ENTREPRENEURIAL APPALACHIA:

CASE STUDIES IN EVOLVING ECONOMIC SECTORS

NOVEMBER 2013

Prepared by Rural Support Partners on behalf of the Appalachian Regional Commission
About the Appalachian Regional Commission

The Appalachian Regional Commission is a regional economic development agency that 

represents a partnership of federal, state, and local government. Established by an act of 

Congress in 1965, ARC is composed of the governors of the 13 Appalachian states and a federal 

co-chair, who is appointed by the president. ARC’s mission is to be a strategic partner and 

advocate for sustainable community and economic development in Appalachia.

For more information on ARC programs to support entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial 

communities, please visit www.arc.gov/entrepreneurship. 

Background and Overview

Throughout Appalachia, entrepreneurs are forging a new economic model — one based on 

local investment and local ownership — and their impact is already being felt in some of 

the Region’s evolving economic sectors, including energy, manufacturing, health care, 

and local food production. 

Prompted in part by Appalachia’s need for economic diversification, the Appalachian Regional 

Commission (ARC) supported this research as a way to summarize entrepreneurial opportunities 

within these economic sectors and to examine innovative projects that demonstrate multiple 

benefits to rural and underserved communities. Aided by an advisory team who provided 

valuable insight into the case study selection process, the examples presented in this guide 

demonstrate job creation potential, cross-sector partnerships, and community impact.

We invite you to read about seven successful entrepreneurial efforts throughout Appalachia, 

with a focus on extracting those lessons with the most potential for informing local and regional 

economic development efforts in your community.

Appalachia

Appalachia is a 205,000 squaremile region that follows the spine 

of the Appalachian Mountains from 

southern New York to northern 

Mississippi. It includes all of West 

Virginia and portions of 12 other 

states: Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, 

Maryland, Mississippi, New York, 

North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, 

South Carolina, Tennessee, 

and Virginia.

NEW YORK

ILLINOIS INDIANA OHIO

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW

JERSEY

MARYLAND

VIRGINIA

DELAWARE

WEST

VIRGINIA

KENTUCKY

TENNESSEE

NORTH CAROLINA

SOUTH CAROLINA

GEORGIA

ALABAMA MISSISSIPPI
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors 1

Table of Contents

Introduction .............................................................................................................2

Energy Sector Overview .....................................................................................3

How$martKY,TM Kentucky .................................................................................5

Ohio University Innovation Center, Ohio ......................................................7

Health Sector Overview ......................................................................................9

LiveWell Greenville, South Carolina ...............................................................11

Hale County Health Development Partnership, Alabama .......................13

Manufacturing Sector Overview ....................................................................15

Gat Creek Furniture, West Virginia ................................................................17

Local Food Sector Overview ............................................................................19

The Greenbrier Valley, West Virginia ............................................................21

Appalachian Harvest, Virginia .......................................................................23

Photo courtesy Ken Murray
2 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —INTRODUCTION

Introduction

The Appalachian Region, particularly its most 

economically distressed counties, has historically 

been dominated by a few industries such as mining, 

textiles, tobacco, and timber. Dependence on these 

industries as economic drivers and employers has left 

many communities vulnerable to economic fl uctuations. 

As these industries continue to face increasing 

competition, specialization, and market changes, 

Appalachian communities that lack economic diversity 

are facing the prospect of diminishing job opportunities 

and deepening economic distress.

In light of this, numerous communities are exploring 

entrepreneurship and small business development as 

promising job creation strategies. Entrepreneurship helps to 

diversify the Region’s economic base, develop and market 

local assets, strengthen existing businesses, foster the 

development and use of innovative technologies, and tie 

economic activity to community well-being. In this way, local 

communities can potentially limit their economic vulnerability 

while fostering home-grown economic opportunities, 

ultimately leading to additional jobs, the creation of locally 

rooted wealth, and more resilient communities.

Evidence suggests that the energy, health, manufacturing, 

and local food sectors demonstrate promising 

entrepreneurial opportunities, particularly for rural 

and/or underserved areas. For each of these economic 

sectors, this report contains an overview of trends and 

opportunities, as well as case studies that showcase 

innovative models, approaches, and strategies. 

The case study profi les that follow describe

■ A Kentucky energy-effi ciency initiative aimed at 

reducing energy costs for rural households

■ An Ohio business incubator that supports clean-energy 

startup companies

■ A South Carolina partnership that works to create 

healthier environments and improve community 

wellness

■ An Alabama program that increases health-care 

career opportunities by connecting university medical 

students, rural high schoolers, and local health-care 

providers 

■ A furniture manufacturer in West Virginia that creates 

hand-crafted, value-added products from Appalachian 

hardwoods 

■ A cluster of innovative local food initiatives in West 

Virginia that use rural-urban connections, place-based 

branding, and agritourism to increase income for food 

and farm entrepreneurs

■ A local food hub that helps small farmers in Virginia

and Tennessee access larger markets 

These cases help illustrate the innovative economic 

development work taking place across Appalachia, 

while examining the crucial role of organizations and 

networks that support local entrepreneurs. Our hope 

is that these examples can inform the variety of actors 

working to strengthen Appalachia’s economy through 

entrepreneurship and small business development. 
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — ENERGY 3

Energy Sector Overview

National Trends

Renewable energy is emerging as a promising sector 

in Appalachia, supported by signifi cant national 

growth and investment in the fi elds of clean energy 

and energy effi ciency. The United States has lagged behind 

many countries in renewable energy development, but 

there is increasing federal interest in renewable energy in 

response to the growing concerns around the depletion of 

natural resources and the environmental impacts of global 

warming.1

 From 1998 to 2007, jobs in the renewable energy 

economy grew nationally by an average of 1.9 percent 

compared with total employment growth of only 0.4 

percent. Venture capital investment in renewable energy 

and energy effi ciency grew from less than $1 billion in 1998 

to $12.4 billion in 2007. 2

Another signifi cant trend in the national energy economy 

is the rise in green-building certifi cations. Increasingly, the 

U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED (Leadership in Energy & 

Environmental Design) certifi cation has become a mandate 

in the construction and renovation of public-sector 

buildings. Because of these national trends and substantial 

1 Regional Technology Strategies, Inc. with Penn State University. Dec. 2011. 

“Energy Workforce Trends and Training Needs in Appalachia.” Appalachian 

Regional Commission: p. A-1.

2 Regional Technology Strategies, Inc. p. A-6.

investments in clean energy and energy effi ciency, there 

is potential for an economy that recognizes the limitations 

of non-renewable resources and capitalizes on economic 

opportunities in renewable energy.3

Opportunities & Challenges in Appalachia

The coal industry has historically had a large presence in 

Appalachia, but its economic returns are declining. This 

decline is due in large part to the depletion of the resource 

base and competition from new energy sources such as 

natural gas. Employment and earnings within the coal 

industry are expected to decrease 25–30 percent over 

the next ten years, while the tax revenue coming from the 

coal industry is expected to decline 20 percent over the 

next ten years as mining volumes decrease.4 The decline in 

coal production also limits any employment opportunities 

within the industry to the replacement of an aging 

workforce rather than hiring for newly-created jobs. 

Natural gas exploration and extraction will continue to 

provide signifi cant, but perhaps temporary, employment 

gains in Appalachia’s shale regions. While job creation and 

3 The Cadmus Group, Inc with Regional Research Institute, West Virginia 

University and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Dec. 2011. 

“Planning and Financing Energy Effi cient Infrastructure in Appalachia.” 

Appalachian Regional Commission: p. 9.

4 Regional Technology Strategies, Inc. p. A-24.
4 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —ENERGY

needs fi nancing incentives that spur investment in 

energy effi ciency and renewable energy among energy 

developers, businesses, institutions and homeowners 

alike. Electric power providers also need a state-legislated 

portfolio standard for renewable energy generation and 

energy effi ciency savings, in order to guarantee a market 

for electricity generated from renewable energy sources.

Connection to Rural & Underserved 

Communities

An economy focused on expanding renewable energy 

and energy effi ciency opportunities provides job creation 

potential for the unemployed and the underemployed. Much 

of the employment potential in renewable energy and energy 

effi ciency is in “middle-skill jobs,” which require more than a 

high school diploma but less than a four-year degree. At the 

national level, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

provided additional federal resources to create new clean 

energy jobs and expand worker training efforts in this sector.9

Rural workers with the support of community colleges and 

other institutions providing re-training programs, can benefi t 

from the emerging labor needs of the green energy economy. 

The rural poor also benefi t directly from energy effi ciency 

upgrades that can bring down the cost of energy in 

their households. Because of sub-standard housing 

stock in large portions of Appalachia, many low-income 

rural households spend the highest income percentage 

in the nation on electricity to heat their homes and 

run appliances. As such, rural communities stand to 

benefi t greatly from energy effi ciency improvements 

to their homes. 

A more diversifi ed energy economy will also bring a 

variety of indirect economic benefi ts to the Region’s 

rural communities. Appalachia’s geographical diversity 

and the isolation of many rural areas creates distribution 

challenges that can contribute to much higher electricity 

costs.10 These distribution challenges and the related 

costs can be mitigated by diversifying the sources of rural 

electricity to include wind and solar as well as coal and gas. 

9 Bozell, Maureen R. and Cynthia D. Liston. May 2010. “Building Effective 

Green Energy Programs in Community Colleges.” New York: Workforce 

Strategy Center.

10 Interview: Bill Blair, How$martKYTM Program Coordinator, 11 September 

2013.

income to landowners are likely short-term benefi ts of this 

trend, the entrepreneurial potential within the shale gas 

industry is limited by high concentration, specialization, and 

well-established outsourcing channels. At the same time, 

the history of resource extraction industries suggests the 

risk of continued boom-and-bust cycles may not provide 

steady long-term growth and employment. There is also a 

concern that shale gas extraction may negatively impact 

other sectors, such as forestry and agriculture, through the 

potential for water contamination and other environmental 

and public health impacts.

Economic Impact & Job Creation Potential 

ARC considers energy to be a promising sector in 

Appalachia due to the sector’s rapid growth and 

generation of new employment opportunities. In 2009, 

total energy-related employment in Appalachia, including 

supply chains and related industries, was nearly one 

million.5 Nationally, 43 percent of energy-related jobs are 

in energy effi ciency, and federal resources are increasingly 

focused on energy effi ciency.6 Initial studies have shown 

that energy effi ciency investments in Appalachia could 

create 77,000 net new jobs in the Region by 2030 and cut 

projected energy use by 24 percent, resulting in energy 

savings of over $21 billion for the Region.7

 These jobs, 

many of which involve renovations and retro-fi ts, build 

upon existing workforce skills. 

Renewable energy offers additional opportunities for 

Appalachia, both in terms of entrepreneurship and job 

creation. Demand for clean energy services in Appalachia 

currently has the capacity to create 41,000 jobs in more 

than 650 businesses or organizations related to solar 

components, and 89,579 jobs in 1,318 businesses or 

organizations related to the wind industry, as noted in a 

study recently prepared for ARC.8

Energy effi ciency and clean energy practitioners point 

out that supportive policies will be crucial for the evolving 

energy economy to realize its full potential. In order to 

accelerate the development of the sector, Appalachia 

5 Regional Technology Strategies, Inc. p. viii.

6 Regional Technology Strategies, Inc. p. 80.

7 Regional Technology Strategies, Inc. p. 2.

8 Glasmeier, Amy, Ron Feingold, Amanda Guers, et al. The Pennsylvania 

University. September 2007. “Energizing Appalachia: Global Challenges 

and the Prospect of a Renewable Future.” District of Columbia: Appalachian 

Regional Commission.
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — ENERGY 5

How$martKYTM, a project of eastern Kentucky-based 

Mountain Association for Community Economic 

Development (MACED), provides on-bill fi nancing for 

energy effi ciency retrofi ts to rural homes. The project 

offers signifi cant energy savings for area residents, 

increases home values, and helps utility co-ops lower costs 

for their consumers.

Opportunities for Appalachia: Reduced Energy 

Costs & New Jobs 

The benefi ts provided by this energy model are particularly 

important to Appalachia because of the predominance of 

rural communities in the Region. Rural households tend to 

pay signifi cantly more for power, since it costs utilities more 

to deliver the power to a geographically isolated population.11

In addition, many rural homes in Appalachia suffer from 

ineffi cient and substandard housing stock. Kentuckians 

use 24 percent more electricity at home than the national 

average, which disproportionately burdens lower-income 

households.12 In addition to reduced costs for home owners, 

energy-effi ciency retrofi ts offer a new job market for 

Appalachia’s many contractors, installation specialists, and 

middle-skilled repairers. And fi nally, everyone benefi ts from 

a diversifi ed energy economy that decreases the costs of 

powering homes, allowing for the savings to be productively 

invested or spent on local goods and services that may help 

create more local jobs. 

Critical Resources and Partners: Utility 

Partnerships & State Policy Support

One critical factor in How$martKYTM’s success is its 

partnership with rural electric co-ops. These membershipbased co-ops, of which there are 16 in eastern Kentucky, 

bring power to rural communities and are accountable to 

11 Interview: Bill Blair, How$martKYTM Program Coordinator, 11 September 2013. 

12 “How$martKY Offers Energy Effi ciency for Everyone.” Mountain View: 

Spring 2011. MACED.

Location: Berea, Kentucky

Contact: www.maced.org/howsmart-overview

Energy Case Study I: How$martKYTM

their members. They see reduced energy usage among 

their members as a strategic goal, and when MACED 

proposed a pilot project to test on-bill fi nancing, four coops agreed to participate. Meanwhile, the start-up capital 

and fi nancing capacity MACED provided was essential in 

getting the pilot project off the ground.

The How$mart process itself is an exercise in partnership. 

When a co-op like Grayson Rural Electric gets a complaint 

from a member about their high power bill, they are able to 

offer How$mart as a solution. An energy advisor from the 

co-op will visit the home and offer to set up an energy audit 

through How$mart. If there are effi ciency improvements 

to be made, How$mart will then hire a trained contractor 

to make the retrofi ts at no upfront cost to the home owner. 

The improvements are paid off over time with the savings 

that appear on the power bill.

For MACED to be able to fi nance a home’s retrofi ts on 

its energy bill, the Kentucky Public Service Commission 

needed to approve a tariff — an additional charge line on 

the bill. What began as a pilot tariff was made permanent 

following the demonstrated effectiveness of this approach, 

meaning that any Kentucky utility can now provide onbill fi nancing for energy-effi ciency retrofi ts through the 

How$martKYTM program. 

Economic Impacts: Job Creation, Energy 

Savings, & Increased Home Value

Contractors and workers in rural Kentucky are already 

benefi tting from the extra work How$martKYTM 

provides. The fl ow of How$mart jobs is steadier than 

most contractors are used to, helping them keep more 

“ Energy effi ciency is the low-hanging fruit.”

—Bill Blair, How$martKYTM Program Coordinator

Photo courtesy Ivy Brashear, Mountain Association for 

Community Economic Development
6 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —ENERGY

employees on a full-time work schedule. With MACED 

providing technical assistance and support for contractors 

to be re-trained and insured to do the retrofi ts, contracted 

businesses have a chance to both improve their credentials 

and diversify their customer base. Of the 17 different 

contractors who have worked with How$mart, some have 

already added crews, and there is additional job creation 

potential as more rural workers are trained to do retrofi ts. 

The most signifi cant impacts, however, are those enjoyed 

by the rural residents themselves. For rural communities, 

the households most in need of effi ciency improvements 

are also the least capable of paying for them. Already 

faced with high distribution costs, residents of older homes 

in rural communities tend to spend more of their income 

on energy due to sub-standard building quality. How$mart 

allows them to make changes that they otherwise couldn’t 

afford, directly impacting their energy savings as well 

as their comfort and safety. As a result, 49 percent of 

How$mart participants have low to moderate income, and 

101 homes have been upgraded in distressed counties. 

How$mart retrofi ts also increase the value of homes by 

at least the cost of the retrofi t, bringing them up to code 

and improving their future marketability. According to 

Tina Preece, an energy advisor at Grayson Rural Electric, 

as the housing stock improves, “instead of driving down 

the road and seeing houses getting dilapidated and 

being abandoned, we actually get homes that are more 

marketable and people staying in the region. We see the 

retrofi tted homes as improving our communities.” The 

long-term savings on a home’s energy bill is also signifi cant, 

often providing the equivalent of a substantial income boost 

to residents once the retrofi t is paid off. 

How$mart coordinator Bill Blair captures this impact in the 

story of a grandmother whose heat pump broke down. Left 

with no other heating options for the winter, she kept herself 

and her two children warm with dangerous kerosene heaters. 

Their How$mart-fi nanced retrofi t addressed pressing 

comfort and safety issues with no out-of-pocket costs, while 

ultimately providing them with around 30 percent energy 

savings. From the energy utilities’ perspective, says Preece, 

“Anything that can help provide basic income or savings to 

people who are struggling is a benefi t.” 

Additional Resources 

For more information on clean energy and energyeffi ciency support: New York State Energy Research 

and Development Authority (NYSERDA — New York); 

Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (Southeastern US); 

Clean Energy States Alliance (National); PENN Futures

(Pennsylvania)

Best Practices & Lessons Learned 

Learn from what others have done. Energy effi ciency is 

a diffi cult fi eld to fi gure out on your own; How$martKYTM 

is based on a Kansas program, and can in turn inform 

other efforts. 

State-level policy support for an on-bill tariff is 

essential, and someone needs to take the lead on 

pulling together stakeholders and advocating for 

these policies. 

Make it easy for energy co-ops to see the benefi t of 

participating in a pilot project. 

An intermediary support organization—like MACED—is 

necessary to provide startup capital and play the 

assessment and fi nancing roles. 

Build on your local workforce and show contractors 

the benefi ts of being trained for energyeffi ciency retrofi ts. 

Focus on rural communities 

since that is where the need, 

opportunity, and impact 

are greatest. 

How$martKYTM by the Numbers 

243

Energy 

Assessments 

Conducted

127

Energy Retrofi ts 

Completed

8

Existing 

Jobs

$76,874

Projected 

Annual Savings

$5,784

Average 

Retrofi t Cost 

$40

Average Monthly 

How$martKYTM 

Charge (Paid on 

Customer Bill)

$52

Average Monthly 

Savings per 

Customer
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — ENERGY 7

landscape is changing. As the energy sector transitions, 

Jennifer Simon, the Director of OUIC, recognizes the 

importance of supporting alternative energy startups, even 

as coal and natural gas remain key industries for Appalachia.

Across Appalachia, there is a critical need to support 

businesses that are exploring clean energy innovations 

like remediation-to-energy technologies and solar power. 

These startup businesses and innovations create new 

employment and entrepreneurial opportunities, while 

building demand for a diversifi ed labor force that can plug 

into the energy supply chain. However, the success of 

these businesses depends on support from organizations 

like OUIC as they make the transition from idea to planning 

to startup. 

Critical Resources & Partners: Industry-Specifi c 

Support, Angel Fund Investors, Universities

Thirty years ago, according to Simon, southeastern 

Ohio was a community that lacked an entrepreneurial 

ecosystem or strong business support structure. There 

was limited access to investment capital, knowledge 

resources, and executive talent. Today, several crucial 

partnerships have helped OUIC create a robust support 

system for clean energy startups and others. According 

to Simon, “What our ecosystem does is provide an entire 

system of assistance that can help a company thrive.”

OUIC works closely with TechGrowth Ohio to support 

entrepreneurs with fi nancing and industry-specifi c business 

development assistance. This partnership provides 

“executive-in-residence” services for new companies which 

are often in need of crucial market research support, as 

well as business coaching, marketing support, and help for 

clients building a pitch to potential investors.

Since 1983, the Ohio University Innovation Center 

(OUIC) has served southeastern Ohio as a business 

incubator in multiple sectors. Among their many 

client businesses, OUIC has housed eight clean-energy 

startups, one of which has graduated and created 

employment opportunities in the Athens area. Of the 

current clients, two have received pre-seed and angel 

investment and a third is in due diligence for pre-seed 

funding. These energy companies accelerate sector 

development by capitalizing on new technologies, such as 

those that convert wastewater or carbon dioxide (CO2) to 

biofuels and alternative energy. OUIC’s business incubator 

model capitalizes on the growing opportunity for clean 

energy startups in Appalachia. Three of the Center’s 

energy client companies include:

■ Third Sun Solar: This OUIC graduate company installs 

small residential solar systems as well as megawatt-scale 

solar arrays for large clients around Ohio. Third Sun Solar 

has grown an average of 50 percent per year over the 

last 3 years, with revenues of $4 to 5 million since 2009.

■ ECO2CaptureTM: Founded by three Ohio University (OU) 

professors, ECO2Capture’s initial product offerings 

improve overall process effi ciency for retrofi t and 

new-build algae production systems, capturing CO2

from the air to support algae growth for algae biodiesel 

production and other end-products.

■ E3 Clean Technologies: Founded by an OU professor, 

the company is dedicated to the commercialization of 

electrochemical devices that clean up the environment 

and produce clean energy. GreenBoxTM technologies 

remove ammonia from wastewater and smog-forming 

compounds from exhaust while producing zeroemissions hydrogen fuel as a byproduct.

Opportunities for Appalachia: Clean-Energy 

Startups & Entrepreneurial Support 

Energy production has historically been an important sector 

for Appalachia, but with coal expected to decline by an 

estimated 53 percent over the next 27 years,13 the energy 

13 McIlmoil, R., Evan Hansen, Nathan Haskins, & Megan Betcher. May 2013. 

“The Continuing Decline in Demand for Central Appalachian Coal: Market and 

Regulatory Infl uences.” Downstream Strategies: page x.

Location: Athens, Ohio

Contact: www.ohio.edu/research/innovation

Energy Case Study II: Ohio University Innovation Center

What is an Angel Investor?

“Angel Investors” are individuals who invest money in 

small emerging entrepreneurial companies. They are 

interested in both a return on their investments and in 

business development in their communities. They are 

called “Angels” because they typically provide the fi rst 

‘real’ outside investment, which is essential for the 

viability of the company.
8 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —ENERGY

Another partner of the Center is the East Central Ohio 

Tech Angel Fund, which connects local angel investors to 

companies with start-up or growth capital needs. They 

collaborate to support business plan development and help 

businesses get to the point where they can attract larger 

investments from mainstream lenders.

The Center is a part of Ohio University, which provides 

a pipeline of research and invention. Many of the 

technological innovations OUIC has supported came 

directly from the university. The scientifi c expertise of 

the university, when combined with business and capital 

support systems at OUIC, has helped several innovative 

ideas mature into businesses. 

OUIC also recognizes the “power of place,” and promotes 

peer-to-peer learning and assistance through “Founder 

Forums,” which bring together entrepreneurs and 

inventors to discuss common challenges and potential 

solutions. An example of the synergy that occurs among 

entrepreneurs at OUIC is the story of an engineer at Third 

Sun Solar who recognized, through peer conversations, 

that heavy hardware and mounting equipment made 

some solar installations cost-prohibitive. Based on this 

realization, the engineer started the company Ecolibrium 

Solar, which produces an innovative light-weight mounting 

system that signifi cantly reduces the cost and time to 

install solar arrays. 

Economic Impacts: New Businesses & 

Job Creation

With 86 percent of their client companies since January 

2008 still in business, the Center demonstrates the 

kind of economic impact a business incubator can have 

when it focuses its entrepreneurial support services on 

Best Practices & Lessons Learned 

Utilize universities and other institutions as research 

and invention hubs as well as deal fl ow generators.

Identify client company needs through continued 

one-on-one consultations and matchmaking with other 

providers within the ecosystem.

Connect companies with university resources to 

improve product development.

Connect new companies with executive talent or 

corporate experience related to their sector.

Provide access to investment capital that suits the 

company’s stage of development.

Provide business development coaching for things like 

business plans and investor pitches.

Encourage the development of companies that 

address emerging gaps in the clean energy sector.

promising sectors like clean energy. The energy startups 

OUIC has supported are already beginning to transform 

the local economy and impact the industry at large. 

Through their support of small businesses, the OUIC 

has seen more than 30 jobs created directly by energy 

companies who have graduated from the program and an 

additional 15 jobs created by current clients. Additional 

indirect employment opportunities have been created for 

contractors and others. Jobs created by these companies 

(e.g. installers, lab technicians, offi ce assistants) cover a 

wide range of skills and training levels that are already 

present in the region’s labor force and transferable to the 

alternative energy sector. In a county where nearly 30 

percent of the population lives below the poverty level, 

the Center’s graduate companies have committed to fair 

wage principles, paying workers wages that are two to 

three times higher than the regional average. Meanwhile, a 

longer-term impact on rural and underserved communities 

will take the form of technologies that emerge from an 

increasingly diversifi ed and competitive energy market. 

Alternative energy companies like OUIC’s clients are part 

of a process of energy innovation that is lowering costs 

and reducing barriers to market entry.

Additional Resources 

For more information on other hi-tech business incubators: 

Ben Franklin Technology Partners (Pennsylvania), Clean 

Venture (California), SJF Institute (North Carolina), 

Alfred State College: School of Applied Technology

(New York)

Photo courtesy HiVelocity magazine, Benjamin French
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — HEALTH 9

National Trends

The size and importance of the health-care industry 

make it a dynamic economic driver for the 

Appalachian Region. Nationally, the health-care and 

social-services sector has grown over 23 percent since 

2002.14 The requirement within the Affordable Care Act of 

2010 to purchase health insurance will result in a greater 

number of people with health coverage, likely leading to 

increased demand for health-care workers. Demographic 

changes, industry shifts, and federal policies have placed 

an increased cost burden on states, and rural communities 

in particular, to create more robust healthcare delivery 

systems.15 Federal health-care policies and national trends 

that focus on creating healthy communities will continue to 

shape the health sector’s evolution in Appalachia for many 

years to come.

Opportunities & Challenges for Appalachia

Appalachia has ongoing health-care concerns that 

represent both a need and an opportunity to develop 

a robust health sector. The Region faces documented 

disparities in the incidence, prevalence, mortality, and 

14 Hess, R., Hampton, P., Music, D., Thakur, R., Mailo, N. 2012. “2012 Blueprint 

Mississippi Health Care Study Appendix.” Newmark Grubb Knight Frank: p. 5.

15 PDA, Inc. and the Cecil B. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, 

University of North Carolina — Chapel Hill. Jan. 2012. “Health Care Costs and 

Access Disparities in Appalachia.” Appalachian Regional Commission: p. 25.

burden of diseases such as diabetes, strokes, and certain 

forms of cancer, and suffers disproportionately from 

adverse health conditions such as obesity and substance 

abuse.16 Additionally, Appalachia has a higher proportion 

of residents age 65 and over than the nation as a whole, 

which creates needs and opportunities for additional 

health-care jobs. There is a growing demand for innovative 

health-care delivery systems that can reach geographically 

isolated rural communities. These needs will in turn create 

opportunities for comprehensive approaches to improving 

public health and wellness that combine educational 

campaigns, wellness infrastructure, and proactive local 

policies to encourage healthier living. 

Economic Impact & Job Creation Potential 

The health-care industry is a signifi cant economic driver and 

employment generator for many Appalachian communities. 

In addition, community wellness directly impacts the 

competitiveness of a town, city, or region, and can be 

considered an indirect economic driver.17 Combining healthcare innovations and comprehensive public-health initiatives 

is the most complete approach to increasing Appalachia’s 

community health and economic competitiveness. 

16 Ezell, T., Lambert, D., Ogle, E. Feb. 2012. “Strategies for Economic 

Improvement in Appalachia’s Distressed Counties.” Appalachian Regional 

Commission.

17 Ezell, T. et. al. p. 14.

Health Sector Overview

Photo courtesy Julie McCombs, LiveWell Greenville
10 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —HEALTH

There are multiple components of the health-care sector — 

including delivery, support, and innovation — which creates 

multiple avenues for generating employment and increasing 

household income. The total national economic impact of 

hospital payroll spending is $5.8 billion, and the health-care 

sector is projected to generate approximately 3.2 million 

more jobs before 2018. On a more micro level, one physician 

creates approximately 21 jobs and more than $2 million in 

long-term revenue for the community.18

Further, healthy communities tend to be economically 

competitive communities. Studies have shown that work 

time and productivity lost due to health issues cost 

businesses in the United States more than $250 billion 

in lost economic output per year.19 When the workforce 

is healthy and productive, there tend to be fewer costs 

associated with health-care. A healthy community has 

increased prospects for local entrepreneurship as well as 

for business attraction, retention, and growth, because 

investors and entrepreneurs are cognizant of how the health 

of the workforce will impact their operational success. If the 

health of the workforce is viewed as a detriment, it can have 

a negative effect on business development.

18 Hess, R., Hampton, P., Music, D., Thakur, R., Mailo, N. 2012. “2012 Blueprint 

Mississippi Health Care Study.” Newmark Grubb Knight Frank: p. 5.

19 Ibid.

Connection to Rural & Underserved 

Communities

Counties identifi ed by the ARC as economically distressed 

face barriers in providing health care to rural communities. 

At the same time, local health-care facilities in economically 

distressed communities are often among the largest 

employers.20 However, the growth of telemedicine and 

school-based health-care delivery has begun to address 

this issue and offer greater health-care options for 

remote areas.21 If Appalachian communities invest in 

telecommunication and information technologies to provide 

clinical health-care, they will be able to better address the 

needs of rural and underserved members of their community. 

Further, in Appalachia, the share of residents ages 65 and 

over is expected to increase over the coming years as 

the large baby boom cohorts continue to move into this 

age group. This will necessitate more trained health-care 

workers to provide them with critical services. Many rural 

communities could benefi t from workforce development 

that prepares a new generation of rural health-care 

practitioners to provide for their own communities. 

Community wellness is also increasingly important to 

Appalachia’s rural populations, as proactive public-health 

and wellness policies can increase a community’s wellbeing and economic potential, and lower long-term healthcare costs. 

20 Ezell, T., Lambert, D., Ogle, E. Feb. 2012. “Strategies for Economic Improvement 

in Appalachia’s Distressed Counties.” Appalachian Regional Commission.

21 Lane, N., Andrew Lutz, Kimberly Baker, Bob Konrad, Thomas Ricketts, Randy 

Randolph, Charles Tran, Chirstopher Beadles. Jan. 2012. “Health Care Costs 

and Access Disparities in Appalachia.” PDA, Inc. and UNC Chapel Hill: p. 121. 

Photo courtesy Melissa Cox
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — HEALTH 11

Health Case Study I: LiveWell Greenville

LiveWell Greenville is a health coalition in Greenville 

County focused on reducing childhood obesity and 

creating healthier community environments. Through 

its eight working groups (At School, Before & After School, 

At Work, Around Town, At Worship, At the Doctor, At 

Mealtime, and For Fun), LiveWell provides support and 

advocacy for health-related projects in the county. The 

coalition’s goal is to help maximize impacts on the health 

environment and showcase the community as a model for 

improving health and wellness.

Opportunities for Appalachia: Public Health & 

Collective Impact 

LiveWell Greenville is a model based on collective impact, 

a specifi c form of collaboration that includes sharing a 

common agenda, measuring similar data, communicating 

among partners, and having a separate support organization 

coordinating these activities.22 The collective impact model 

holds potential for Appalachia because it is based on the 

premise that the complex nature of large-scale social change 

is more than a single organization can achieve independently. 

The collective model provides a “more powerful and realistic 

paradigm for social progress” in Appalachia and elsewhere.23

LiveWell works to create healthy environments through 

a broad range of collaborative partnerships that help 

increase the impact and reach of the initiative. The types 

of projects LiveWell supports are common opportunities 

across Appalachia, and include parks and recreational 

facilities, public education programs on the importance 

of healthy environments, walkable business districts, bike 

repair mentorship programs for at-risk youth, and farmto-school programs that increase the amount of local, 

fresh food in K-12 schools and after-school programs. 

All LiveWell projects are based on the recognition that a 

healthy community depends on having an environment 

where people are able to make healthy choices.

22 Hanleybrown, F., Kania, J., and Kramer, M. (2012). Channeling change: 

Making collective impact work. Stanford Social Innovation Review: Leland 

Stanford Jr. University.

23 Hanleybrown et. al.: p. 1.

A similar coalition 

may be a useful tool 

for Appalachian 

communities facing 

a multitude of 

health concerns, 

including substance 

abuse, malnutrition, 

obesity, and mental 

illness. An inclusive 

coalition model can 

build on and connect 

a community’s 

existing health 

programs to create 

an environment that 

addresses multiple 

health concerns.

Critical Resources & Partners: Existing 

Community Assets and Cross-Sector 

Collaboration 

Because LiveWell Greenville focuses on advocacy, one of 

its main challenges has been communicating the impact of 

the coalition. In order to overcome this challenge, LiveWell 

has encouraged the development of the “Swamp Rabbit 

Trail” to help increase visibility for a broader range of 

health initiatives. The Swamp Rabbit Trail, built in 2010, is a 

17.5-mile multi-use public recreation corridor created with 

support from the city of Greenville, Greenville County, and 

Furman University. New businesses have sprung up around 

the trail since its development, and sales have increased 

for surrounding businesses by as much as 85 percent.24

LiveWell Greenville has provided support and publicity 

for the Swamp Rabbit Trail, and the early success of the 

trail has helped LiveWell by providing a concrete, visible 

example of how the coalition’s work helps create positive 

health and economic outcomes in the community. 

LiveWell Greenville’s structure has been critical to its 

success. The initiative began with a leadership team made 

up of community leaders motivated to address childhood 

obesity. Two years later, LiveWell assembled an infl uential 

advisory board made up of CEOs, city managers, county 

managers, and others, which meets twice a year to oversee 

24 Reed, J. (2012). Greenville Health System Swamp Rabbit Trail: Year 1 

Findings. Furman University.

Location: Greenville County, South Carolina

Contact: www.livewellgreenville.org

Photo courtesy Julie McCombs, LiveWell Greenville
12 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —HEALTH

the coalition’s strategic direction. LiveWell Greenville’s 

structure has been effective thanks in large part to the 

YMCA, which operates as the support organization for the 

initiative. The coalition’s multi-institutional evaluation team 

has also played an important role. Each of the coalition’s 

eight aforementioned working groups has an evaluator 

tasked with tracking changes in policy and environments, 

which allows LiveWell to measure its impacts against local, 

state, and federal standards and build community support 

for its work. 

Support and resources from multiple funding sources 

have also been critical to the initiative’s success. LiveWell 

received large foundation grants for its start-up funding, 

but the coalition has also generated support from the 

local community. It has secured backing from local parks 

and recreation entities, and has also received private 

investment from companies like Elliott Davis, Rosenfeld 

Einstein and South Carolina Tool, which recognize the 

value of a healthy, productive workforce.

Economic Impacts: Health Equity, Employment, 

& Increased Marketability 

LiveWell Greenville’s focus on health equity creates a 

healthy environment for everyone in Greenville County. 

Although LiveWell Greenville reaches 200,000 community 

members, its work is intensely focused on underserved 

communities. LiveWell works with Title I schools to foster 

healthier school environments and impact family health 

through after-school programs and connections with faithbased organizations. 

Affi liated projects are providing employment opportunities 

and creating economic impacts in the community. For 

example, $500,000 in revenue for local farmers was 

generated when LiveWell created avenues for fresh 

produce to reach 91 schools and 72,000 students in the 

Greenville school district. Similarly, LiveWell helped attract 

funding to complete an economic impact analysis of the 

Swamp Rabbit Trail. As a result, there is now data on how 

the increasingly walkable business districts are generating 

between 30 and 85 percent more revenue for Greenville 

County businesses.25 These health-based economic 

outcomes make Greenville County a marketable and 

attractive community for businesses and families looking 

to relocate to the area.

25 Reed, J. (2012). Greenville Health System Swamp Rabbit Trail: Year 1 

Findings. Furman University.

Best Practices & Lessons Learned 

Establish three criteria before launching a health 

coalition: a specifi c goal (reducing childhood obesity), 

a clear method for creating change (through 

environmental and policy change, not individual 

behavior), and a powerful motivating factor (making 

Greenville County one of the healthiest communities 

in the nation).

Working groups are idea generators and platforms for 

organizations to partner and create larger impacts, but 

they need consistent leadership and support to keep 

the work moving forward.

An evaluation team can contribute to the coalition’s 

overall sustainability by providing continuous feedback 

for improvement.

Using the collective impact model and a backbone 

support organization is critical for achieving large scale 

social impact.

If specifi c health initiatives need their own voice, help 

the community create spin-off organizations.

Make the healthy choice an easy and attractive option 

that encourages participation from the local population.

Photo courtesy Julie McCombs, LiveWell Greenville
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — HEALTH 13

The Hale County Health Development Partnership 

(HCHDP) is a workforce development pipeline 

program in western Alabama developed by the 

Department of Community and Rural Medicine at the 

University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa. HCHDP is an 

entrepreneurial partnership among rural high schools, 

medical students and residents at the University of 

Alabama, and Hale County’s health-care industry. These 

partners work together to increase the number of students 

from rural areas who enter the medical profession and 

return to practice in rural communities. The partnership’s 

main activity is a year-long program for 10th graders, 

which provides fi eld trips and hands-on learning to 

introduce them to rural health care and the specifi c 

medical professional opportunities available locally.

Opportunities for Appalachia: Health Care 

Needs & Underserved Students 

Hale County has struggled with limited access to health 

care and a shortage of medical providers. In light of this, 

the partnership’s goal is to increase the number of rural 

medical professionals by tapping into the potential of 

local high school students. When these students return 

to practice medicine in their rural communities, the 

economic impacts can be powerful. On average for a rural 

community, when a single rural physician establishes a 

practice it generates approximately 21 jobs and over $2 

million in long-term revenue within the local economy.26

26 Interview: Dr. John Wheat, Hale County Health Development Partnership 

Principal Investigator, 25 September 2013.

The expanded health insurance coverage mandated by the 

federal Affordable Care Act (2010), coupled with a rise in 

common lifestyle diseases and an aging rural population, will 

likely increase the demand for health-care delivery in most 

rural communities. HCHDP is working to address this need 

while creating economic opportunities for local students. 

Developing locally-based health-care delivery systems 

is a great way for a rural community to “grow its own,” 

according to Dr. John Wheat, the principal investigator for 

the HCHDP. The Hale County initiative is an example of how 

rural communities can “show kids that they don’t have to 

leave to do something good [...] they don’t have to think they 

need to escape from their home community to fi nd work.”

Critical Resources & Partners: Community 

Relationships & State Investment

The success of the Hale County Health Development 

Partnership has relied on strong relationships within the 

community and support at the local, state, and federal 

levels. One critical partner for this project has been the 

Rural Alabama Health Alliance, a group of area economic 

development and health-sector representatives that 

has provided the University of Alabama with advice, 

encouragement, and political support, helping to establish 

credibility for their efforts in rural communities like 

Hale County. 

Thanks to a strong existing relationship with Hale County 

community leaders, the university was able to form a local 

advisory council made up of members of the school board, 

teachers, health-care professionals, judges, parents, and 

other interested community members. The thoughtful 

involvement of the local community in the planning 

and program development process has helped build 

momentum, excitement, and local support for the project. 

Health Case Study II: Hale County Health 

Development Partnership

Location: Hale County, Alabama

Contact: www.cchs.ua.edu/crm/rural-healthprograms

“ We need to transition as the health policies of 

the U.S. change. This partnership is helping 

us to change, to capture opportunities, to 

meet our mission.”

—Dr. John Wheat, Principal Investigator, 

Hale County Health Development Partnership

Photo courtesy Melissa Cox
14 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —HEALTH

The HCHDP also benefi ts from multiple levels of 

government support. Created by the Alabama Legislature 

in 1989, the Family Practice Rural Health Board provides 

funding for rural health programs across the state. The 

board receives $1.5 million per year from the state to 

encourage medical education programs to bring more 

doctors to rural communities. The university was able 

to use grants from the board to fund its rural health 

initiative, and now, thanks to the success of programs like 

the Hale County Health Development Partnership, the 

state legislature provides additional funding to run the 

university’s rural health programs. 

Economic Impacts: Homegrown Physicians & 

Leveraged Funding

The economic and community impacts of the Hale County 

Health Development Partnership occur on several levels. 

The University of Alabama creates real-world training 

opportunities that put medical students in touch with 

rural communities. For medical students and residents, 

training in Hale County and interacting with the high 

school students in the program provides a personal 

understanding of the unique needs associated with 

rural health care. At the same time, local health-care 

professionals benefi t from the medical residents who train 

in Hale County. Lastly, the program’s students acquire a 

basic understanding of what a career in rural health care 

can offer them. 

Since the HCHDP began in 2011, 20 students from Hale 

County have gone through the program, and impacts are 

beginning to show. Dana Todd, one of the residents who 

participated in the program, grew up in Hale County. After 

completing her residency, including an HCHDP elective in 

the community, Dr. Todd returned home to open her own 

practice — a move that will increase access to health-care 

services for local residents and bring a variety of economic 

benefi ts to the community. 

The pride HCHDP generates for the community also 

facilitates residual economic impacts. Dr. Wheat observes, 

“It’s really remarkable to see the evolution of [the 

students’] personalities as they feel like they are part 

of this bigger thing. The more pride a kid takes in their 

community, the better off that community is economically, 

socially, spiritually, however you want to measure it.”

Additional Resources 

For more information on innovative health initiatives: 

Center for Rural Health Innovation (North Carolina); 

Kentucky Trail Towns (Kentucky); Itawamba Community

College Allied Health Program (Mississippi)

Best Practices & Lessons Learned 

Link University medical training programs with rural 

communities to increase health care access.

Advocate for state and federal support for rural 

health initiatives that combine education and 

economic impacts.

Harnessing local leadership to take the reins of 

multi-institutional programs is challenging but critical. 

According to Dr. Wheat, “kids need to start connecting 

with their local leadership because we want them to be 

imprinted upon locally rather than being imprinted upon 

from the enthusiasm of the University of Alabama.” 

Create local partnership with the school system, 

a Cooperative Extension System offi ce, or an Area 

Health Education Centers (AHEC) as a way to build 

stakeholders willing to share project responsibility.

Begin with a strong community-based leadership team 

that understands and represents the local community’s 

particular needs, structure, political realities, 

and resources. 

“ Over the past 12 years, the University of 

Alabama’s rural health programs, including 

the HCHDP, have produced 50 doctors who 

have located practices in rural Alabama 

communities. These placements have 

leveraged the state’s $6 million investment 

to bring an additional $200 million in rural 

health economic impacts to Alabama.”

—Dr. John Wheat
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — MANUFACTURING 15

National Trends

The manufacturing sector in the United States 

has been transformed by the forces of globalized 

trade. Since as early as the 1970s, manufacturing 

has steadily lost jobs and businesses to outsourcing and 

overseas competition. There are signs, however, that this 

trend is beginning to reverse, due to rising wages overseas 

and increased shipping costs, as well as to productivity 

gains and technological improvements in the United States.

By 2015, the cost difference between manufacturing and 

shipping from Asia and manufacturing in the U.S. will likely 

be less than 10 percent.27

Manufacturing fi rms are increasingly interested in domestic 

production because of reduced transportation costs, tighter 

quality control, the ability to drive products to markets 

faster, and growing consumer demand for American-made 

and socially-responsible products. American workers are 

also becoming more attractive to corporations, due in part 

to increases in worker productivity.28 As a result, there are 

early signs of a “re-shoring” of manufacturing. A worker27 White, Martha. “The Economic Impact of Made in the USA”. Industry Edge. 

Accessed 6.26.13. http://industryedge.nationalhardwareshow.com/2013/06/

the-rising-demand-for-made-in-the-usa-products#sthash.roNYy4U8.dpuf

28 Plumer, Brad. “Is U.S. manufacturing making a comeback — or is it just 

hype?” Washington Post. Accessed 10.8.13. http://www.washingtonpost.com/

postlive/conferences/manufacturing

owned textile cooperative in Burke County, North Carolina, 

Opportunity Threads, has already helped an American

company relocate its production operations from Bangladesh 

to the Region.

29 The Washington Post reports that this 

trend will likely become more common across a variety of 

manufacturing industries.30

These global economic trends are accompanied by increasing 

consumer demand for products that are made locally or in 

the United States. A raft of surveys and retail scans show 

that consumers highly prioritize goods that are domestically 

produced. According to consumer surveys, the trend towards 

“Made in the USA” has three main drivers: 1) a sense of 

patriotism, 2) a desire to help the American economy, and 3) 

the belief that American-made products are of higher quality.31

Opportunities & Challenges in Appalachia

For decades, manufacturing has accounted for one of the 

largest shares of total Appalachian employment; providing 

10.9 percent of all jobs in the Region as recently as 2011.32

The Appalachian Region’s dependence on manufacturing 

29 Interview: Molly Hemstreet, Manager, Opportunity Threads. Sept. 24, 2013.

30 Plumer. 

31 White.

32 Appalachian Regional Commission. 2011. “Economic overview of 

Appalachia—2011.” Accessed at: http://www.arc.gov/images/appregion/

Sept2011/EconomicOverviewSept2011.pdf 

Manufacturing Sector Overview

Photo courtesy Robert Peak
16 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —MANUFACTURING

has also been a vulnerability, 

as the Region lost over 

473,000 (24.6 percent) 

of its manufacturing jobs 

between 2002 and 2008.33

The rejuvenation of the 

manufacturing sector is 

an opportunity to reverse 

this decline, and there are 

promising signs. In 2011, for 

example, North Carolina 

saw its fi rst net increase 

in manufacturing jobs in 

16 years.34

Appalachia’s existing 

manufacturing 

infrastructure, knowledge, 

and workforce position the 

Region well as the sector 

enters what may be a new 

economic phase. As director of the North Carolina-based 

Manufacturing Solutions Center (MSC), Dan St. Louis 

has been forecasting the rise, decline, and gains of this 

sector for the past 34 years. He argues that the Region 

currently has a powerful, but time-sensitive, opportunity 

in this sector. “Manufacturing has a real and true history 

in Appalachia, it is something we have a competitive edge 

in. But we are going to lose that edge in fi ve years if we 

don’t do something now.”35 Factories and other facilities 

are available to be re-tooled for hi-tech and other forms 

of manufacturing. Young entrepreneurs are pushing 

innovative production models and capitalizing on emerging 

niches in the market. At the same time, Appalachia has a 

workforce that may be well-suited to the manufacturing 

sector, including a large population of middle-skilled 

workers — those with more than a high school diploma but 

less than a four-year degree.

Economic Impact & Job Creation Potential

Manufacturing has the potential to generate new 

businesses and return experienced workers back to work. 

33 Appalachian Regional Commission. 2011. “Economic overview of 

Appalachia-2011”. Accessed at: http://www.arc.gov/images/appregion/

Sept2011/EconomicOverviewSept2011.pdf.

34 NC Rural Center. “Our Manufacturing Future.” Accessed at: http://www.

ncruralcenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=607.

35 Interview: Dan St. Louis, Director, Manufacturing Solutions Center. Sept. 25, 

2013. 

The industry shift towards higher craftsmanship standards 

and the increase in “green-collar” industries is helping 

to generate new types of manufacturing that can build 

on existing workforce and infrastructure.36 Workforce 

development training programs from community colleges 

and other institutions across Appalachia will be critical to 

capturing new manufacturing opportunities. Meanwhile, 

regional leaders are already crafting a new narrative 

for manufacturing: that it not only pays well, but also 

involves craftsmanship, skilled technicians, a collaborative 

approach, and a focus on sustainability.37

The sector also offers increasing opportunities for small 

businesses and entrepreneurs. A forthcoming report from 

the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, “Production 

in the Innovation Economy,” predicts that domestic 

manufacturing will shift away from a landscape dominated 

by large corporations. “Instead, the future of manufacturing 

will consist of smaller fi rms that may not always have 

enough money to train workers, commercialize new 

products and procure fi nancing on their own.”38

Connection to Rural & Underserved 

Communities

Manufacturing is especially important to rural communities 

throughout Appalachia. In North Carolina, for example, it 

accounts for 14 percent of total employment and $9.3 billion 

in annual wages in rural communities.39 Manufacturing also 

provides higher-quality jobs than many rural industries; in 

North Carolina, the average rural manufacturing wage of 

$42,297 is nearly a third higher than the average for other 

private, non-manufacturing jobs.40

Workforce retraining offers signifi cant opportunities for 

low- and middle-skilled workers in rural communities. 

Community colleges, universities, nonprofi t organizations, 

and regional collaborations such as the Appalachia 

Funders Network are supporting a wide range of services 

for business development and job training, helping prepare 

the Region to meet the demands of the rapidly changing 

manufacturing sector.41

36 Economic Modeling Specialists, Inc. May 2009. “How to Prepare Jobseekers 

for the Green Economy.” Moscow, ID: Economic Specialists, Inc. as cited in RTS 

Inc. ARC Energy Workforce Trends and Training Needs, p. A-25.

37 Interview: Molly Hemstreet, Manager, Opportunity Threads. Sept. 24, 2013.

38 MIT: Production in the Innovation Economy. As cited in Plumer.

39 NC Rural Center. 

40 Ibid. 

41 Plumer.

Photo courtesy Robert Peak
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — MANUFACTURING 17

As a West Virginia native and furniture designer, Gat 

Caperton was uniquely positioned to recognize 

the opportunity to connect Appalachia’s bountiful 

hardwood forests with value-added furniture production. He 

stepped into this niche, and Gat Creek Furniture was born. 

Opportunities for Appalachia: Value-Added 

Manufacturing & Demand for USA-Made 

Products 

The reinvention of manufacturing in Appalachia presents 

a promising horizon, according to Caperton, who calls 

himself “a believer in value-added manufacturing for 

Appalachia.” For hardwood furniture manufacturing in 

particular, being close to a source of high-quality raw 

materials is a signifi cant advantage as shipping costs 

increase. At the same time, manufacturing technologies 

are becoming increasingly effective and affordable, 

allowing enterprises in rural Appalachia to compete in 

larger markets. 

Appalachia is also endowed with what Caperton calls a 

“fantastic agrarian workforce. People get up early and 

work hard, are ‘ingenuitive,’ and are self-suffi cient.” These 

qualities may make Appalachian workers ideally suited for 

value-added manufacturing, and allow Gat Creek to avoid 

having to hire outside experts since the locals can fi gure it 

out for themselves. 

Manufacturing in Appalachia is also capitalizing on a renewed 

emphasis on products that are made in the United States. 

According to Caperton, this interest didn’t exist fi ve years 

ago, but now there is a great appreciation from mainstream 

buyers. The “Made in the USA” narrative has historically 

been about auto workers and patriotism, but is now more 

about environmental and community sustainability. “People 

recognize that it’s good for companies to be based here and 

to employ people who work here. Buying USA-made costs a 

little more, but affects a lot more.”

Critical Resources & Partners: Capital, 

Coaching, Production Networks, and 

“Gazelle” Customers 

Traditional manufacturing businesses are relatively 

bankable, due to the tangible assets and inventory that 

make it easy for banks to make loans. Even so, capital is 

a signifi cant early barrier for entrepreneurs. Caperton’s 

advice is for companies to focus on being capital-effi cient, 

operating as leanly as possible with limited capital. 

Caperton is also a board member of a local community 

development lender, the Natural Capital Investment Fund 

(NCIF). NCIF and other community development fi nancial 

institutions are powerful resources for providing and 

leveraging capital, particularly for the many investments in 

Appalachia that are small-scale and effort-intensive. 

Besides capital, good coaching and technical assistance 

from experienced business professionals and others 

has been critical to Gat Creek’s success. “With good 

Manufacturing Case Study I: Gat Creek Furniture

Location: Berkeley Springs, West Virginia

Contact: www.gatcreek.com

“ 16 years ago, West Virginia was cutting down 

trees, sending them away, and buying back 

the furniture made from them. I believed 

the entire process could be done here when 

I bought the company, and it’s proven to be 

a viable and successful business.”

—Gat Caperton, owner, Gat Creek

Photo courtesy Robert Peak
18 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —MANUFACTURING

coaching and technical assistance, you can overcome a 

lot of barriers. Having ARC and other service providers 

involved in the Region, there are some unique resources 

in Appalachia that are pretty valuable. There are lots of 

business support resources out there,” says Caperton, 

“But it’s hard for a lot of people to fi nd them, and fi gure 

out how to tap and use them, at the same time as you’re 

trying to run a business.”

Gat Creek also makes use of an innovative production 

network to increase sales volume. All of the design, 

fi nishing, and marketing is done in-house, and products 

are sold under the Gat Creek brand. However, about half of 

the unfi nished furniture — mostly drawers and other simple 

components that aren’t as technology-intensive — is built by 

a network of 20 small workshops. These largely Amish and 

Mennonite workshops, grouped in two clusters in Ohio and 

Pennsylvania, allow Gat Creek to achieve larger production 

volume and focus on their specialty of design, marketing 

and value-added fi nishing. 

Lastly, Gat Creek has capitalized on the growing valueadded niche in the furniture market. Manufacturing 

businesses face diffi culties securing larger retail partners 

who can help operations like Gat Creek reach a broad 

base of end consumers. The key to accessing large 

urban markets, where the demand for high-end furniture 

products is greatest, is identifying the right customers. 

Caperton has utilized what he calls the “Gazelle strategy,” 

where a company like Gat Creek builds a partnership with 

a large urban retail chain that appreciates their valueadded products. The retail partner(s) — Crate & Barrel is 

one of Gat Creek’s examples — create a pipeline to urban 

demand that allows the business to increase its scale and 

focus on producing quality products, rather than having to 

constantly search for new markets. 

Economic Impacts: Local Ownership & 

Quality Jobs

For Caperton, economic impact begins with local 

ownership. When a company is locally owned, the money 

it generates stays in the community; it gets services from 

other local businesses, helps maintain the tax base, and 

continually invests in the general health and well-being of 

the region. Gat Creek’s annual sales are approximately $14 

million, and much of that remains in the local economy. 

“Our payroll turns over a lot in this community,” says 

Caperton, “That impact on the economy is very real and 

very powerful.”

While his company provides work for 120 employees, 

the number itself doesn’t mean much to Caperton. “It’s 

great to create jobs, but the number of jobs is not a 

great measure. One good job is worth fi ve low-quality 

jobs. Manufacturing should generate good jobs.” Good 

manufacturing jobs entail tangible elements like a 

living wage, safe workplace, and health care, as well as 

intangibles like a workplace that appreciates the laborers 

and gives them a chance to have pride in their work. 

Additional Resources 

For other manufacturing network models: Carolina Textile 

District (North Carolina), Contraxx Furniture (Ohio), MidAtlantic Technology, Research, and Innovation Center

(West Virginia)

For more information on CDFIs: Natural Capital 

Investment Fund (West Virginia); Virginia Community 

Capital (Virginia); Kentucky Highlands Investment 

Corporation (Kentucky); Mountain Bizworks

(North Carolina)

Best Practices & Lessons Learned 

Take advantage of support resources such as 

capital from CDFIs, technical assistance, and 

business coaching. 

Be capital effi cient and operate as leanly as possible.

Capitalize on the Made in the USA trend; tell your story 

and build on the local connections. 

Build production networks that increase capacity and 

allow you to focus on your strengths. 

Identify your “value-add” — the consumer demand 

you’re meeting and the market niche you’re fi lling.

Find the “gazelles” — build relationships with large 

urban retailers who value your work and understand 

how to position your product for success. 

Be aware that manufacturing in a rural community isn’t 

easy, but is ultimately very valuable. It is hard for rural 

companies to serve urban markets, but when it works, 

it’s a powerful business model. 
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — LOCAL FOOD 19

National Trends

I

n recent years, the local food sector has demonstrated 

strong and steady growth on a national scale. The 

dialogue about food, and in particular local food, 

has begun to enter the mainstream of American 

consciousness. This trend is apparent in media coverage, 

policy changes, academic publications, and increased 

consumer demand for local food. 

The growth in demand for local food in recent years has 

been impressive. Direct-to-consumer sales, which include 

local farmers markets, community-supported agriculture 

programs and on-farm sales, grew 117 percent between 1997 

and 2007, from $551 million to $1.2 billion.42 Overall, including 

retail and restaurant purchases, total local food sales in 

2008 were slightly less than $5 billion nationally, and have 

continued to grow steadily through 2012.43

Federal, state, and local governments have shown 

increased support for local food systems through policy 

changes and resource allocation. Federal grant and loan 

programs, as well as technical assistance and training, are 

42 Martinez, Steve. et. al. 2010. “Local Food Systems: Concepts, Impacts, and 

Issues.” United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, 

Washington, DC: May 2010. p. 8.

43 Matson, James, Martha Sullins and Chris Cook. “Role of Food Hubs in Local Food 

Marketing.” USDA Rural Development Service Report 73. January 2013. p. 9.

widely available and increasingly utilized. Meanwhile, there 

is a robust network of regional and national organizations 

dedicated to supporting and expanding local food systems. 

Opportunities & Challenges in Appalachia

The local food sector is particularly promising for the 

Appalachian Region. Appalachia possesses a variety of 

cultural assets supportive of local food system development, 

including an on-going tradition of small farming and home 

gardening, regional food diversity, knowledge of seed-saving 

and the cultivation of heirloom varieties of local food, and a 

rich cultural heritage of craft, music, storytelling, literature, 

and customs related to food. Appalachia is also home to some 

of the nation’s most visionary leadership in the local food 

movement, as numerous organizations are working to develop 

a diversifi ed local food infrastructure of farmers markets, 

food-processing facilities, shared-use kitchen incubators and 

processing centers, and aggregation and distribution centers. 

One of Appalachia’s core challenges, however, is the 

relatively small size of its farms. For example, median 

farm size in Appalachian Kentucky is just 83.5 acres; in 

West Virginia, 89 acres; in Ohio, 79 acres; in Virginia, 70 

acres.44 Therefore, developing local food systems that 

44 USDA National Agricultural Statistical Service, 2007. Accessed at http://

www.nass.usda.gov. 

Local Food Sector Overview
serve as economic drivers requires strategies that increase 

capacity and market access for small producers. According 

to the Central Appalachian Network, needed services 

and infrastructure include processing, aggregation and 

distribution facilities; models and systems that connect 

farmers to institutional markets while continuing to 

support direct sales outlets; technical and business 

support to local producers; and development of valueadded infrastructure and knowledge.45

Economic Impact & Job Creation Potential 

Local food is increasingly recognized as a high-impact 

sector for job creation and economic development. Income 

and employment benefi ts in the local food sector occur 

through substitution (buying local instead of farther away) 

and localization (processing closer), and both methods 

result in additional jobs and more dollars circulating in 

the local community.46 Economic output multipliers, which 

measure the impact of sales on the local economy, range 

from 1.55 to 1.78. This means that every dollar of local food 

sales stimulates another $0.55 to $0.78 in other sales and 

income in the local economy.47

A recent study found that if West Virginia farmers grew 

enough fruits and vegetables to meet the in-season fresh 

produce needs of all state residents, such a shift would 

generate 1,723 new jobs and contribute an additional 

$35.7 million in local sales. Additionally, growing this extra 

produce would require cultivating less than 10 percent 

of West Virginia’s undeveloped prime farmland.48 These 

fi gures may be similar across the rest of Appalachia.

In 2009, approximately 94,000 people in Central 

Appalachia were employed in agriculture, yet there were 

over 97,000 farming operations, suggesting the importance 

of small-scale farming as a source of supplementary income. 

However, the employment potential in local food systems is 

not limited to production. A study found that for each fulltime job created by farmers markets, nearly half of another 

full-time job was created elsewhere in the local economy.49 

45 Central Appalachian Network and Central Appalachian Forestry 

Alliance. “Opportunities for Land-Based Economic Development in Central 

Appalachia.”

46 Martinez et. al. 

47 Swenson, D. 2010. “Selected measures of the economic values of 

increased fruit and vegetable production and consumption in the upper 

Midwest.” Ames, IA: Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture. Otto, 

D. 2010. “Consumers, vendors, and the economic importance of Iowa 

farmers markets: An economic impact survey analysis.” Ames, IA: Strategic 

Economics Group. 

48 Hartz, Laura, et. al. “West Virginia Food System: Seasonal Production 

Expansion and its Impacts.” Downstream Strategies, West Virginia University, 

West Virginia Food and Farm Coalition. 17 January 2012.

49 Otto, D.

In West Virginia 31 farmers markets generated an estimated 

69 full-time equivalent jobs and $656,000 in labor income.50

It is also worth noting that local food intermediation 

models, such as food hubs, dramatically increase the scale 

of local food’s economic impact. An analysis by the USDA’s 

Economic Research Service found that “marketing of 

local food via both direct-to-consumer and intermediated 

channels grossed $4.8 billion in 2008 — about four 

times higher than estimates based solely on direct-toconsumer sales.”51

Other immediate economic benefi ts of a local food system 

can include improvement in residents’ health (due to 

fresher and less processed food), food security (especially 

when supplemental benefi ts can be used at farmers 

markets), reduced environmental impact, and maintenance 

of working lands.52

Connection to Rural & Underserved 

Communities

For small-scale rural farms, market entry and 

infrastructure remain key challenges. For these food and 

farm businesses, capacity constraints and the lack of 

distribution systems are typically the greatest obstacles 

to economic viability. Intermediation models such as 

food hubs are “part of a growing local food system that 

strengthens rural economies by lowering entry barriers 

and improving infrastructure to create, as well as expand, 

regional food markets. They can also create rural jobs. 

This rural on- and off-farm employment can expand 

opportunities and encourage skilled people, including 

youth, to remain in rural areas.”53

In addition, efforts to connect local farmers to public 

schools and to increase access to farmers markets are 

promising for public health reasons. And, despite claims 

that local food is not affordable for low-income consumers, 

a recent study found that price is not a barrier for lowincome shoppers at farmers markets — rather, the keys to 

improving access to healthy, fresh, and local food are more 

accessible locations and increased information.54

50 Hughes, David, et al. 2008. “Evaluating the Economic Impact of Farmers 

Markets Using an Opportunity Cost Framework.” Journal of Agriculture and 

Applied Economics, Vol. 40: p. 253–265.

51 Matson et. al. p. 9.

52 Hartz et. al.

53 Matson et. al. p. 6.

54 Project for Public Spaces & Columbia University. “Farmers Markets as a 

Strategy to Improve Access to Healthy Food for Low-Income Families and 

Communities.” Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Accessed at: http://www.

pps.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/RWJF-Report.pdf. 

20 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —LOCAL FOOD
Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — LOCAL FOOD 21

The Greenbrier Valley, in southeastern West Virginia, 

is the watershed shared by Pocahontas, Greenbrier, 

and Monroe counties. While efforts in the local food 

economy have a long history, several related initiatives 

that have been operating since 2010 show great promise. 

These initiatives include: 

■ The Greenbrier Valley Local Foods Initiative (GVLFI):

The initiative, a project of the Greenbrier Valley Economic 

Development Corporation, provides technical assistance 

and training for food and farm entrepreneurs; recently 

launched the “Greenbrier Valley GrownTM” brand; and is 

exploring the feasibility of a processing, aggregation, and 

distribution facility for area farmers.

■ The Greenbrier Valley Pasture Network (GVPN): GVPN 

works to support and educate local farmers on pastureraised meat production through regular meetings and 

workshops on topics such as conservation, land restoration, 

and animal health, as well as organizing an annual farm tour. 

■ Monroe Farm Market (MFM): MFM is a farmer 

cooperative that also serves as an aggregator and 

online marketplace for local food products. Through 

their web-based platform, MFM sells products from 25 

farms in the Monroe County area and reaches markets 

as far away as Charleston, West Virginia.

Opportunities for Appalachia: Rural-Urban 

Connections, Branding, & Agritourism

These organizations work together to strengthen and 

connect their area’s agricultural assets, helping local 

food and farm entrepreneurs capitalize on the increasing 

consumer demand for locally-grown food and authentic 

rural landscapes. This growing demand for local agricultural 

products, and the corresponding opportunities for area 

farmers, is present across much of Appalachia. 

The Greenbrier Valley also faces challenges that are seen 

throughout Appalachia, including lack of market access and 

distance from highly populated urban centers. To overcome 

the challenge of geographical isolation, the Monroe Farm 

Market creates rural-urban connections via its online 

marketplace and by serving as an aggregator and distributor of 

locally grown food. The online marketplace and pooling of local 

products creates the opportunity for rural farmers to reach 

customers in larger urban demand centers such as Charleston, 

West Virginia. 

The Greenbrier Valley Local Foods Initiative is also working 

to create rural-urban connections. GVLFI has launched a 

feasibility study to look at the possibility of developing a 

processing, aggregation, and distribution (PAD) facility. 

The PAD facility aims to aggregate and process the 

products of local growers in order to serve larger markets 

and increase food-based economic activity in the region. 

Meanwhile, the recently-launched Greenbrier Valley 

GrownTM brand will create a common place-based identity 

for local food and farm entrepreneurs that will result in 

increased market exposure and consumer awareness for 

local products. Greenbrier Valley GrownTM certifi es not only 

produce and meat, but also value-added products, farmers 

markets, food-related retailers, and restaurants. 

The Greenbrier Valley also has a growing demand for 

agritourism. The GVPN is currently working with Dr. Carol 

Kline, Assistant Professor from the Center for Sustainable 

Tourism at East Carolina University, to create a multistop farm tour that will connect visitors to agricultural 

sites across the Greenbrier Valley. Kline recognizes that 

agritourism will not fi t all farmers’ interests right away. “The 

goal is not to convince farmers to sign up — it’s to let them know 

that this is a revenue generating alternative; it’s a tool that 

some are using successfully to increase brand recognition, 

form that emotional connection with customers, and educate 

people that not all meat is alike.” Participating farms receive 

agritourism resources, training, and marketing support to help 

maximize the income generation potential of their farms. 

Local Food Sector Case Study I: The Greenbrier Valley

Location: Greenbrier Valley, West Virginia

Contact: www.greenbriervalley.org

Photo courtesy Leah Elizabeth Photography
22 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —LOCAL FOOD

Critical Resources & Partners: Cross-Sector 

Collaboration, Supportive Policies & Funding

Collaboration between mainstream economic development 

institutions and grassroots organizations has been integral 

to the development of the Greenbrier Valley local food 

economy. The Greenbrier Valley Economic Development 

Corporation (GVEDC) has helped area farmers markets 

access funding, acted as the fi scal sponsor for non-501(c)(3) 

organizations, and provided offi ce space for start-up groups. 

The West Virginia University Small Farms Center has provided 

local food education, networking opportunities at its annual 

conference, vendor guides, and toolkits for small farmers. 

In addition to providing local market outlets, grassroots 

organizations like the Monroe Farm Market, the Pocahontas 

County Farmers Market and the Greenbrier Valley Pasture 

Network also conduct community outreach and education, 

provide networking opportunities for growers and local food 

supporters, and help leverage additional resources for the 

continued development of the food economy. AmeriCorps 

VISTA positions have been used widely and successfully to 

increase the capacity of grassroots efforts and train the next 

generation of local food leaders.

Statewide policies that support local foods have also 

been essential. The West Virginia Food & Farm Coalition 

(WVFFC) works across the state to build public awareness 

and create policies that support the local food economy. 

One recent policy victory is the state’s launch of a farmto-school initiative, which works to connect K-12 schools 

with locally-produced foods. This represents a promising 

new economic opportunity for growers. In 2012, 20 county 

school systems purchased locally-grown agricultural 

products from West Virginia farmers. The value of these 

purchases was approximately $90,000 for the fi rst three 

months of the school year.

The investments of local, regional, and national funders 

have also been critical to the development of West Virginia’s 

local food economy. In 2012, West Virginia received 2 

out of the 13 federally awarded Rural Jobs Accelerator 

Grants offered through a partnership between the 

Economic Development Administration, the USDA Rural 

Community Development Initiative and the Appalachian 

Regional Commission. Also, since 2009, the Natural Capital 

Investment Fund, through its participation in the Central 

Appalachian Network (CAN), has provided critical startup funding and organizational development support to 

grassroots local food efforts. 

Economic Impacts: Market Development & 

Producer Capacity

The West Virginia Food and Farm Coalition, West Virginia 

University, and the WVU Extension Offi ce conducted a baseline 

study that concluded West Virginians spend $2.5 billion 

on food for at-home consumption. Almost 18 percent — or 

$421 million — of this amount is spent on vegetables and 

fruits.55 According to the study, a fi ve-percent increase in 

local food consumption by West Virginia residents would 

generate an increase in annual income of $200 million for 

the state. Because 90 percent of money spent on local food 

returns to the economy, local food system development has 

enormous potential to positively impact rural and underserved 

communities in the Greenbrier Valley and across Appalachia.

55 Hartz, L., Eades, D., Brown, C., McConnell, T., Hereford, A. Boettner, F (Jan. 2012). 

“West Virginia food system: Seasonal production expansion and its impacts”. 

Downstream Strategies. Accessed at: http://www.downstreamstrategies.com/

documents/reports_publication/ds_food_system_report_fi nal.pdf. 

Best Practices & Lessons Learned 

Before implementing local food development projects, 

establish clear goals that are informed by feasibility 

studies, baseline measures, and business plans. 

Connect with regional and state-wide networks such as 

CAN and the WVFFC to share and connect strategies.

Create partnerships with economic development 

entities by showing the economic impact of local food.

Develop strategies for tapping into urban demand for 

local food and rural landscapes.

Having regular community meetings is essential for 

maintaining project momentum and farmer participation.

Invest in infrastructure needed to connect pieces of the 

supply chain — producers, aggregators, distributors, etc. 

Advance local and statewide policies to support local 

food systems.

Central Appalachian Network (CAN) Local 

Food Data for Greenbrier Valley in 2012

$122,558

Revenue to 

25 producers

65

Employment 

positions (fulltime jobs or 

supplementary 

income)

600

Acres of local food 

production, over 

500 organic or 

chemical-free
I

n recent decades, Southwest Virginia’s agricultural 

economy has been adjusting to the loss of tobacco as a 

viable cash crop. Appalachian Sustainable Development 

(ASD), a nonprofi t organization based in Abingdon, 

Virginia, recognized the need to equip traditional tobacco 

farmers with alternative crops and broader markets. While 

there was no single crop that could replace tobacco, the 

growing demand for locally-produced food spurred ASD’s 

creation of Appalachian Harvest (AH) in 2000. AH is a food 

hub that provides an aggregation and distribution facility, 

branding and marketing services, and training and support 

for vegetable producers.

Opportunities for Appalachia: Demand for Local 

Foods & Aggregating Small Farmers

ASD Executive Director Kathlyn Terry and AH Manager 

Robin Robbins has observed a strong and steady increase 

in the demand for local produce among mainstream buyers. 

Appalachian Harvest has capitalized on this demand to 

help drive the growth of area farm and food businesses, 

building on the characteristics and assets of Appalachia’s 

farming communities. According to Tamara McNaughton, 

a grower who sells to Appalachian Harvest, “People have 

been growing produce forever, but the markets have either 

been extremely local or [reached] through large distribution 

channels.” AH represents a new model that helps aggregate 

produce from small- and medium-sized farms in order 

to meet regional demand, while also working with some 

larger farmers that help keep AH’s supply consistent. As 

Robbins describes, “It’s a response to the ‘get big or get out’ 

mentality. Many of our smaller guys are never going to get 

big, but there is power in numbers.” 

Alongside growing consumer demand, there is now wide 

acceptance among economic development professionals 

that local-food production is a viable development strategy.

Critical Resources & Partners: Startup 

Resources, Buyer Partners, and Farmer Capacity

Appalachian Harvest arrived early to the food hub scene, 

and could not have been successful without crucial 

support during its start-up phases. One of their earliest 

challenges was fi nding investment and funding for initial 

infrastructure — a common barrier for aggregation and 

distribution projects. ASD was able to secure a variety of 

resources in the form of grants and government funding, 

and has steadily moved towards the goal of being selfsuffi cient. Currently, around 90 percent of AH’s operating 

cost is covered by sales, with the remaining 10 percent 

coming from grants and other forms of fundraising.

Appalachian Harvest has also relied on consistent support 

from its buyer partners. In solving distribution logistics 

that address the geographical challenges of the area, 

they’ve leaned on the expertise of their experienced 

buyers. Partners such as Ingles Markets (a regional grocery 

store chain) and Whole Foods have provided advice on 

a range of issues and even loaned AH much-needed 

equipment during a crisis. Robbins shares that “our buyers 

are partners who have a stake in AH’s success — without 

their patient support AH would not be functioning at its 

current level of capacity and without AH our buyers would 

have a much harder time meeting customer demand for 

local produce.”

Obviously a food distribution entity can’t be successful 

without its core partner — the farmer. AH has invested 

heavily in developing trust and relationships with area 

farmers and in increasing the capacity of local growers. 

While upholding common standards across a large 

and diverse collection of farmers remains a challenge, 

AH continues to prioritize farmer preparedness as a 

cornerstone of the enterprise. Good Agricultural Practices 

(GAP) and USDA organic certifi cations are expensive, 

Local Food Sector Case Study II: Appalachian Harvest

Location: Duffi eld, Virginia

Contact: www.asdevelop.org/programs/

appalachian-harvest

Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors — LOCAL FOOD 23

Photo courtesy Appalachian Sustainable Development
24 Entrepreneurial Appalachia: Case Studies in Evolving Economic Sectors —LOCAL FOOD

complicated, and often difficult for small farming 

operations. To lower this barrier, AH provides a costshare for certification, training workshops, and tools that 

walk farmers through the preparations, paperwork, and 

inspections. The quality standards of mainstream buyers 

are also challenging for small growers, so AH provides a 

variety of tools and training that help farmers understand 

the quality requirements for every type of product. 

Economic Impacts: Purchasing Security 

& Farm Income

Supporting small rural farmers, the mission of Appalachian 

Harvest, poses a number of challenges. Says Terry, “It 

would have been more practical to put our packinghouse 

in the middle of a large number of big farms near the 

interstate, but the goal was to provide opportunities 

where there weren’t any. This has always been the 

intention.” Aggregating produce from small farmers to 

meet mainstream commercial demand is not easy, but 

Appalachian Harvest has been successful in creating 

access to large wholesale buyers for farmers that would 

otherwise be excluded from this market.

By connecting to the consistent demand of larger markets, 

Appalachian Harvest provides a rare value for growers: 

“purchasing security.” According to McNaughton, “The 

guarantee of being able to sell is what allows a farmer to 

plan securely. Going to the farmers market you load up 

the truck and don’t know how much you’ll sell; with AH, 

we know whatever is picked is going to be sold. In the past, 

a farm family had to run around miles in every direction 

trying to peddle their produce. AH saves a lot of time on 

the sales, distribution, and marketing side of things.” This 

saved time allows growers to focus their efforts on adding 

acreage, expanding production, increasing farm income, 

and adding more jobs.

Appalachian Harvest’s overall economic impacts are 

significant, especially given the challenges in which they 

operate. AH’s model helps create jobs all along the path 

to market, from the fields to the packinghouse to the 

distribution trucks. For Robbins and Terry, however, AH’s 

most important impact is the benefit for local farm families. 

Robbins warns to “never underestimate the importance of 

buying even a small volume of produce from a particular 

family. We only buy 3 or 4 cases of shiitake per week from 

one family, but that helps them make ends meet.”

Additional Resources 

For more information on innovative local food initiatives: 

Appalachian Sustainable Agriculture Project (North 

Carolina), Appalachian Center for Economic Networks

(ACEnet – Ohio), Pennsylvania Association for 

Sustainable Agriculture (PASA — Pennsylvania)

Best Practices & Lessons Learned 

Approach food hubs or aggregation and distribution 

enterprises with a business mentality. The concept of 

“if you build it, they will come” isn’t true; you need a 

feasibility study and a solid business plan in order to 

make it work. 

Prioritize farmer capacity and production volume to 

make sure you’re able to meet customer demand. The 

demand for local products will be there. Consistent 

supply is the challenge. 

Have a diverse base of products. AH started with a 

sole focus on in-season organic produce, but it takes a 

diverse array of products (i.e. organics, conventional, 

and value-added products) to maintain a consistent 

cash flow throughout the year

Diversify your markets. It’s important to create a broad 

variety of market options to accommodate differentsized farmers.

Market the “social” aspect of your social enterprise, 

as well as the environmental benefits. Consumers are 

willing to pay more for products, and develop loyalty 

to brands, that they see as benefitting their own 

communities and regions.

Identify your core strengths and areas of expertise as a 

business. Focus on the roles that only you can play, and 

partner with others with complementary strengths to 

fulfill other roles.

AH’s 2012 Numbers

Over

$1 million

in total sales 

Purchases by

18

different 

retailers

Over

175

farming jobs 

provided by 20 

different producers
Acknowledgements

We would like to offer a special thanks to the project’s 

Advisory Team for their valuable input on the case study 

selection process and publication:

■ Bobby Lewis, West Virginia State Director of Rural 

Development, USDA

■ Jennifer Simon, Director, Ohio University Innovation Center

■ Justin Maxson, President, Mountain Association for 

Community Economic Development (MACED)

■ Kim Barber Tieman, Program Officer, Claude Worthington 

Benedum Foundation

■ Mikki Sager, Vice President, The Conservation Fund

■ Peter Hille, Executive Vice President, MACED

About the Authors: This paper was written by Rural 

Support Partners, a social enterprise working across the 

rural southeastern United States to strengthen anchor 

organizations, foster strategic networks, and support assetbased economic development efforts. The Rural Support 

Partners research team for this project consisted of Thomas 

Watson, Andrew Crosson, and Erin Harris, with writing support 

from Mary Snow and Kathryn Coulter. 

Rural Support Partners 

1456 Patton Avenue, Suite C 

Asheville, NC 28806 USA

www.ruralsupportpartners.com

List of Interviewees

This project would not have been possible without the helpful 

contributions of all those interviewed for the case studies. We 

would like to thank the following interview participants for 

each case study:

How$martKYTM

■ Bill Blair, How$martKYTM Program Coordinator, MACED

■ Tina Preece, Energy Advisor, Grayson Rural Electric

Ohio University Innovation Center

■ Jennifer Simon, Director, Ohio University Innovation Center

LiveWell Greenville

■ Bob Mihalic, Government Affairs Coordinator, 

Greenville County

■ Eleanor Dunlap, Former Lead Facilitator, LiveWell 

Greenville

■ Dr. Alicia Powers, Evaluation Coordinator from Furman 

University, LiveWell Greenville

■ Katy Smith, Executive Director, Piedmont Foundation 

Hale County Health Development Partnership

■ Dr. John Wheat, Principal Investigator, Hale County 

Health Development Partnership

■ Melissa Cox, Project Director, Hale County Health 

Development Partnership

Gat Creek Furniture

■ Gat Caperton, Owner, Gat Creek Furniture

Greenbrier Valley 

■ Jennifer “Tootie” Jones, President of the Greenbrier 

Valley Pasture Network

■ Dr. Carol Kline, Assistant Professor, East Carolina 

University, Greenbrier Valley Pasture Network

■ Jill Young, Former Project Coordinator, Greenbrier 

Valley Local Foods Initiative

■ Quincy Gray McMichael Lewis, Project Coordinator, 

Greenbrier Valley Local Foods Initiative

■ Steve Weir, Executive Director, Greenbrier Valley 

Economic Development Corporation

Appalachian Harvest

■ Kathlyn Terry, Executive Director, Appalachian 

Sustainable Development

■ Robin Robbins, Manager, Appalachian Harvest

■ Tamara McNaughton, Farmer and AH Grower