While large urban areas frequently receive attention for their sustainability programs, their successes do not tell the whole story. While large cities often have the money, expertise, and regional power base to implement large-scale sustainability programs, thousands of small cities and rural towns face political, fiscal, technical, and jurisdictional challenges when they seek to protect the environment.

George Homsy and Mildred Warner analyzed data from an ICMA Sustainability Survey to see what factors contribute to the adoption of sustainability practices by municipalities. Although the survey found that smaller and poorer municipalities are less likely to enact sustainability policies, Homsy and Warner identified seven communities that serve as examples of how small places have implemented a variety of sustainability measures. The communities are profiled in the report Defying the Odds: Sustainability in Small and Rural Places.

Sustainability Examples

The profiled communities (and their 2010 populations) were

• Columbus, Wisconsin (4,991): Columbus gave its economic development goals a boost by making physical improvements that supported its promotion of the city to businesses as a sustainable, green community. It also adopted “green” purchasing practices, converting all street lights to high-efficiency LED fixtures and installing electric car plug-in stations in municipal parking lots. The city also provided financial incentives to residents for “green” practices (e.g., home energy audits, high-efficiency washers).
• Kearney, Nebraska (30,787): Spurred by a rise in fuel prices, Kearney began replacing vehicles with electric replacements and sought other energy savings by replacing traffic lights with high-efficiency fixtures, conducting energy audits of municipal buildings and following up with improvements, modifying the zoning code to encourage walkability, and cutting paper usage as much as possible.
• South Daytona, Florida (12,252): South Daytona focused on the threat of sea-level rise and the availability of drinking water for a growing population. The city implemented programs to conserve water through rebates to purchasers of ultra-low flush toilets and began reclaiming treated sewage water from a neighboring jurisdiction for landscape irrigation. It also took steps to increase energy efficiency with a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in municipal operations and the community as a whole.
• Homer, Alaska (5,003): Homer, with a rural economy based on tourism and natural resources, became aware of the effects of climate change on weather, pests that were devastating forests, and the sport fishing industry. The city incorporated sustainability as a mandatory part of new employee orientation and ensured that its economic development plan focused on “smart growth” land use and transportation policies to reduce reliance on cars. It also took steps to conserve energy in municipal facilities, supported programs to improve energy efficiency in homes and businesses, and encouraged development of renewable energy sources.
• Sleepy Eye, Minnesota (3,599): Spurred by state regulations governing the public power utility, Sleepy Eye set about reducing energy consumption by seeking out renewable sources and providing rebates to purchasers of energy-efficient appliances and to companies that address leaks in their compressed air systems. The city also tackled water conservation through a pricing structure that penalized waste.
• West Liberty, Iowa (3,736): As a relatively low-income community, West Liberty had few resources to invest in sustainability initiatives. Nevertheless, it purchased a plug-in hybrid from the local dealer for use as the city manager’s car, changed street lights to high-efficiency fixtures (saving 47 percent in energy costs), and conserved water resources by using recycled water to clean out sewage lines.
• Hurricane, Utah (13,748): In anticipation of possible future renewable energy requirements, Hurricane began purchasing wind power. The city also employs a home energy analysis tool that permits power customers to see online how their energy consumption compares with that of other customers in homes of similar age and size.

Top Sustainability Policies in Small Places

Based on the survey, these were the top 20 sustainability policies adopted by communities smaller than 25,000 in population: 

1. Community-wide recycling for residents (75%)
2. Government office recycling (67%)
3. Biking and walking trails (57%)
4. Energy audits of government buildings (55%)
5. Requiring sidewalks in new developments (52%)
6. Supporting a local farmers’ market (51%)
7. Recycling household hazardous waste (48%)
8. High-efficiency lighting in government facilities (47%)
9. Recycling of household electronic waste (45%)
10. Community-wide recycling for businesses (44%)
11. Tree preservation and planting program (42%)
12. Heating and cooling upgrades in government facilities (38%)
13. Water pricing to encourage conservation (38%)
14. Purchasing fuel-efficient vehicles (33%)
15. Community-wide collection of compost material (33%)
16. Zoning codes to encourage more mixed-use projects (32%)
17. Actions to protect quality of aquifers (32%)
18. Installation of high-efficiency traffic lights (30%)
19. Setting limits on impervious surfaces on private property (30%)
20. Co-locating recycling with trash containers in public spaces (30%)

Factors Contributing to Innovation

Homsy and Warner identified a number of factors that make these communities innovators in sustainability.

Entrepreneurial Leadership. All have entrepreneurial leaders—either elected officials or professional managers and staff who drive green policy making. These creative leaders reshape regional and global issues to fit local agendas and local circumstances. Usually, they reframe environmental issues in terms of cost savings or increased efficiency, which can be an important way to broaden the appeal of green policies to officials and constituents who do not prioritize such issues.

Starting Small. These municipalities also started with the easiest strategies that make the most sense in their community. Energy audits, weatherization of public buildings, changing street lights, and purchase of alternative fueled vehicles can have very large long- and short-term fiscal benefits. For example, in Kearney, replacing a gas-guzzling pickup truck with an electric car showcased the economic and environmental benefits of green policies in a big way. This should make it easier to accept other changes in which the payback will take longer. Obvious projects with quick payoffs will still get people into the mode of thinking more comprehensively and over the longer term about sustainability.

Educating the Staff and Public. Education of staff and the public is important. For programs to have impact over time, they must be institutionalized. The leaders in these communities recommend that starting with new hires is a good place to begin sustainability training as changing the habits of long-term employees is more difficult. In these cases, think of ways to make sustainable behavior easy, such as providing recycling bins in every office, installing motion-activated light switches to turn off lights in unoccupied rooms, and using automatic thermostats to control temperatures, especially after hours. Changes in the community may take longer, but leaders in these municipalities found innovative ways to use incentives to encourage conservation among local residents and businesses. Financial savings are an important driver of public action.

Regional Relationships. Entrepreneurial leaders do not act alone. Local and regional networks are important for public officials, especially for small town leaders. Such regional relationships in these municipalities took numerous forms: state-sponsored environmental coalitions, formal networks of local governments, informal networks of neighboring municipalities, regional utility organizations, and power suppliers. These regional networks are sources of inspiration, best practices, grant funding/ administration, and political support. Municipalities that decide to work together within a region toward economic and environmental goals may have more success than those who act individually. Such programs are also more likely to be of interest to funders.

Municipal Utilities as Key Players. Municipalities that own their own utility have access to technical staff and financial resources that help overcome the capacity problems that hamper implementation in other small communities. Municipal utilities are motivated by regulation from higher levels of government and have revenue that can be used to support energy conservation or water protection. Utility staff also learn about sustainability best practices through their own associations or as part of the regulations or incentives promulgated by states or the federal government. Utilities can be key players in both compelling action and enabling it.

Sustainability as a Competitive Advantage. The sustainability actions in these communities make clear that environmental protection and economic development are not in conflict. Many communities use sustainability policies as a way to give their community a competitive edge, which attracts jobs. In addition, these local governments can help provide cost saving strategies and efficiencies to the businesses within their borders. In the same way, local residents, especially those with lower incomes, can benefit from the extensive energy saving programs offered by the municipalities, which can reduce overall housing costs and boost quality of life in poor neighborhoods.

Key Takeaways

Small and rural places, whether acting alone or as part of a regional network, can make important contributions to sustainability—and do it in a way that is a net positive for the local economy. Such a realization is important, since small cities and rural towns encompass so many people and so much land. Local governments face challenges, especially in terms of fiscal capacity and technical expertise. But small places actually may have an advantage over big cities. The city manager in Columbus said that the nearby state capital has more eco-friendly students and many more resources, but they do not get enough done because they have to deal with a much larger bureaucracy. “You’ve got to make it easy to get things done. If you get tied up in committees and studies and consultants, it doesn’t last.”

So while big cities boast of their green successes, the unlikely innovators described here demonstrate that there are ways for smaller municipalities to push forward. Small and rural places may face many challenges, but they also have the advantage of agility. Key takeaways:

• Entrepreneurial leadership makes a difference, especially in small communities.
• It is important to show early benefits to build support for sustainability efforts.
• Educate local staff and the public; they can be a force for change over time.
• Regional networks are critical for information exchange and learning best practices.
• Municipal utilities are key partners–they have expertise, investment capability, and regulatory incentives to play a leadership role.
• Sustainability can be a competitive economic development strategy—one that promotes social inclusion and community revitalization.