We keep telling small towns to grow, but who is actually funding the growth?

I’m always hearing people telling small towns to focus on growth - attract new residents, support local businesses, diversify their economies, create new jobs, encourage tourism, find new industries, attract investment, keep young people in town, solve the housing shortage, fill empty shop fronts. We’ve heard it all. 

They tell us all these ideas, and then often expect a handful of already-busy people to somehow make it all happen at the snap of their fingers. Usually on top of their actual jobs.

This is the part of the regional development conversation that does not get talked about enough.

The projects get funded, but the people, capacity and long-term economic development work required for these projects doesn’t.

 A grant is not an economic development strategy.

There is money going into regional Australia, like the Australian Government's Financial Assistance Grant, and competitive programs targeting regional growth like the Regional Economic Development Grant program. 

These programs matter, but they don’t solve the entire problem, they’re not a done solution. Because economic development does not begin when someone presses “submit” on a grant application. 

Economic development begins months, sometimes years, earlier. Someone has to identify the opportunity, talk to the local businesses, understand growth limitations, build new partnerships, develop the idea, find the funding, write the application. After all that, they need to deliver the project. 

In a small town, who is being paid to do that?

The problem isn’t in the ideas, it’s in the capacity.

Large regional centres have whole teams dedicated to economic development, tourism, strategic planning and even specialised grant writers. Small towns usually don’t.

The local government is already responsible for everything from roads and rubbish collection, to recreation, planning and community infrastructure. Businesses are busy running businesses. Community groups are largely run by volunteers, who usually belong to more than one club. Yet, we’re asking the same small group of people to drive economic growth as well. 

We are very good at funding things. 

Buildings, streetscapes, tourism attractions, roads, infrastructure.

But economic development is the invisible work that happens before the publicised ribbon cutting. It’s helping a business expand rather than relocate. Or connecting a local entrepreneur with an empty shop front down the main street. Or identifying an industry that could operate locally. It’s turning “someone should do something with that” into an actual viable project. That work takes time, expertise and people. 

Relying on grants creates another problem.

To win the funding, you need to have the capacity to pursue the funding. This is not as simple as just filling in an application. Someone needs to find the grant, interpret the inflexible guidelines, develop the project, gather all the evidence, obtain the quotes, build the partnerships and then write the application. 

The communities who have a stronger development capacity are often better positioned to attract further investment. Those without it can struggle to even get to the starting line. 

Maybe we should spend less time asking “Can we apply for this open grant?” and more time asking “Where could our local economy be in ten years, and who are we funding to get it there?” 

Small towns don’t need saving. They already grow food, manufacture products, train apprentices, support major industries, and create business footprints far beyond their postcode. The opportunities exist. 

But if we genuinely want small towns to grow, diversify, and become more resilient, we can’t keep expecting economic development to happen in someone's spare time.