Village renewal in Archangelsk region
Duration of the case: 4 years (1999 – 2004)
Prepared by: Gleb Tyurin
Institute for Social and Humanistic Initiatives, Russia
November 2005
Abstract
Best practice Village renewal in Archangelsk region was created by NGO Institute of Social and
Humanistic initiatives in the framework of few projects, which was estimated as having no
analogies in Russia.
The aim: to stop overall crisis and destruction of villages by supporting community based system of
local governance and bottom up initiatives.
Grant funding as well financial support from Archangelsk regional administration and 12
municipalities was attracted.
Numerous discussions, meetings, round tables promoting of dialog culture ended in appearance of
more then 35 local development groups (in Russian - TOS) in 14 districts. Education, consulting
(organisational development, projecting, planning, accounting, taxation, etc.), creation of regional
content of rural projects and establishment of links with local authorities allowed to start practical
village renewal. 53 rural projects were implemented with economical effect of more than 670 000$,
while only 59508$ invested. 88 social objects built or restored, 273 working places created (33
permanent). Projects were monitored and followed.
This success created absolutely new psychological situation, strata of active and self esteem people
appeared and is growing. TOS is supported by local authorities and is recognized as important link
between population and authorities.
Municipal legislation which was adopted and a draft of the Regional Law on Territorial Selfgovernment is worked out.
We created an information network Agency and page on local development issues which were
published in the most of local (district) newspapers of the region. More than 400 publications
prepared and issues of local development rise interest in the society.
Methodology of consultancy is developed and our experience successfully transferred to few
regions of Russia.
501/2003
Background
Break down of planning economy and transition to market lead to terrible ordeal in depopulated Russian
Northern countryside, ceasing of production, poverty, infrastructure demolishing. Population is dying off
(1–2 percent a year). It is followed by overall apathy and despair, alcoholism, growing criminality, drugs
abuse, homeless children number. Situation is hardened by severe climate, isolation, absence of roads.
Many villages have come to the very edge of total destruction and could disappear within a few years.
Our priority was to work with rural areas (most vulnerable ones) which are a real treasurer of old
cultural traditions. The biggest priority - bottom up community based initiatives.
One of the main reasons of the crisis is a disability and unwillingness of people to take initiatives
and to adapt to new conditions, as they got used to live in a system where decisions were always
taken by the authorities. But existing administrative system can’t provide it any more. In order to
survive villages had to create new system of local governance, learn a lot.
About the organization
Institute of Social and Humanistic Initiatives was started as union of few practitians aimed on
practical and conceptual work on local development, support of community based groups on the
grass rout level. The special stress was made on elaboration, and adoption of social technologies for
development. We started our work in 1998. Since that time a number of projects were fulfiled,
including these which are described in this case.
Objectives and strategies
Our aim was to stop destruction of our villages by supporting community based system of local
governance, local development (LD), rising accumulated human energy as the main force of
development. Our aims were: to “open” society, promote the culture of dialog, joint decision
making, provide organisational development of groups (TOS) and obtaining necessary managerial
skills, monitor and ensure their success. We also had to support establishment of co-operation of
TOS groups with authorities, their networking and spread information about positive experience of
LD.
Description of the implementation
To start the work we used our own recourses. Since 2000 we had grant funding of Western
Foundations, which was the main financial source (more then 50%). We started in 2000 -2001 with
a number of small grants, aimed at initiating development work in villages, studies. In 2001 -2003
we have fulfilled 3 big projects (Eurasia Foundation (USA), European commission).
We also worked hard to attract local resources. Archangelsk regional administration have been
supporting our projects since 2000, starting with very limited support in 2000. In 2002 the amount
of Regional Administration funding grew up to 26300$ (750000 rubles) and remained the same in
2003. Most of this money went to finance village projects. We worked hard to get support from
municipalities and since 2001 amount of it was growing steadily. It also went mainly to village
projects. Now we try to attract support from local business.
Most of our techniques we developed by ourselves but with some support of experts from UK
(Glochester college, PREPARE programme), Austria (Vienna University, Institute of spatial
planning), Sweden (Northern Folk Academy Getheborg), USA, Moscow State University, etc.
We believe that LD can only be initiated if there is necessity in it and entire responsibility. We
arranged numerous round tables, discussions, meetings, trying to provide people with understanding
what the reasons of crisis were, and what they could do with it. Many of them looked at us as if we
fall from the Moon, but there were some people who wanted to change the situation. We helped
1
these people to unite with each other, form local development groups (organ TOS), get skills of
joint action and managing groups.
We worked on inspiring and empowerment them, getting new vision, understanding what and in
what way they could do. We helped them to make their choice. It was difficult and fragile process
of supporting new We-concept growth, rising of new values and relationship, which could set the
wheel of self-reliance of local communities in motion.
We arranged education for members of groups on projecting, planning, accounting, legislation,
taxation, etc. In 2001 we helped our groups to develop and implement their own projects which
involved population of this villages mostly on voluntary basis (building water towers, bridges,
ferries, clubs, elderly houses, market place on the road to sell local goods, starting pedigree sheep
breeding and honey production; cleaning of river banks in an ancient city; doing forests
rehabilitation, etc.)
We created Regional content of development projects, which turn into permanent. We monitored
projects ensuring their success. We developed and adopted techniques of social consulting and adult
education. We paid special attention to specific women’s role, creating social awareness that
women are the main force in renovation and encouraging their initiatives.
We were consulting and educating municipalities, trying to provide links between local
development groups and municipalities, incorporating TOS into municipal system. We worked our
municipal legislation on local governance (in Russian, territorial public self government, TOS),
which was adopted in most of municipalities. We also developed a draft of a Regional law.
We developed regional networks of TOS organs; build up Association of village renewal.
We created an information network, Agency and page on local development for rural district
newspapers, produced hundreds of articles and programmes disseminating positive experience and
success stories.
Results achieved
- System of bottom up community based governance (impossible few years ago) established. More
that 35 LD groups (TOS) appeared in 14 districts of the region.
- We proved that with minimised support LD can be very successful even in very marginal and
ruined rural areas. 53 development projects implemented. While only 1 696 000 roubles (59508$)
were invested, total budget was 6387347 roubles ($224117). Total economic output was more than
20 million roubles (about 670 000$). More then 1200 people actively worked (mostly as
volunteers). It directly affected more then 18000 people.
- System of open access to financial support via Regional Content was established.
- Dozens of concrete problems solved. 88 objects (clubs, bridges, ferries, medical centers, water
towers and pipeline, parks, market buildings, facilities for tourism, stadiums, wells, etc.) have been
build or restored. 14 working institutions, co-operatives started, 33 permanent and 240 temporary
working places created. 9 historic and cultural objects (bell tower, merchant mansion, churches, old
houses, etc.) were preserved, few historical collections created, 3 museums (expositions) opened.
- New strata of activeness appeared. Part of population united, got self esteem and believe in own
forces, inspiration, changed their point from “give us” to “let’s do”.
- Association of village renewal is founded, network is growing.
- Most local authorities support LD and allocate more financial support every year. They provide
local communities with bigger responsibilities. TOS is recognised as important link between
population and authorities. Regional and lastly some federal politicians express interesting in this
experience.
- Municipal legislation was worked out and adopted. Regional law on Territorial Self-government is
worked out and submitted for adoption.
- Broad information field on LD is created. More than 400 publications and programmes prepared.
More that 200 000 people have been informed about LD.
- Own methodology of consultancy and adult education worked out.
2
Lessons learned
We have learned valuable lessons about mechanisms of change (while there were others).
- Even one person can sometimes cause significant changes. It is very hard, but possible.
- Real changes and development are to do with interaction and efforts of many people (community).
It is based on common identity, combination of values, norms, attitudes, (what is called “Weconcept”), which “programs” people’s behaviour. Most of it is unconscious. Positively oriented
“We- concert” is a pivot of development.
- On of the key words is sense. Local development can be put as common search of sense. Weconcept created by free will summing up of wills, senses turns community into a synergetic
complicated self-arranging system (which obtains many times higher abilities then its parts
separately) And it gives people energy, forces, abilities, inspiration, which they could not even
dream about.
- Positive “We-concept” allows community to use resources excluded by administrative and
commercial approaches. In many cases community based economy (while having bitter limitations)
provides efficiency many-many times higher then liberal market, when much more equity is gained
with many times less cost and destruction of resources. We are sure that even most poor
communities have enough resources for development. It works in different cultures but it is
especially important for poverty reduction in poor areas.
Now we can with proud say, that in certain conditions even with very little money and resources
(almost nothing) people can do great things.
- Development of such “We-concept” is a continuous and complicated process with the center of
responsibility placed inside the community, but it needs support from outside (financial, legislative,
informational, consulting). Special tools and techniques can catalyze and assure this process. We
have worked out a study on We-concept of development and would like to share it.
We believe that human nature has some wonderful still hidden and disregarded by our industrial
civilization abilities and signs, which can help people in depopulated areas to strive for better life
and not to suffer.
Transferability
We consider ourselves being an informal part of movement, which started in 60-70th with
Kennedy’s Antipoverty programme (USA), CDP in UK, experience of Netherlands, Ireland, Nordic
countries, and now is spreading in many countries of the world. We transfered this experience, as
we benefited from studying of experience of interactive adult education methods, practical social
psychology and sociology, synergy, from a number of teachings like Ghandi. Studies of Old
Russian traditions of self-government were also very beneficial.
We think that our experience is also transferable as we never bring the answer or fixed approach. It
is combination of methods of work with variables of entire necessities, forces, resources, human
energy and sense, which could build new social identity. It is social consulting technique especially
valuable as it worked even in very marginal and ruined rural areas being able to demonstrate very
high results with very limited resources. We managed to transfer this experience in Archangelsk
region (bigger than France) in 14 municipalities (with very difficult conditions). We shared it with
municipalities of Leningrad region, Volga area. Our experience was used in initiating development
process in Penza region, regions of Russian Far East.
Contacts information
Gleb Tyurin, Institute for Social and Humanistic Initiatives
Archangelsk region, Russia
Tel: +007 (8182) 200073
E-mail: glt@arh.ru
3