CLAREMORE — In the past, the  U.S. Economic Development Authority supported efforts in rural areas like Rogers County and Claremore, providing funding for hard infrastructure improvements like access roads, rail spurs, sewer and water lines and more in order to attract business and industry.

With a new emphasis on soft infrastructure geared toward investment in urban areas, Rogers County could be short changed in the future, some fear.

“Regional clusters” and “innovation” are economic development’s new buzzwords, but what do those terms mean and how does the growing trend toward soft infrastructure impact development in rural areas?

“Hard infrastructure is still needed,” said Claremore Economic Development Authority Assistant Director Cary Jester, who maintains that the shift in funding hurts small towns and rural areas most.

The EDA is putting millions into the soft infrastructure of innovation, education and technology.

For example, this spring the agency funded $1 million to the University City Science Center in  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to fund a pilot “Quod Erat Demonstratum proof of concept program” meant to provide “technical assistance, business guidance, market process, funding, and exit coordination to participating eligible universities and nonprofit organizations in the early-stage life science technologies across the greater Philadelphia region,” according to EDA reports.

Another $5 million went to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development and the Ben Franklin Technology partners of Southeastern Pennsylvania in Philadelphia to fund a multi-component project—construction and non-construction—that will be located at the Philadelphia Navy Yard’s Clean Energy campus to bring together “leading researchers from academia, national labs, and the private sector in an ambitious effort to develop energy-efficient building designs that will save energy, cut pollution, and position the United States as a leader in this industry.” This investment is funded under the FY 2010 Energy Efficient Buildings Systems Regional Innovation Cluster, according to investment information available on the EDA’s web site.

“We still have a need for public infrastructure investment,” said Jester. “Not everybody wants to or can live in the metropolitan areas.”

New terminology in the economic development field are “regional clusters” and “innovation.” Those buzz words don’t make mention of urban versus rural, but people in rural areas say more money is channeled into urban areas under the new soft infrastructure and “regional cluster” focus

Last month, the Texas Valley Communities Foundation received a $1 million EDA grant along with the city of Mercedes and the Texas Polytechnic Institute of Mercedes, Texas, to help develop a feasibility study for a “Technopolis Village”— a community focused on “innovation and identifying ways to enhance and produce positive economic growth that spans the regional economy.”

“The Obama administration is committed to providing communities with the resources they need to foster job creation and business growth,” said U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke.

“This EDA grant will support high-skill, living-wage jobs in the Lower Rio Grande Valley and enhance the region’s competitiveness by providing a blueprint for collaboration to develop a strong technology cluster.”

While a feasibility study to create a blueprint seems a little fuzzy sounding to some, the project is eventually expected to include a polytechnic institute, an innovation science park, incubator facilities and multi-use space.

The integration of softer items like planning, education and innovation combined with more traditional hard structure of incubator facilities typifies the new direction the EDA is taking, but there is little doubt splitting the money in this fashion means less hard dollars for hard infrastructure.

Jester said developing and keeping jobs in rural areas is important. He maintains there is already available assistance for soft infrastructure without diverting the lion’s share of EDA funds that direction.

Engineers and architects have long valued the integration of soft and hard infrastructure.

Studies help with planning and implementation and can ensure that tax dollars are not wasted on buildings or roads no one uses.

“Bridges, roads, and tunnels — what we know as hard infrastructure— are easy to grasp as the backbone of the city,” writes Julie V. Iovine in “What’s holding us up,” published in The Architects Newspaper.

“Soft infrastructure is something else altogether,” says Iovine. “Immaterial, expansively informational, and slippery, soft infrastructure is now more than ever the key to shaping a more dynamic future for architecture.”

Iovine describes soft infrastructure as “powered by data networks, not engines.” She points out that these systems can be powerful, citing the effects of the collapse of the financial system. Using the tools of soft infrastructure to make hard infrastructure better serve the uses for which it was intended is a good thing. Why build a detention pond that doesn’t prevent funding?

But while some soft infrastructure, such as an engineering study to determine the appropriate placement of a detention pond can be crucial to the final outcome of a project, funding that stretches into harder to define and measure categories such as innovation, can be a tricky arena for government.

Economic development experts agree both soft and hard infrastructure components are important.

For Jester, the issues is whether the EDA’s shift in focus will undermine funding for rural communities like Claremore.