Assets in the West Central Region

1 Introduction

One current goal in the West Central region of Minnesota is economic development, defined by economists as the general sustainable enhancement of the well-being of a region. In order to pursue this goal of economic development, surveys were conducted to better understand the importance of existing assets, lacking assets, and needed assets in the West Central region. The goal of this report is to examine which assets those surveyed felt were most important. These assets were divided into six different categories—physical, demographic, institutional, economic, social, and cultural. In the surveys, participants were able to rank the importance of certain assets, add comments regarding those assets, and had the option to add additional assets along with comments of those assets.

2 Physical Assets

The first group to be considered will be physical asset. These assets include such things as water and air and tend to related to nature and the outdoors. However, physical assets need not be related to the outdoors as these assets could include roads or other physical structures.

In order to rank the physical assets, the mean response was calculated (the sum of responses divided by the number of responses). In the case of ties, the asset with a smaller standard deviation was listed first. The ranking of physical assets can be seen in Table 1.

Table 1

Ranking of Physical Assets in the West Central Region

	Physical Asset	Mean
1	Clean Air	4.900 (sd = 0.31)
2	Agricultural Land	4.800 (sd = 0.42)
	Wind and Natural Resources for Energy	4.800 (sd = 0.42)
4	Minnesota River	4.700 (sd = 0.67)
	Clean Water	4.700 (sd = 0.95)
6	Soil Productivity	4.600 (sd = 0.52)
7	Nature	4.500 (sd = 0.71)
8	Wildlife	4.444 (sd = 0.53)
9	Wetlands	4.400 (sd = 0.52)
10	Prairie	4.111 (sd = 1.36)
11	Open Spaces	4.000 (sd = 1.15)
12	Climate Diversity	3.300 (sd = 1.34)
13	Glacial Ridge	2.900 (sd = 1.29)

What this table shows is clean air was ranked as the most important physical asset in the West Central region with a mean response of 4.900. The least important physical asset was Glacial Ridge with a mean response of 2.900. Also noteworthy is that the top ten assets all had a mean response of 4.000 or greater while the remaining two assets were not close to having a mean response of 4.000.

Also in this section there were three other assets listed in the other section. These assets and any additional comments regarding these assets can be found in Table 2.

Table 2

Other Listed Physical Assets

Asset	Comments
Roads	Ranked as a 5
Water/Sewers	Ranked as a 5
Land	Prices are getting to high for low wage workers to afford

These additional assets tended to revolve around physical structures as opposed to nature. These additional assets are able to help shed light on other assets that the region may possess that could aid in economic development.

3 Demographic Assets

The next group of assets would be those that are demographic such as age, gender, and race/ethnicity or other personal characteristics. The assets that were included in the survey tended to be those that revolved around personal characteristics (such as talent) as opposed to other areas such as age.

These assets were also ranked in the same manner as the physical assets. This ranking can be found in Table 3.

Table 3

Ranking of Demographic Asset in the West Central Region

	Asset	Mean
1	Innovative People	4.900 (sd = 0.32)
2	People with Integrity	4.300 (sd = 1.25)
3	People with Talent	4.100 (sd = 0.74)
4	Retired Persons	4.000 (sd = 1.05)
5	Low Population Density	3.500 (sd = 1.35)

The most important asset was innovative people with a mean response of 4.900 while the least important was low population density with a mean response of 3.500. Low population density was the only asset that had a mean response that was less than 4.000.

Similar to the physical assets, participants also had the opportunity to write in additional demographic assets and comments related to these additional assets. This information can be found in Table 4.

Table 4

Other Listed Demographic Assets

Asset	Comments
Diversity	-Diverse people are not being welcomed, but need to be -Enriches community
Immigrant Population	-Will take time to fully appreciate -New immigrants have been neglected
Leaders	Going down
Young People	-Young people are leaving -Need to be more open and show that we care
Arts Culture
Single Family Homes	High levels of poverty

Overwhelmingly, participants pointed out the importance of diversity and other cultures and the need to embrace them as diversity enrich the community. Also important to participants were youth/young people as this group tends to be leaving the region for various reasons. One common theme among participants is that certain groups are not being welcomed into the region, especially new immigrants, nor are many groups being encouraged to stay in the region such as young people.

4 Institutional Assets

The next group that is to be considered is institutional assets. This group includes assets that are related to various civic, cultural, and educational institutions in the region as well as other institutional causes such as healthcare.

These assets were also ranked based on the mean response. The ranking for institutional assets can be found in Table 5.

Table 5

Ranking of Institutional Assets in the West Central Region

	Asset	Mean
1	UMN/UMM	4.900 (sd = 0.32)
2	Education	4.800 (sd = 0.63)
3	Current Projects	4.500 (sd = 0.76)
4	Center for Small Towns	4.400 (sd = 0.70)
	Health Care Purchasing	4.400 (sd = 1.26)
6	UMN Research	4.333 (sd = 0.87)
7	Pioneer Public TV	4.100 (sd = 0.74)
	Regional Partnership	4.100 (sd = 0.88)
9	Evolving Experience	3.857 (sd = 1.46)
10	Economic Improvement Groups	3.600 (sd = 1.17)
11	Associations and Non-Profits	3.556 (sd = 1.33)
	Churches	3.556 (sd = 1.33)
13	UM Extension Services	3.300 (sd = 0.95)

The most important asset in this group was UMN/UMM with a mean response of 4.900 while UM Extension Services was least important with a mean response score of 3.300. The general reason for the low ranking of UM Extension Services was the ineffectiveness of reorganization. What is noteworthy about this is that those assets that were related to education such as UMN/UMM and education were ranked highly while more civic organizations such as churches were ranked lowly and more cultural-based assets, such as Pioneer Public TV, were ranked in the middle.

Participants also had the opportunity to list other assets that they found to be important. These additional assets and any comments can be found in Table 6.

Table 6

Other Listed Institutional Assets

Asset	Comments
WCROC/ARS Soils Lab	Very creditable, good partner, gets things done
City and County Government
Independent Mix Group
Local Media
Legal

Most notable in the additional assets would be that WCROC was listed by multiple participants as being important. Other institutional assets that were listed tended to be more governmental and legal in nature and less local.

5 Economic Assets

The next group to look at is economic assets. This group includes a wide range of assets that are both tangible (highways) while many others are intangible (agricultural resources and potential). Many of these assets revolved around farming and agriculture and how to enhance these assets.

These assets were also ranked using the mean response of participants. This ranking can be found in Table 7.

Table 7

Ranking of Economic Assets in the West Central Region

	Asset	Mean
1	Agricultural Resources and Potential	4.875 (sd = 0.35)
2	Local Investment	4.778 (sd = 0.44)
3	Sustainable Agriculture and Land Stewardship Connection	4.600 (sd = 0.84)
4	Capital	4.500 (sd = 0.71)
5	Ability to Leverage Dollars	4.444 (sd = 0.73)
6	Small Businesses and Firms	4.400 (sd = 0.84)
7	Highways	4.222 (sd = 0.67)
8	Industry	4.000 (sd = 0.82)
	Food Network	4.000 (sd = 1.32)
10	Infrastructure for Aging Population	3.889 (sd = 1.27)
11	Agricultural Commodities	3.800 (sd = 1.14)
12	Tourism	3.500 (sd = 1.08)
13	Low Cost Labor	2.625 (sd = 1.51)

The most important asset in this group was agricultural resources and potential with a mean response of 4.875 while low cost labor received the lowest mean score of 2.625. The most likely reason for the low mean score of low cost labor is that most participants did not view this as an asset but rather as a problem. Also noteworthy is that though many of the assets revolved around agriculture, these assets were ranked highly (agricultural resources and potential), in the middle (food network), and lowly (agricultural commodities).

As with the other asset groups, participants had the option of listing additional assets and comments regarding those assets. However, none of the participants chose to do so.

6 Social Assets

The next group of assets to consider would be social assets. Assets in this group include those that relate to the quality of life in the West Central region.

Within this group, assets were also ranked using the mean response score. This ranking can be found in Table 8.

Table 8

Ranking of Social Assets in the West Central Region

	Asset	Mean
1	Quality of Life	5.000 (sd – 0.00)
2	Internet Access	4.700 (sd = 0.67)
3	Entrepreneurs	4.500 (sd = 0.71)
4	Service Commitment	4.000 (sd = 1.63)

The most important asset in this group was quality of life which had an impressive mean response of 5.000 while service commitment was the least important asset with a mean response of 4.000. It is necessary to note that though quality of life is ranked highly it is, in actuality, a result of many other assets such as healthcare, employment opportunities, and educational system.

Participants had the opportunity to list additional assets that they felt were important. However, none of the participants chose to do so.

7 Cultural Assets

The last group of assets to be considered would be cultural assets. These assets tended to involve either cultural characteristics of the region, such as work ethics, or the cultural identity of the region.

These assets were also ranked using the mean response score. The ranking for this group can be found in Table 9.

Table 9

Ranking of Cultural Assets in the West Central Region

	Asset	Mean
1	Work Ethics	4.750 (sd = 0.46)
2	Regional Diversity	4.250 (sd = 0.89)
3	Cultural Diversity	4.125 (sd = 0.83)
	Art, Culture, Counterculture	4.125 (sd = 1.13)
5	Caring for Others	4.111 (sd = 1.27)
	Core People Who Value Region’s Lifestyle	4.111 (sd = 1.45)
7	Regional Identity	3.250 (sd = 1.91)

The most important asset in the survey was work ethics with a mean score of 4.750 while regional identity was considered least important with a mean response of 3.250. It is noteworthy that both regional and cultural diversity were highly ranked assets. This coincides with the findings in the demographic assets section regarding the need to embrace diversity.

8 All Assets

To understand how the groups of assets are interrelated, it is necessary to rank all of the assets using the mean response. This ranking can be found in Table 10. Besides ranking these assets, they were also color-coded in order to see if certain groups of assets were generally given higher scores than others. In this table, green is used for physical assets, red is used for demographic assets, blue is used for institutional assets, brown is used for economic assets, purple is used for social assets, and orange is used for cultural assets.

Table 10

Ranking of All Assets in the West Central Region

	Asset	Mean
1	Quality of Life	5.000 (sd = 0.00)
2	Clean Air	4.900 (sd = 0.31)
	Innovative People	4.900 (sd = 0.32)
	UMN/UMM	4.900 (sd = 0.32)
5	Agricultural Resources and Potential	4.875 (sd = 0.35)
6	Agricultural Land	4.800 (sd = 0.42)
	Wind and Natural Resources for Energy	4.800 (sd = 0.42)
	Education	4.800 (sd = 0.63)
9	Local Investment	4.778 (sd = 0.44)
10	Work Ethics	4.750 (sd = 0.46)
11	Internet Access	4.700 (sd = 0.67)
	Minnesota River	4.700 (sd = 0.67)
	Clean Water	4.700 (sd = 0.95)
14	Soil Productivity	4.600 (sd = 0.52)
	Sustainable Agriculture and Land Stewardship Connection	4.600 (sd = 0.84)
16	Capital	4.500 (sd = 0.71)
17	Entrepreneurs	4.500 (sd = 0.71)
18	Nature	4.500 (sd = 0.71)
19	Current Projects	4.500 (sd = 0.76)
20	Wildlife	4.444 (sd = 0.58)
	Ability to Leverage Dollars	4.444 (sd = 0.73)
22	Wetlands	4.400 (sd = 0.52)
	Center for Small Towns	4.400 (sd = 0.70)
	Small Businesses and Firms	4.400 (sd = 0.84)
	Health Care Purchasing	4.400 (sd = 1.26)
26	UMN Research	4.333 (sd = 0.87)
27	People with Integrity	4.300 (sd = 1.25)
28	Regional Diversity	4.250 (sd = 0.89)
29	Highways	4.222 (sd = 0.67)
30	Cultural Diversity	4.125 (sd = 0.83)
	Art, Culture, Counterculture	4.125 (sd = 1.13)
32	Caring for Others	4.111 (sd = 1.27)
	Prairie	4.111 (sd = 1.36)
	Core People Who Value Region’s Lifestyle	4.111 (sd = 1.45)
35	People with Talent	4.100 (sd = 0.74)
	Pioneer Public TV	4.100 (sd = 0.74)
	Regional Partnership	4.100 (sd = 0.88)
38	Industry	4.000 (sd = 0.82)
	Retired Persons	4.000 (sd = 1.05)
	Open Spaces	4.000 (sd = 1.15)
	Food Network	4.000 (sd = 1.32)
	Service Commitment	4.000 (sd = 1.63)
43	Infrastructure for Aging Population	3.889 (sd = 1.27)
44	Evolving Experience	3.857 (sd = 1.46)
45	Agricultural Commodities	3.800 (sd = 1.14)
46	Economic Improvement Groups	3.600 (sd = 1.17)
47	Associations and Non-Profits	3.556 (sd = 1.33)
	Churches	3.556 (sd = 1.33)
49	Tourism	3.500 (sd = 1.08)
	Low Population Density	3.500 (sd = 1.35)
51	UM Extension Services	3.300 (sd = 0.95)
	Climate Diversity	3.300 (sd = 1.34)
53	Regional Identity	3.250 (sd = 1.91)
54	Glacial Ridge	2.900 (sd = 1.29)
55	Low Cost Labor	2.625 (sd = 1.51)

What Table 10 is able to show is that quality of life received the highest mean score with a mean of 5.000 while low cost labor was ranked as the least important asset with a mean score of 2.625.

Overall, physical assets tended to receive higher rankings than the other groups of assets. Demographic assets tended to receive lower rankings than the other groups of assets. Institutional assets tended to receive high, middle, and low rankings, though institutional assets as a whole were generally ranked in the lower half of all assets. Economic assets appear to not be clustered into any one section of the ranking as these assets received high, low and middle rankings and are not clustered in either the upper or lower half. Similar to economic assets, social assets also received rankings that were high, middle and low. While a few cultural assets were ranked highly, such as work ethics, the majority of assets in this group were ranked in the lower half of all assets overall.

By ranking all of the assets and identifying them by their asset groups, it is possible to better understand how those surveyed perceive the importance of certain assets and asset groups. Overall, physical assets tended to be ranked as the most important while demographic and cultural assets tended to receive lower rankings than other group while the remaining groups, social, economic and institutional asset, received rankings that were high, medium and low.

9 Conclusion

Through the use of surveys it is possible to rank certain assets and analyze the overall importance of asset groups. By doing so, it has been shown that the quality of life is perceived to be the most important asset overall, though physical assets tended to receive the highest rankings of all asset groups. Though the quality of life is ranked highly, it is important to keep in mind that this asset is really the result of realizing other assets. Low cost labor is seen as the least important asset, most likely because it is not seen as an asset but rather as a hazard.

By analyzing the perceived importance of these assets, it is possible to develop economic development strategies that encompass the most important existing asset and utilizing them to their full potential while, at the same time, building up those assets that are seen to be least important or non-existent.