Panel 3: A living countryside
The role of rural development policy in the rural economy and for rural
communities
How can the policy contribute to the development of rural areas?
1.
INTRODUCTION
A living countryside means rural areas having both a good quality of life and
employment opportunities. Quality of life is achieved in the access of local population to
different public and private services: health care, transport, education,
entertainment…etc. On the other hand, agriculture increasingly represents a smaller part
of rural employment and diversification is the keyword for opening new employment
opportunities in rural areas (tourism, crafts, services, new activities related to the
environment… etc).
Rural Development Regulation 1257/99 has tried to address these challenges by
including a number of measures, used in the Member States’ rural development
programmes, which have as a main objective promoting the adaptation and development
of rural areas and can be classified under the general title of “rural economy and rural
communities”.
These measures, included in article 33 of the Regulation, are the following:
• Basic services for the rural economy and population
•
Renovation and development of villages
•
Diversification of agricultural activities to non agricultural activities
•
Encouragement for tourism and craft activities
•
Financial engineering
In the 2000-2006 programming period, current member states (EU-15) have allocated
approximately 10% or 5 bio EUR (EAGGF part) of their rural development budgets to
these measures (13,1% in Objective 1 programmes and 6,6% in rural development
programmes ie. non Objective 1).
Leader + programmes also finance this type of measures focusing on four main subjects:
use of know-how and new technologies, improving the quality of life in rural areas,
adding value to local products and making the best use of natural and cultural resources.
2.
QUESTIONS
(1)
Are the current measures in this group considered sufficient to tackle the
problems of rural areas? And if not, what specific additional needs should be
covered?
(2)
Should Member States allocate a minimal percentage of their rural development
budget to this type of measures, to contribute to the common agreed objective of
the countryside as a better place to live and work in? Which specific weight
should this group of measures have in the new member states, given the ongoing
restructuring of agriculture and the need to create jobs outside agriculture?
(3)
How could a higher take-up of these measures be promoted? Would a more
detailed definition of the measures at EU level help to increase the use of these
measures? Or should this definition be left to the Member States? Could the
exchange of member states’ best practices on the implementation of these
measures help?
(4)
How could the integration between this group of measures (wider rural
development) and the other groups (competitiveness, environment) be enhanced
to achieve maximum effect?
(5)
How could the synergies and complementarity between this group of measures
and other EU policies promoting growth and employment and national policies
be better exploited?
(6)
Taking into account three of the main functions of rural areas (accommodation,
employment and leisure/recreation), how could a more balanced rural-urban
development be achieved?
2