Bridging the AI Divide: Why Rural Communities Can't Afford to Wait
Bridging the AI Divide: Why Rural Communities Can't Afford to Wait
The White House is currently attempting to curb state-led legislation, adding another layer of complexity and urgency. Whether AI governance happens primarily at the federal or state level, rural communities need the literacy to participate in these debates as informed stakeholders.
This is why AI literacy can't be separated from civic engagement and democratic participation. Without understanding the technology, rural residents can't meaningfully engage with the policies being built around it. Without local capacity for informed advocacy, rural interests get overlooked in favor of urban priorities. Without the confidence that comes from knowledge, rural voices stay silent when critical decisions are being made.
Moving Forward: Building Capacity That Lasts
The AI divide isn't inevitable, but closing it requires the kind of intentional, locally led action that research shows actually works in rural communities. We can't afford to wait for solutions to arrive from elsewhere, and we certainly can't afford to face infrastructure decisions and policy debates unprepared.
The Brookings research emphasizes that successful rural development requires "genuine local ownership and decision-making power." AI literacy initiatives embody this principle. Rather than depending on external experts to tell us what AI means for our communities, we build the capacity to understand it ourselves. Rather than accepting whatever technology companies decide to deploy here or whatever policies legislators decide to impose, we develop the knowledge to negotiate as informed equals and advocate as The technology that's reshaping our world isn't reaching everyone equally — and that gap is growing.
The Digital Divide Gets Deeper
While AI dominates headlines in tech hubs and major cities, a different story unfolds in rural America. In Southeast Ohio and communities like it across the country, the AI revolution feels distant, abstract, even irrelevant. But this perception masks a crucial reality: AI is already influencing job markets, business operations, and daily life — whether rural communities are prepared for it or not.
The digital divide isn't new, but AI has made it more consequential. Where previous technology gaps meant slower internet or older devices, the AI divide means missed economic opportunities, reduced competitiveness, and diminished access to tools that are quickly becoming standard. Rural areas already face challenges with broadband access, technology infrastructure, and digital skills training. Add AI to the mix, and the risk of being left behind becomes very real.
And it's not just about access to tools anymore. AI governance is happening right now at the state level, shaping how citizens are protected from abuse, how information ecosystems respond to AI-generated deepfakes and automated decision-making, and whether governments establish institutions capable of governing AI over the long run. According to recent research from the Brookings Institution's Center for Technology Innovation, all 50 states introduced at least one AI-related bill between January 2023 and October 2025, totaling 385 bills addressing everything from individual privacy protections to transparency requirements to systemic governance frameworks.
Here's the problem: these policies are being shaped largely without rural input or understanding. When communities don't understand the technology being regulated, they can't effectively advocate for policies that serve their interests or even recognize when proposed regulations might harm them.
This isn't about lacking intelligence or capability. Rural communities have always been resourceful, innovative, and adaptive. What's missing is access to training, to clear information, to the confidence that comes from understanding these tools and the policies being built around them.
Real-World AI: Beyond the Hype
Strip away the sensational headlines, and AI becomes surprisingly practical. It's not about robots taking over or science fiction scenarios — it's about tools that can make everyday tasks more efficient and accessible.
For job seekers, AI-powered resume builders and interview prep tools are increasingly standard in hiring processes. Understanding how Applicant Tracking Systems work, how to optimize a LinkedIn profile for AI algorithms, or how to use AI assistants for career research aren't luxuries — they're becoming necessities.
For small business owners, AI offers efficiency gains that were once available only to large corporations. A local bakery can use AI to forecast inventory needs and reduce waste. A freelance graphic designer can leverage AI tools to speed up routine tasks and focus on creative work. A farmer can analyze weather patterns and crop data more effectively. These applications don't require computer science degrees — simply basic literacy and access.
For creative projects, AI tools democratize capabilities that once required expensive software and specialized training. Writers can brainstorm ideas, entrepreneurs can create marketing materials, educators can develop customized lesson plans. The barrier to entry has never been lower — if you know these tools exist and have basic guidance on using them responsibly.
The common thread? AI literacy transforms these tools from intimidating technology into practical assets. And without that literacy, individuals and communities risk missing opportunities that their competitors are already seizing — and losing the ability to shape the policies that will govern how AI affects their lives.
Why Local Solutions Matter: What Research Tells Us
The case for locally led AI literacy initiatives isn't just intuitive — it's backed by emerging research on what actually works in rural economic development.
Recent findings from the Brookings Institution's research on rural America reveal a fundamental shift in how successful communities approach economic development. The old playbook — recruiting large employers through tax incentives and waiting for outside investment — is giving way to strategies that prioritize local leadership, capacity building, and resident-centered development.
The research identifies what scholars call "entrepreneurial social infrastructure" as among the most critical factors for successful rural development. This means communities where leadership, trust, civic relationships, and partnerships converge to leverage social capital in solving local challenges. It's the hardest element to quantify, but it's also the most powerful.
This matters for AI literacy because it validates a core principle: sustainable development happens when communities build their own capacity rather than depending on external solutions.
Waiting for top-down AI programs — federal initiatives, state grants, corporate outreach — means waiting too long and often receiving solutions that don't match local context. The CTI research shows that while AI legislation is emerging across all states, it's creating a patchwork of approaches that may or may not serve rural interests. Technology moves faster than bureaucracy, and by the time large-scale programs reach rural communities, the gap will have widened further, and policies will already be in place.
The Brookings economic development research emphasizes that "economic strategies must match community capacity and context rather than result from top-down, generically defined development initiatives." An AI literacy program designed in Washington or Silicon Valley won't address the specific needs of Southeast Ohio — our local industries, our broadband realities, our economic challenges, our community strengths.
Local AI literacy initiatives offer something that centralized programs cannot: relevance. A workshop designed for Appalachian communities can focus on applications that matter here — agriculture technology, healthcare accessibility, small manufacturing efficiency, tourism marketing. Training can acknowledge rural broadband limitations and resource constraints. Examples can feature businesses and challenges that participants actually recognize.
And crucially, local AI literacy enables informed civic participation in policy discussions. When state legislators consider bills about AI transparency, automated decision-making, or privacy protections, are rural voices at the table? Can rural constituents meaningfully engage with their representatives on these issues if they don't understand the technology being regulated?
The research also highlights a striking finding: quality of life investments correlates with population, job, and startup growth. Education — including digital and AI literacy — isn't just a nice-to-have amenity. It's foundational infrastructure for economic development, like broadband, housing, and healthcare.
Community-based education builds something equally important: confidence and civic capacity. Learning alongside neighbors, taught by people who understand local context, reduces the intimidation factor that keeps many people from engaging with new technology. It transforms AI from an abstract, threatening force into a set of practical tools that real people are using to solve real problems — and a set of policy challenges that real people can engage with as informed citizens.
Perhaps most importantly, local initiatives create the multiplier effects that researchers identify as crucial for sustainable development. One small business owner who learns to use AI efficiently can share that knowledge with others. One educator who integrates AI literacy into their curriculum reaches dozens of students. One community leader who understands AI's potential can advocate more effectively for resources and infrastructure — and participate meaningfully in state-level policy discussions. This is how "entrepreneurial social infrastructure" develops — through networks of knowledge, trust, and shared capacity.
The Brookings research warns that "assets alone don't guarantee results without local ownership and control, accountable institutions, governance quality, and the capacity to execute projects." This applies directly to AI: simply having access to AI tools or even receiving outside training won't transform a community unless that knowledge is owned, controlled, and applied by local residents for local benefit.
Two Ohio Stories: The Power of Preparation
The contrast between two communities facing major tech infrastructure projects reveals exactly why AI literacy matters — and what happens when it's absent.
Tucker County's Surprise: When Communities Are Caught Unprepared
Tucker County, West Virginia offers a cautionary tale about what happens when AI infrastructure arrives before AI literacy. As documented by the Brookings Institution's "Reimagine Rural" podcast, when a permit application for a proposed power plant heralded the possibility of a large data center near the towns of Davis and Thomas, local leaders and residents were caught completely off guard.
Data centers aren't just generic industrial facilities — they're the backbone of AI systems. As demand for AI grows, these massive computing facilities are spreading from urban tech corridors into rural areas with available land and power capacity. But Tucker County's experience reveals a troubling pattern: communities are being asked to make decisions about AI infrastructure without the knowledge needed to evaluate what they're actually gaining or losing.
This is precisely the scenario that rural development research warns against: outside investment arriving without local capacity to evaluate it, negotiate from a position of knowledge, or ensure that benefits actually flow to the community rather than simply extracting resources.
The questions Tucker County residents found themselves asking came too late:
How will this data center connect to local economic development, or will it simply extract resources?
What AI applications will it support, and could any benefit local businesses or services?
Are there opportunities for local workforce development in AI-adjacent fields?
What does community ownership of AI infrastructure even look like?
Who profits from this arrangement, and what does the community actually receive in return?
How will state AI regulations affect this facility, and do those regulations protect community interests?
Without AI literacy, these conversations defaulted to the traditional economic development framework: jobs, taxes, environmental impact. Those factors matter, but they miss the larger picture of how AI infrastructure could — or couldn't — serve community interests. Residents found themselves negotiating without fully understanding what was being built, why it mattered, or what leverage they might have.
The Brookings research emphasizes that "development strategies must center local residents as their primary beneficiaries." But how can residents ensure they're the primary beneficiaries when they don't understand the technology being deployed in their community or the emerging regulatory framework around it?
Franklin County's Intel Plant: A Different Approach
Compare this to Franklin County's experience with Intel's massive chip manufacturing facility in New Albany. Despite project delays and uncertainties that would typically spark community anxiety, the response has been markedly different. New Albany residents, backed by robust educational institutions, economic development expertise, and existing tech sector knowledge, approached the Intel project as informed stakeholders.
The difference wasn't just access to information — it was literacy and capacity. Franklin County had the educational infrastructure, the workforce development programs, and the technological familiarity to ask sophisticated questions from the start. Community leaders understood what semiconductor manufacturing means for AI development. Residents could evaluate workforce training opportunities. Local institutions could position themselves to benefit from the ripple effects.
When delays hit the project, the conversation didn't devolve into confusion or panic. Instead, the community could assess what delays meant in the broader context of chip manufacturing, global supply chains, and long-term economic positioning. They had the knowledge base to remain engaged partners rather than passive recipients of whatever the corporation decided.
The Intel situation demonstrated what the Brookings research identifies as critical success factors:
Local ownership and decision-making power in development conversations
Existing educational partnerships with tech-focused institutions
Workforce development programs that understand emerging technology
Economic development leaders who speak the language of the tech industry
A population with baseline digital and technological literacy
The confidence to negotiate as equals rather than supplicants
Civic infrastructure capable of collective problem-solving
The ability to engage meaningfully with state-level policy discussions
Franklin County residents can participate in conversations about how Ohio regulates AI because they understand what's at stake. They can evaluate proposed legislation on automated decision-making, transparency requirements, or privacy protections because they have the foundational knowledge needed to assess impact.
The Real Divide: Knowledge as Power
The gap between Tucker County's data center surprise and Franklin County's Intel engagement isn't about one community being "smarter" than another. It's about preparation, access to education, and what researchers call "entrepreneurial social infrastructure" — the networks of knowledge, trust, and capacity that enable communities to respond effectively to opportunities and challenges.
Franklin County had decades of building tech sector relationships, educational programs, and workforce development capacity. When a major tech company arrived, they were ready. When state legislators debated AI policy, they could engage. Tucker County, like so many rural communities, was expected to make critical decisions without that foundation.
This is the AI divide in action — not just differences in broadband speed or device access, but fundamental disparities in the ability to engage with technology-driven economic development as informed participants and with technology-driven policy discussions as informed citizens. And as AI infrastructure spreads into more rural areas seeking cheap land and power, and as state AI legislation continues to emerge in patchwork fashion across the country, more communities will face Tucker County's dilemma unless we act now.
The Brookings research makes clear: "Federal and state investments in rural communities should focus on bolstering local capacity and leadership to avoid dependency on project-based, short-term injections of external investment." AI literacy is exactly that kind of capacity-building investment. It doesn't create dependency on outside experts — it builds local capability to understand, evaluate, and leverage AI on community terms while participating meaningfully in the policy discussions shaping AI's future.
The Policy Landscape: Rural Voices Missing from Critical Decisions
The CTI research tracking AI legislation across all 50 states reveals just how urgent AI literacy has become. Between January 2023 and October 2025, states introduced 385 AI-related bills covering three broad themes:
Protection of the individual — bills addressing privacy, consent, biometric data, and protection from AI-driven discrimination or harm
Transparency and trust in information ecosystems — bills requiring disclosure of AI use, combating deepfakes, and ensuring accountability in automated decision-making
Responsible systemic governance — bills establishing AI task forces, regulatory frameworks, and government capacity to oversee AI deployment
These aren't abstract policy discussions. They're decisions that will directly affect how AI is used in hiring, healthcare, criminal justice, education, and countless other areas that touch rural lives. They'll shape whether small businesses can compete with AI-enabled competitors, whether farmers have transparent access to AI-driven agricultural tools, whether job seekers understand how automated systems are screening their applications.
Yet rural communities are largely absent from these conversations. When legislators in Columbus debate AI transparency requirements or privacy protections, are they hearing from Southeast Ohio? Are rural constituents equipped to engage meaningfully with these issues, or are urban tech sectors and corporate interests primarily shaping policy decisions?
The research notes that "some states are racing ahead with detailed frameworks, while others have introduced just a few bills" — creating a patchwork that matters because it "shapes how citizens are protected from abuse, how information ecosystems respond to AI-generated deepfakes and AI-driven automated decision-making, and whether governments establish institutions capable of governing AI over the long run."
For rural communities, this patchwork creates additional challenges. Will Ohio's AI regulations serve rural interests as well as urban ones? Will Southeast Ohio have the civic capacity to advocate for policies that protect local businesses, workers, and residents? Or will AI policy be shaped by those with the loudest voices and deepest pockets — typically not rural communities?
informed citizens.
This isn't about turning everyone into programmers or data scientists. It's about ensuring that people in all communities understand the fundamentals: what AI can and can't do, how it's already affecting their lives, how they can use it to their advantage, how to ask the right questions when AI-related development comes to their doorstep, and how to engage meaningfully with the policy discussions shaping AI's role in society.
It's about access, clarity, and confidence. It's about building what researchers identify as the hardest-to-quantify but most critical element of successful rural development: the social infrastructure of knowledge, relationships, and collective capacity that enables communities to solve problems on their own terms and participate as equals in democratic governance.
Research shows that quality of life investments — including education — should be seen as a foundation for economic growth rather than an outcome. AI literacy is that kind of foundational investment. It prepares communities to seize opportunities, evaluate proposals, protect their interests, participate in policy debates, and engage as equals in both technology-driven economic development and technology-related governance.
The time to build this capacity is now — before the next permit application, before the next infrastructure decision, before the next legislative session, before the gap becomes too wide to bridge. Tucker County was caught unprepared. Franklin County was ready. Southeast Ohio gets to choose which path it follows.
Because when it comes to the AI revolution, being left behind isn't just about missing out on new tools. It's about losing the power to shape your own community's future — economically and politically. And the research is clear: that power comes from local capacity, local ownership, and local leadership. It comes from communities that invest in their own ability to understand and respond to change. It comes from informed citizens who can engage meaningfully with the technologies and policies shaping modern life.
It comes from AI literacy, built locally, for local benefit — enabling both economic opportunity and democratic participation.
The question isn't whether rural America will encounter AI — it already has. The question is whether communities will shape that encounter with the knowledge, capacity, and confidence that research shows are essential for sustainable, equitable development and meaningful civic engagement.
The answer starts with education, and education starts locally. The time is now.