-Periphery Model (1963) by John Friedmann. While one of the main purposes of the model is to explain the spatial distribution of processes highlighting uneven development, the processes within the model can be put into context to explain the significance of rural-urban linkage. Processes within the rural-urban linkage are bilateral which explains the interference.
Core-Periphery Model
Rural Canada is important to urban Canada because of the continued supply of resources from the rural to the urban. Resources fulfil the urban consumption needs which facilitate the continued urban growth. Canada is one of the biggest exporters of agriculture product. Having a strong agriculture sector ensures the food security of urban Canada as well as meeting the global demands for agriculture goods. With the help of the extensive transportation networks, the movement of people and goods is hastened which further strengthen the linkage between rural and urban areas.
In turn, the urban regions benefit the rural regions by improving the aforementioned physical infrastructure and providing various benefits. For example, the Rural Economic Development Fund (RED) finances regional economic development activities in rural southern Ontario communities. The program currently emphases on providing the rural with additional resources to implement projects that increase regional economic opportunities. With the development of urban areas from the support of the rural, the rural regions receive a reciprocated benefit.
Therefore, I feel that it is naïve to assume that urban and rural are mutually exclusive and independent from one another. I argue that these two regions are in fact completely intertwined. However, I urge everyone to not view these two regions as separate spaces. The old orthodoxy of a dichotomous approach to urban development (vice versa) as distinct from rural development no longer accords with reality, considering the complementary functions and flows of people, capital, goods and services between the two areas. Rural and urban areas are economically, socially and environmentally interdependent.
Of course, much of my discussion post has been one-sided taking the position that the rural-urban linkage is a necessary condition for the development of both regions. However, I welcome a different perspective on why urban Canada just might survive without rural Canada in the comments below. Cheers.
