73rd EAAE Seminar
Ancona, 28-30 June 2001
Rural Development Policy
in a Diversified Europe:
Some Notes for a Research Agenda
Franco Sotte
Dipartimento di Economia
Università di Ancona
Piazza Martelli, 8
60121 Ancona
Sotte@dea.unian.it
73rd EAAE Ancona, 2001
1
Why this Seminar on RD Policy?
 Evaluation of RDP experiences (especially CAP)
 Structural policy, Leader, Sapard, Regional development plans Ag2k
 But also other experiences of RDP: parks, border regions, remote areas
 Tools and Methods
 Instruments for evaluation
 ex ante
 in itinere
 ex-post
 Data and statistical information
 Institutional solutions
 Definition of RDP
 What is rurality ?
 What is rural development ?
 What is Rural Development Policy then ?
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
2
What is Rural?
 The definition evolves (and corresponding indicators are needed)
 “Agrarian rurality”
 Rurality = Agriculture
 Unit of measurement: rate of employment in agriculture
 “Industrial rurality”
 Other economic sectors (industry) prevail
 Unit of measurement: population density (OECD)
 “Post-industrial rurality” (dispersion, small scale, common goods)
 Polymorphism
 Natural capital, Social capital, Human capital, Artificial capital
 Economic complexity and diversity
 Integration among services, industry and agriculture
 Agriculture: new quality oriented market demand, multifunctional roles
 Which unit(s) of measurement for the level of rurality?
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
3
Local Specific Rurality Issues?
 Peri-urban model
 Integration with metropolitan area: residence, local demand
 High natural and tourist values
 Prevalence of common goods and services
 Commodity oriented agriculture
 Competition in the international markets
 High quality agriculture
 Agricultural and agro-food districts
 Severe natural constraint areas
 Dry areas
 Very remote rural areas
 Isolation, lack of integration
 Specific cases of disaster areas
 War and ethnic cleansing: Croatia, Yugoslavia;
 Earthquake: the Italian Apennines
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
4
The 4 types of Capital in Rurality
Human
Capital
Natural
Capital
Rurality
Social
Capital
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
Artificial
Capital
5
The Risk of losing the Balance
Waste of
Natural Capital
Waste of
Human Capital
Weakened
Rurality
Waste of
Social Capital
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
Less artificial
artificial
Less
Artificial
Capital
Capital
Capital
6
What Is Rural Development ?
 Balance between Human-Social-Natural-Artificial capital
 Preserve the complexity
 Maximise the resilience
 Integration between economic sectors
 Provide non agricultural functions and employment
 Foster the exchange of resources
 Co-evolution between rural and urban
 Improve the quality of life
 Food security
 Rural services (tourism & leisure, culture, health, environment, etc.)
 Increase the overall competitivity
 Maintain flexibility
 Conserve uniqueness and identity
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
7
What is RD Policy?
 An integrated vision of territorial development
 Between sectorial economic policies
 Between economic & social, environmental, territorial planning
policies
 With development policies of other territories
 A related distribution of responsibilities
 Centre - Periphery
 Bottom-up and Top-down approaches
 Government vs. Governance (Formal-Informal)
 Public and Private
 A cumulative construction
 Learning by doing / trial and error processes
 Based on consistent monitoring and evaluation feedback
 Overall analysis of policy impact
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
8
Rural versus agricultural
development
Agrarian rurality
Agricultural
development
Rural
development
Post-industrial rurality
Rural
development
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
Agricultural
development
9
How does RDP Change ?
Industrial
policies
Tertiary
policies
Health
policies
Agricultural
policy
Infrastructural
policies
Education
policies
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
Environ.tal
policies
10
Why the present Cap does not Suit
RD?
 Sectorial definition
 No integration with other structural policies
 RD regional programs basically only for agriculture
 Uneven budget distribution
 1st Pillar (price support + direct payments) = 90%
 2nd Pillar (RDP) = only 10% + mixed collection of measures
 Final effect oriented by prevailing coupled push
 No comparable support to multifunctional functions
 Results
 Distribution of benefits unchanged (mainly rent)
 No significant support to new/young entrepreneurs
 Territorial RD reduced to be 10% of a sectorial policy
 Obstacle to enlargement and WTO negotiations
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
11
Rural policy in the Agenda 2000
scenario
Lack of other
basic policies
CAP
Ag2k RDP
2nd Pillar
Price support
&
direct payments
1st pillar
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
Leader
Plus
Obj. 1-2
structural
policy
12
Which Agricultural Policy
corresponds best with RDP?
 Moving from CAP to CARPE
 Market stabilisation
 Environmental and cultural landscape payments
 Rural development incentives
 Transitional adjustment assistance
 An integrated vision of agricultural policy
 EU + National + Regional
 Expenditure + tax and social security exemption
 Targeted towards the entrepreneurs
 Finalised to a positive turnover (a central role for young farmers)
 Restore a business and marketing perspective
 Ag. policy oriented to create a services network
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
13
RDP: a Challenge for Ag-Econs?
 RD: a new experiment in governing in Europe
 Cooperation between policy makers and researchers
 Interaction with other economic disciplines, as well as with
social and territorial sciences
 A new leading role of agricultural economists
 in sustainable development definition
 and in the corresponding design of suitable policies
Thank you
73rd EAAE
Ancona, 2001
14