Conference during the X Summer Academy of Euroacademy Association (www.euroacademy.org)

1. 30/12/2012
10th Summer Academy
“Local Governance and Sustainable Rural
Development”
Gandia, Valencian Community, Spain
27th August – 4th September 2011
Index
1. Introduction: governance and sustainable
development in the complex rural world
2. A quick note on the evolution of rural
development policy in the EU
3. Lessons learned from the analysis of the impact of
public action on rural development in the
European Union
1

2. 30/12/2012
Introduction: governance and
sustainable development in the
complex rural world
What is sustainable rural development?
Option 1: the Green Economy
Activities related to the “green
economy” (Kennet and Heinemann,
2006), that takes advantage of the
opportunities arising from the need to
replace the current energy and
production models to generate
economic activity and employment in
rural areas and, at the same time,
contribute to global sustainability?
2

3. 30/12/2012
What is sustainable rural development?
Option 2: the citizen’s based model
Is it, rather, to reach a rural world
where residents and visitors can
adequately address the difficulties in
accessing all kinds of goods, services
and employment, especially in the
case of disadvantaged social groups
and in remote areas (Borden and
Moseley, 2006)?
What is sustainable rural development?
Options 1 and 2 Not Exclusive
But a choice is needed to clarify
what is the philosophy behind the
concept of "sustainable
countryside": the one centred on
the rural culture, the rural area and
the needs and demands of rural
people, or another that focuses on
responding to the needs and
demands of the urban
environment?
3

4. 30/12/2012
What is sustainable rural development?
The “third way”
A model of rural development
(Noguera, Esparcia and Ferrer,
2004) that focuses on the need
to: (i) respond to rural land
management in an effective and
sustainable way; (ii) prioritise
wishes and needs of rural
residents; (iii) help meeting the
needs and demands of the urban
environment as long as they are
not in contradiction with the rural
environment and not detract
from its inhabitants and territory.
Initial conclusion
The challenges for the rural
governance
(i)the complexity and diversity of rural
areas;
(ii)the different government and
governance traditions and cultures in the
European Union;
(iii)the generalised lack of power in small
and medium size rural municipalities to
design and implement strategic policies
and programs;
(iv) the dominance of a “municipal” rather
than “territorial” conception of rural
development in many regions, etc..
4

5. 30/12/2012
A quick note on the evolution of
rural development policy in the EU
5

6. 30/12/2012
Lessons learned from the analysis of
the impact of public action on rural
development in the European Union
Lessons learned (FAO 2008)
According to the document from FAO (2009)“The evolution and
impact of EU regional and rural policy”, the following lessons can be
learned from the EU regional and rural policy:
1. BELIEVE IT..... OR
NOT
Endogenous growth is
better achieved if
regional and local
actors take ownership
of the strategy
6

7. 30/12/2012
Lessons learned (FAO 2008)
2.INSTITUTIONAL
RESPONSIBILITY
The
administrative
capacity and
commitment of
local and regional
administrations in
the development
of the strategy is
fundamental
Lessons learned (FAO 2008)
3. POLICY
COORDINATION
Policy coherence
with wider fiscal
and labour
market policies
is key
7

8. 30/12/2012
Lessons learned (FAO 2008)
4. VARIABLE
INTENSITY OF
SUPPORT
Funds should
concentrate in
areas in need and
should finance
investments that
would otherwise
not have been
undertaken
Lessons learned (FAO 2008)
5. THE KEY ROLE OF
INTERMEDIATE
NODES
Concentrate funds
on regional urban
centres to develop
economic hubs.
They can then be
linked to
surrounding areas
and generate
spillover effects
8

9. 30/12/2012
Lessons learned (FAO 2008)
…because otherwise, “the bottom” will (is?) rise(ing?)
maybe in a way that we do not like
6. BOTTOM-UP, YES,
BUT EXCELLENT
BOTTOM-UP
B-U approaches that
include consultation
(concertation) with
civil society, combined
with the proactive
attitude of
administrations, can
lead to ground-
breaking initiatives
and positive results
http://www.peoplesorganizing.org/index.html
9

10. 30/12/2012
Lessons learned (FAO 2008)
7. ACCOUNTABITY,
TRANSPARENCY AND
PARTICIPATION
Funding should be
awarded through open
calls for tenders and
clear procurement
procedures, to ensure
the best possible
selection of projects. To
achieve this, civil
society needs to be
involved at all stages,
from strategic planning
to implementation
10

11. 30/12/2012
Lessons learned (FAO 2008)
8. AN STYLISED FALACY:
“WE NEED MORE
INFRASTRUCTURES”:
THE NEED TO FOCUS
ON “SOFT” FACTORS
Infrastructure
investments have
marginal returns.
Beyond the complexion
of basic infrastructures,
a strong focus on
education, training and
R&D is essential to
sustain growth in the
long term
More lessons learned
From my own experience
1. The need for a long-term Territorial
territorial planning B
framework at multiple
analysis
B
levels Technical (FTM)
diagnosis B2
The action of public and
private institutions needs a Participation -
territorial model for the consensus B3
E1 Bn
future that establishes
(among other) potential land
uses, constrains to certain
Shared diagnosis E
uses in certain places, the E2
strategic development axis,
E3
the threshold capacities, and
incompatibilities between
A
(CTM)
activities and uses
11

12. 30/12/2012
Example: Box 5. The winding road to regional land-use
planning in Valencia
In Valencia, Spatial Planing can be described as highly deficient:
• First law in 1989 that just came to be implemented
• Second law in 2004 on "spatial planning and landscape protection" that
only from 2010 began to bear fruit.
In the absence of a regional framework for SP, the last 30 years have been
presided over by a cluster of economic and urban developments in which the
only reference was the local. Decisions taken by a small municipality (eg, the
location of a hazardous or highly polluting activity) involved a supra-municipal
area that, despite being affected, could do nothing about it. In this context,
local planning became the only instrument of spatial planning and overview
needed was absent.
The result is a unsustainable and irrational territory in which the logic of
human occupation has squandered the natural and cultural heritage with
irreversible changes, has diminished the potential of many land resources,
and has created or exacerbated many environmental hazards.
12

13. 30/12/2012
1950
2011
13

14. 30/12/2012
14

15. 30/12/2012
More lessons learned
From my own experience
2. Putting the strategy at the
center of rural and territorial
development
There must be a rural
development strategy at the
state and, where appropriate,
regional levels, with adequate
tools and resources for
implementation.
The rural territory can only be
understood as a system.
Consequently, it is meaningless
carrying out uncoordinated
actions that may be not only
ineffective but counterproductive
15

16. 30/12/2012
More lessons learned
From my own experience
3. Combining history, identity,
functionality and sustainability
in a new rural governance
It is urgent to create more
rational territorial levels of
government by promoting
legislation that provides supra-
local scales (counties or similar)
with skills and powers to the
provision of services, the design
of territorial development
strategies, etc.
Rural governance, whatever it may be, must base its action in a
process of strategic reflection and action agreed by local
stakeholders. Although there are countries or regions in which this
claim appears to be the "truism", the reality of many regions and
countries of the European Union is that rural governance barely
exists, there is little supra-municipal cooperation and there is little
strategic processes of reflection-action that rationally direct
development efforts. Consequently, the proposal goes through the
definition of "territorial model of Future" to be defined in a shared
and agreed form with local stakeholders. This involves: (i)
commitment at the political level (not appropriation), (ii)
commitment of the main institutions of the territory, (iii) involvement
of social and economic organizations, (iv) working towards a real
model of participatory democracy.
Noguera, 2011 (Euroacademy Academic Guide)
16

17. 30/12/2012
More lessons learned
From my own experience
Rural areas become privileged places
4. Privileged places to test
for the promotion of participatory
participative democracy
models of governance closer to the
Growing dissatisfaction of citizens with
concept of participative democracy.
regard to political representatives and
democratic system.
This “new” governance model has
Misuse and perversion of principles of
been tested for over 20 years mainly
representative democracy led to
in rural areas through EU programs
“politicians” being perceived by
like LEADER, LIFE, INTERREG, TERRA,
citizens as a “problem”.
etc.
Representative democracy has been
perverted so that serves primarily the
Therefore, the principles of
interests of political groups and the
“participative democracy” are well
associated social and economic
rooted in most rural societies
lobbies.
Europe-wide
More lessons learned
From my own experience
LINKAGES
5. Recognize the
value and
validity of the
specificities of
the LEADER
method,
framed in a
mainstream
smart rural
policy
17

18. 30/12/2012
More lessons learned
From my own experience
Administration is sectoral… … but the rural territory is a system
5. The necessity
of coordination
mechanisms
To conclude…..
Future rural development policies will have to define more clearly the
following aspects…
1. Functions expected from rural areas both in sectoral policies (ie. the role
of agriculture) and territorial policies;
2. What the EU and national governments want or need to transfer or play
(action, methodology, institutional structures, etc.);
3. The very features expected from the future RD policies’ method
(animation, territorial balance, promotion of other instruments or policies,
intervention in the local economy, empowerment, revitalization of social
and territorial networks, promotion of cooperation mechanisms, etc.);
4. The most suitable future innovations in RD policy making and what role
should they have in relation to mainstream rural policies
18

19. 30/12/2012
Now, we can just forget about all
this, or spread the news......
19