An Assessment of the Impact of Rural Non-Farm Development on ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Rural</strong> <strong>Non</strong>-<strong>Farm</strong> <strong>Development</strong> on <strong>the</strong> Viability <strong>of</strong> Agriculture: Literature Review1.6 Creation <strong>of</strong> <strong>Rural</strong> <strong>Non</strong>-<strong>Farm</strong> Lots in Ontario’s CountrysideThrough <strong>the</strong> review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> literature that identifies <strong>the</strong> impact <strong>of</strong> rural non-farmdevelopment, in <strong>the</strong> previous section, it has been established that rural non-farmdevelopment tends to negatively impact <strong>the</strong> viability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> agricultural industry. <strong>An</strong>d yetrural non-farm lots continue to be established in agricultural land. This section reviewssome <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> literature that identifies why rural non-farm development is created, despiteits problematic nature.According to <strong>the</strong> literature, <strong>the</strong> most significant reason for persistent residentialdevelopment in Ontario’s countryside is <strong>the</strong> demand. Most typically <strong>the</strong> demand is for<strong>the</strong> creation <strong>of</strong> residential lots in <strong>the</strong> countryside. The demand comes from both urbanand rural dwellers.The literature has identified a number <strong>of</strong> push and pull factors that have beeninstrumental in creating a demand for rural properties over <strong>the</strong> last thirty years. Somekey push factors from large urban centres include: <strong>the</strong> economic push primarily relatedto housing costs and high tax assessments (Bryant, Russwurm and McLellan, 1982);and environmental push factors, such as pollution, congestion or pace <strong>of</strong> life (Bryant,Russwurm and McLellan 1982; Williams and S<strong>of</strong>ranko 1979). Numerous factors thatpull people to <strong>the</strong> countryside have also been identified. The most frequently mentionedpull factor is <strong>the</strong> search for rural quality <strong>of</strong> life (Polch, 1978; Williams and S<strong>of</strong>ranko,1979; Fuguitt and Zuiches, 1975). Included in quality <strong>of</strong> life are privacy and space(Bryant, Russwurm and McLellan 1982; Joseph, Smit and McIlravey 1989), freedom <strong>of</strong>activity, quality <strong>of</strong> environment for raising children (Bryant, Russwurm and McLellan- 23 -
<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Rural</strong> <strong>Non</strong>-<strong>Farm</strong> <strong>Development</strong> on <strong>the</strong> Viability <strong>of</strong> Agriculture: Literature Review1982), decentralization <strong>of</strong> cultural facilities, retirement, back-to-<strong>the</strong>-land ideology andreturn migration (Weeks 1976, Williams and S<strong>of</strong>ranko 1979).The agricultural land lost to non-farm rural residential development is a topicalissue in Ontario because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> intense demands for housing from population growthcoupled with a preference for rural living. In his book, Conflict and Crisis in <strong>Rural</strong>America, Waterfield speaks about <strong>the</strong> American preference for rural living:Most Americans come from rural roots. The suburbs, with one foot in <strong>the</strong>city, one in <strong>the</strong> country, reflect this divided loyalty. Americans have taken<strong>the</strong> country with <strong>the</strong>m to <strong>the</strong> city: <strong>the</strong> open spaces, parks, trees, music,games and sports. The ongoing struggle to save and preserve <strong>the</strong> best <strong>of</strong>rural America has led to conflict in Eden. Some serpents still lurk <strong>the</strong>re.Voltaire said, ‘Let each man cultivate his own garden.’ Americansunderstand what he meant: <strong>the</strong>y are torn between <strong>the</strong> call <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> pavementand <strong>the</strong> deep desire to cultivate that garden. <strong>Rural</strong> America lives in <strong>the</strong>hearts <strong>of</strong> millions who see little more than glass, brick and stone.(Waterfield, 1986, p.18).A very similar statement could be made about Canadians. The sheer number <strong>of</strong>Canadians who flock to <strong>the</strong> suburbs each year to obtain <strong>the</strong>ir engineered piece <strong>of</strong>rurality is a testament to this mentality. There is an appeal to living in a rural setting.This appeal, coupled with advances in technology and transportation, has produced ademand for rural non-farm properties in Ontario’s countryside.In addition to <strong>the</strong> demand for rural residential properties from non-farmers, <strong>the</strong>reis pressure from <strong>the</strong> supply side as farmers sever <strong>of</strong>f small parcels <strong>of</strong> land from <strong>the</strong>irfarms. It is appealing for farmers to create retirement lots, on <strong>the</strong>ir own farm property,so that <strong>the</strong>y can stay close to <strong>the</strong> farm and perhaps family. There is also an economicincentive for farmers as <strong>the</strong>y are able to sell <strong>the</strong> retirement lot and obtain someadditional retirement income. <strong>Farm</strong>ers also engage in rural non-farm lot development- 24 -
Page 1 and 2: Farmland Preservat
Page 3 and 4: Table Of Contents1.1 Introduction..
Page 5 and 6: List of TablesTabl
Page 7 and 8: Impact of<
Page 27: Impact of<
Page 43 and 44: Bunce, M. 1998. “Thirty Years <st
Page 45 and 46: Ontario Ministry of</strong

An Assessment of the Impact of Rural Non-Farm Development on ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?