Recipient Organization
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
2621 MORGAN CIR
KNOXVILLE,TN 37996-4540
Performing Department
Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications
Non Technical Summary
Community resiliency is dependent on effective communications systems that are resilient in the face of mitigating factors such as storms and natural disasters. Short and long range wireless communications technology (commonly known as wifi) supported by remote power sourcing (solar cell and long-term batteries) have been demonstrated to be effective methods of creating resilient local communications networks. These systems use off-the-shelf wireless technology and hardware to create a portable "network in a box" to allow sharing of files and messaging in a local setting in the absence of an external communications network. This is particularly important in post-disaster communications where relianceon an external communications network has been shown to be limited. Despite the existence of these systems onan ad-hoc basis (mostly amateur network creators) these systems have not been empirically tested in a rural or agricultural science setting. This project will test the ability of these micro-communications systems in establishing short-term communications in the absence of an external source.Currently, smart farming utilizes connected devices through the Internet of Things (IOT) to advance farm monitoring techniques by utilizing connected devices, cloud based servers, 3rdparty hosted applications, and internet or cellular networks.This brings with it some challenges for developing smart farming on a large scale basis:Cost:data, connections, and 3rdparty hosting all come at an expense to the producer/farm.Connectivity:Currently smart farming devices and applications are based on a cellular or internet connection feeding data into a cloud based server. This means, for current smart farming success, you require some form of internet connection.Privacy:Due to the reliance on a 3rdparty cloud based platform this also means the farm/producer has to share its data with a 3rdparty. As we have seen with personal data hosting this has issues around how this data is stored, shared, and monetized.What if there was a way to develop smart farming that would eliminate all of these concerns? A way that any farm regardless of location and connectivity could develop smart farming at minimal cost.This project will also utilize wirless technology, similar that being deployed in a community resilience setting, to test the ability of this technology to hostsmart farming hardware and sensors internally without the need to send data externally or be hosted by a 3rdparty. This would eliminate the barriers of cost, connectivity, and data privacy that exist with smart farming through cellular networks.After beingestablished and tested further research will promote local entrepreneurship through the development ofsmart hardware and automated devices/applications that function on this local network (engineering hardware and applications that connect to a local server and do not route data through a 3rdparty).This project will provide empirical evidence for the deployment of this technology to support community resiliency as well as impacting the way we view and apply smart farming techniques, specifically in areas where cost and connectivity are roadblocks. It will provide a means for communities to mitigate the effects of natural disasters and open up smart farming to any locationregardless of existing internet or cellular infrastructure.
Animal Health Component
50%
Research Effort Categories
Basic
25%
Applied
50%
Developmental
25%
Goals / Objectives
Enhancing rural economic opportunities and entrepreneurship. This is an exceptionally broad, multi-faceted objective which encompasses both the need for advancing the theoretical structure of community economic development and the need for empirical, focused, policy relevant research. Some of the areas which NE1049 researchers have pursued and will expand in the new project are discussed in the comments section. a. The Theory of “Community capitals” (Flora and Flora 1993, 2008). These seven community capitals include built, financial, political, social, human, cultural and natural capitals (Flora and Gillespie 2009). NE1049 researchers have done substantial research on social capital over the past five years (e.g. Goetz and Rupasinga, 2006; Halstead and Deller, 2015). Research in the capitals overlaps with many sub-topics in both this and the second proposal objective, and helps in the pursuit of a broad paradigm for economic development.
b. Issues of wealth/income distribution and rural economic development. Country-level studies have largely found that income inequality and economic growth are inversely related (e.g. Person and Tabellini, 1994; Alesina and Rodrik, 1994; Banerjee and Duflo, 2000). Income and wealth distribution is also an issue in rural areas. Bishaw and Posey (2016) noted that rural Americans have lower median household incomes than urban households, but rural areas have lower poverty rates than their urban counterparts.
c. Non-agricultural development opportunities. A particular area of research for NE1049 has been the economics of local agriculture. However, many rural communities have tried to expand into tourism and recreation with mixed success; in any case, employment opportunities generated in some of these sectors tend to be relatively low-income. Diversification of local economies (e.g. export base and local agriculture; business attraction and retention) through both expanding the small business sector (Eschker, Gold and Lane, 2017) and fostering retention and expansion of existing businesses (Halstead and Deller, 1997) are key development objectives which clearly affect resiliency in the face of natural and human caused shocks to the system. How entrepreneurs behave socially, exchange information, and procure resources and establish reciprocity, are key areas of research (Markeson and Deller 2015).
d. Infrastructure needs, development, and deficiencies. Infrastructure is a broad concept, including both Economic Overhead Capital (which includes roads, bridges, powerlines, etc.) and Social Overhead Capital (health, education, etc.) (Hansen, 1965). Built infrastructure has been researched by team members since the 1980s (e.g. Johnson et al. 1988). Such investments have the potential to affect virtually all the subtopics in both proposed objectives. Specific topics under scrutiny by NE1049 researchers include impacts of broad band internet availability/deficiency on economic development and availability and affordability of child care as a deterrent to availability of affordable labor, and its effects on rural quality of life.
e. Chronic and progressive labor availability problems, related to the issues raised in the third REE goal listed above. If labor becomes more expensive, more automation may result (Devaraj et al. 2017). This can cause economic distortion, and affect labor participation rates, economic goal setting, and other key features at the community level
f. The impact of entrepreneurship on rural areas. There is evidence from previous research that entrepreneurs can contribute to growth in rural areas (e.g. Sepehns et al. 2013; Rupasingha and Goetz, 2013) and understanding what types of policies can contribute to this growth will be critical to deal with the restructuring of rural areas.
2. Evaluating Factors and Policies Affecting the Resiliency of Rural Communities. Many of the natural and human induced “shocks” which impact rural communities are external i.e. communities have little or no control over whether the shock occurs. Examples include major storms (Hurricane Harvey, Superstorm Sandy), restructuring of the tax code or health care system, or State and Federal changes in energy, land, and water use policy. However, there are proactive and reactive mechanisms communities can adopt to minimize negative effects and enhance positive effects of these shocks, and to mitigate effects which do happen. The degree to which a community can bounce back from these changes is a measure of resiliency. Proposed and ongoing research areas under this objective are discussed in the comments section. 1. objective are:
a. Impacts of federal infrastructure investment plans. Funding mechanisms for proposed infrastructure upgrades and expansion are not yet determined and may be quite different from historical funding efforts and effects on tax bases (Deller, Amiel, Stallmann, and Maher, 2013a; Janeski and Whitacre, 2014).
b. Changes in health care availability due to changes in the Affordable Care Act and possible new health care legislation. Many rural counties currently have few or no health care providers, and often suffer from substance abuse issues (Henning-Smith and Kozhimannil, 2016; Skidmore et al. 2014). The disproportionate representation of veterans in rural areas presents both problems and opportunities; veterans may require health care and counseling services difficult to find in rural areas.
c. Why are some areas lagging in recovering from the recession (Stephens, H., Partridge, and Faggian, 2013; Stephens and Partridge, 2011)? What did we learn from the recession? What policies aided resilience and recovery (Deller and Watson, 2016)? There is movement away from extractive industries to retirement/tourism based economies in rural areas, a trend partially offset with opposite effects in, for example, fracking areas; how will this effect community resilience in the face of future shocks? What contexts increase the likelihood a rural community will benefit from retirement-, tourism-, or recreation-based economies as they consider moving away from extractive industries (Hill et al. 2014; Lim, 2016)?
d. The impact of changes in federal policies affect land and water use in rural areas (Chen and Weber, 2012). For example, transfer of ownership of federal lands from federal to state government has been proposed, which might affect income, employment, and taxation at the local/state level. Other issues include changes in public land policy and forest resource management.
e. Understanding the Impacts of changes in the retirement system. For example, the current generation of retirees is the first to experience a shift from traditional pension plans to personal retirement accounts, with implications for intergenerational wealth transfer.
f. Understanding the impact of policies regarding climate change and efforts to support alternative forms of energy on rural areas. What impacts does the renewable energy sector have on rural jobs, income, and household and community well-being? Are some locations better equipped with transport infrastructure, land and forest resources, and human and social capital to support the expansion of this emerging sector? What is the effect of clean energy development on rural counties? Increased focus on sources of renewable energy has raised questions of aesthetic damages, issues of regional vs. local energy, and storage capacity for solar generation. How can rural areas participate?
g. Understanding the impact of policies geared at reinvigorating or encouraging fossil fuels on rural areas. How do rural residents value this development which brings jobs but also can damage natural resources and affect long-term amenity-led growth?
h. Considering the interplay between traditional sources of energy and renewables. How do higher oil prices factor in? How do the interaction between weather and output in solar power link into/with “traditional” energy suppliers? For example, much of the coal fired power of eastern Montana which went to Seattle has been supplanted by other sources. What are the local/regional effects of renewable energy pipelines, powerlines, and other energy infrastructure requirements (Coon et al. 2015; Fortenbery, Deller, and Amiel, 2013)?
Project Methods
Community resiliency is dependent on effective communications systems that are resilient in the face of mitigating factors such as storms and natural disasters. Short and long range wireless communications technology (commonly known as wifi) supported by remote power sourcing (solar cell and long-term batteries) have been demonstrated to be effective methods of creating resilient local communications networks. These systems use off-the-shelf wireless technology and hardware to create a portable "network in a box" to allow sharing of files and messaging in a local setting in the absence of an external communications network. This is particularly important in post-disaster communications where relianceon an external communications network has been shown to be limited. Despite the existence of these systems onan ad-hoc basis (mostly amateur network creators) these systems have not been empirically tested in a rural or agricultural science setting. This project will test the ability of these micro-communications systems in establishing short-term communications in the absence of an external source. Field test sites will be established in the absence of external cellular or data connections (dead zones). Short and long range Transportable ResilientNetwork Kits (TRNKs) will be constructed and deployed in these test locatons. Researchers will test the ability of these kits to handle local communications and file transfers, recording their effectiveness at accomplishing these tasks and noting their deployment capabilities. This data will be used to inform policy makers about the effectiveness of these systems in post disaster resilient communications deployment.Furthermore this hardware also has the ability to host local devices and applications. Smart farming technology is increasingly reliant on access to cellular networks. Yet cost, connectivity, and privacy are all barriers to this method of smart farming application. Local wifi networks, with locally hosted servers, give producers the ability to deploy remote sensors and device automation in the absence of cellular connections. Similarly to community communications resiliency testing, researchers will test the ability of TRNKs and Static Local Wireless Networks (SLWNs) to host locally controlled sensors and automated devices. Once this ability has been established and recorded these TRNKs and SLWNs willbe used to promote local entrepreneurship through the development of hardware and software designed for use through these local systems. This will not only promote agricultural entrepreneurhsip through hardware and software design but also promote smart farming in areas where cost, connectivity, and privacy are barriers to growth.