Canadian EDO Best Practices Assessment

Here are the highlights of a recent best practices study of selected rural Canadian EDO's. It was conducted by the University of Guelph. It provides some useful insights into what makes a "good" EDO. Download the full report here.

POLITICAL COMMITMENT

· Political commitment to local economic development was firm and characterized by the allocation of resources specific to this purpose.

· The Municipal Council and the Board of Directors adopted a “hands off” approach in that it gave the designated economic development person(s) and departments the freedom to operate. Council and the Board did not micro-manage the economic development process in any of these communities.

INVESTMENT IN LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

· Every community had an Economic Development Officer (EDO) or equivalent. Not only was a designated person an indication of the high priority accorded to local economic development, but was also a necessity. It was necessary to assign someone to this function because economic development was a full-time job that required dedication and effort, an impossible feat for someone wearing multiple hats or for volunteers who eventually suffer from burn-out despite their best efforts and intentions.

· All of the best practice interviewees pursued multiple funding sources for preparing Plans or Strategies and for project implementation.

· While there is considerable variation in terms of the investment, “best practice” Municipalities and organizations were characterized by a willingness to invest in some research and analysis to acquire or confirm the ‘facts’, to examine possible futures and get a better understanding of their communities and their local economies.

THE PLAN OR STRATEGY

· Each had either a Plan or a Strategy. Local economic development was not pursued haphazardly.

PARTICIPATION

· Intensive and diverse participatory processes characterized the preparation of Plans and Strategies. Broad-based public engagement went beyond the rhetoric of gestures and passive information dissemination, and was encouraged to ensure that the final document was reflective of what the community wanted. This approach engendered support and ownership from the Municipal Council, the business sector, community groups and the public at large.

COLLABORATION

· There was a high degree of horizontal and vertical inter-agency collaboration between the Municipality or organization and other organizations, groups and individuals within the community. They partnered with various organizations within the community and drew on existing expertise and other resources. The depth of interaction was such that partners sat on each other’s board, and shared responsibilities and information. They also partnered with other levels of government and benefited from various forms of assistance, financial and otherwise.

· Horizontal and vertical collaboration within their organizations consolidated the ‘hands-off’ approach by the Council or Board of Directors with the reduction of red-tape. Economic development personnel were given freedom to do their jobs yet remained accountable to their organizations. Having the authority to liaise with other departments without strict adherence to the bureaucratic chain of command reduced the time spent on decision-making and implementing initiatives, and enabled personnel to move into action when a window of opportunity presented itself.

· Inter-municipal collaboration resulted in a more efficient use of resources, reduced duplication and insularity, built good inter-community relations, provided willing and able partners for joint initiatives and had the potential for positive spin-off effects for a much larger area.

TRANSFERABILITY

· These “best practice” rural Municipalities and the community development agency pursued initiatives in a manner that was actually not radically different from mainstream practice. They differed more in terms of the degree and intensity, or in some cases the aggressiveness, with which they pursued participation, partnerships and local and community economic development, including tourism development.

· In most instances, interviewees indicated that their local economic development process and their approach to practice were readily transferable to other contexts in rural Ontario.