Social Capital and Leadership:
Rural Cooperation in Central
and Eastern Europe
Annette Hurrelmann, Catherine Murray and
Volker Beckmann
IDARI Dissemination Event
June 2, 2006 in Dublin
IDARI Dissemination Event
1
Motivation





WP3 case studies: local leaders can play an import
role for starting and maintaining rural cooperation
Social Capital literature: cooperation happens
“automatically” where enough SC is present
What is the role of leadership for rural cooperation in
CEECs?
How are SC and leadership connected?
What policy advice can be drawn from this?
IDARI Dissemination Event
2
Social Capital Theory (1)




Starting point: argument of low social capital in CEECs
due to historic experiences (distrust in authorities,
enforced cooperation)
Network definition of SC: “Social Capital inheres in the
structures of relations between actors and among actors”
(Coleman 2000)
Trust as popular measurement
Bonding (between actors with similar backgrounds) and
bridging (between groups with different backgrounds) SC
IDARI Dissemination Event
3
Social Capital Theory (2)




“Social capital is expected in this reckoning to provide
not just the glue (which binds community members
together into collective action) but also the gear, which
directs community members toward participating in
democracy building” (Krishna 2001)
Krishna (2001, 2002): SC holds communities together –
but what motivates them to play an active role in
collective action?
SC provides the “glue” but a mediating agency may be
necessary to provide the “gear” for cooperation
The mediating agency can be an organisation, such as a
political party, but also a particular individual
IDARI Dissemination Event
4
Case Studies (1)
Cooperation
In the market
In and between
communities
In environmentally
protected areas (state)
Case studies:
Case studies:
Case studies:
Bulgaria: Land Market
Latvia: Rural Tourism
Poland: National Park
Hungary: Cooperatives
Lithuania: Rural
Tourism
Slovakia: National
Park
PhD:
Bulgaria: Land Market
Poland: Local products
Poland: Producer
Groups
IDARI Dissemination Event
5
Case Studies (2)

Hungary (Pillar A: cooperation in the market)





Old producer’s cooperative BEKE, new purchasing and
marketing cooperative PMCHG
BEKE: president persuaded members to stay in cooperative by
informing them of advantages and disadvantages, long history of
cooperation
PMCHG: key players set up cooperation by informing farmers of
benefits of collective action, cooperative took consecutive steps
to increasing cooperation
Members trust each other and their leaders
Members realise the advantages of cooperation (better access to
the market, lower transaction costs…)
IDARI Dissemination Event
6
Case Studies (3)

Latvia (Pillar B: Cooperation in and between
communities)




Rauna Tourism Association unites farmers, a recreation
centre and a church, initiated by one individual who runs a
farm/rural tourism enterprise
Municipal government paid for office and coordinator in the
first year, then funding stopped
Information, meetings, exchange etc. is organised by
coordinator, members trust each other but are not very
active, beginning frustration of coordinator
Members: we “could run business also without RTA”, few
immediate benefits of cooperation
IDARI Dissemination Event
7
Case Studies (4)

Slovakia (Pillar C: Cooperation in protected
areas)




Slovensky Raj National Park is under control of various
administrative units and antagonistic actor groups
Park Administration has limited rights, is regarded critically
by other actors as representing “authority”
Park Administration initiated application for PanPark scheme
but no cooperation with other groups
Population regards SRNP as imposed on them and as
obstacle to their economic activities
IDARI Dissemination Event
8
Results (1)

Theory:





Not necessarily low overall levels of SC in CEECs
Bonding social capital (= trust within the group) present
Lack of bridging social capital (= trust to other groups,
especially trust in authorities)
Leaders as mediating agency to provide “gear”, bridge the
gap
Leadership problems:



Leadership is difficult where SC is low (“glue” is missing)
Leaders give high input but often do not profit accordingly
Free rider problem: leader’s action benefits all
IDARI Dissemination Event
9
Results (2)

Role of leaders:




Communicate advantages of cooperation, inform about
realistic expectations
Cooperation more difficult where benefits are harder to
recognise and/or materialise more slowly
Immediate benefits: In the market > in and between
communities > in protected areas
Policy advice:


Need to support leaders (technically and financially)
Need to identify leaders who are accepted by the whole
community
IDARI Dissemination Event
10
Thank you!
IDARI Dissemination Event
11