Disintegration, the reason for policy failure

1
Disintegration, the reason for policy failure
an analytical model of integrated rural
development By Gusztáv Nemes (Hungarian
Academy of Sciences Institute of Economics)
Chris High (Open University Systems
Department)

• Introduction
• Rural disadvantages - access and resources
• Two rural development systems central
  administrative and local heuristic
• Integrated versus non-integrated rural
  development two simple models

2

• 40 years of EU and domestic policies, positive
  discrimination
• Everyday aspiration of local people to make rural
  life better
• RESULTS
• Environmental and social degradation,
  depopulation, growing geographical disparities,
  etc.
• WHY RURAL POLICIES DO NOT WORK WELL?
• HOW COULD WE DO BETTER?

3
RURAL DISADVANTAGES ACCESS AND RESOURCES

• Rural areas have comparative disadvantages
• access-type disadvantages
• Results of underdevelopment of different
  infrastructures, resulting in limited
  communication of people, goods, capital and
  information from and to backward rural areas
• physical economic and political (or policy)
  access.
• resource-type disadvantages
• Results in the limited ability to produce goods
  and services, saleable on the global market
• financial, human, and institutional resources
• Core policies usually promote access type
  disadvantages
• Access two-way concept, without improved local
  resource base can cause damage

4
TWO RURAL DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS

• Europeanisation improving access, diminishing
  traditional protections, exposing rural areas to
  global (unequal) competition.
• Rural development is
• external (central) intervention - to protect
  the loss of rural values during Europeanisation
  through rules, financial aid, rural policies in
  general
• aspiration of local people - to improve their
  own lives through unlocking local resources and
  attracting external ones, searching for new
  futures

5
TWO RURAL DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS

• 1. Central-administrative system of rural
  development
• Based on top-down intervention of the political
  centre
• Comprises of EU and domestic policies, centrally
  redistributed resources, strategic development
  plans, bureaucratic knowledge, central rules,
  high level interest groups, NGOs, etc.
• Institutionalised character (with written
  procedures)
• External resources for intervention
• Narrow information
• Aimed at quantifiable results
• Can have high level, longer term objectives
• Central development logic (modernist paradigm)
• Main aim is to provide access and a peaceful
  environment for economic development for the
  economic centre
• Level EU-domestic-regional (?)

6
TWO RURAL DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS

• 2. Local-heuristic system
• Based on endogenous bottom-up processes
• Comprises of local actors and values local
  development plans social networks and kinship
  relations local authorities, innovative
  individuals, development associations and
  partnerships, etc.
• Low level of institutionalisation
• Builds on local resources, but often needs
  external help
• Based on responsive local knowledge and wide
  information flows
• Main aim is to improve local life, giving
  flexible responses to external challenges,
  keeping benefits for the locality
• Local development logic (new development
  paradigm)
• Level sub-regional and bellow

7
Human actors

• Local heuristic system
• Local leaders, entrepreneurs, etc.
• Their work effects their lives they risk their
  own money
• Embeddedness moral control
• Insightful knowledge on local matters, but often
  little understanding of central rules
• Very committed and less objective
• Main concern is the betterment of rural life /
  non-quantifiable results
• Central-administrative system
• Politicians, high level public servants, etc.
• Deal with others life, do not risk their own
  money
• High up in the system broad vision, objectivity
• Under bureaucratic and political control
• Insightful knowledge of bureaucratic rules but
  low information on local
• Main concern is to comply with the political
  centre, accountability, transparency
• Risk evasion

8
Integrated versus non-integrated rural
development two simple models

• Central Administrative System of Rural
  Development characterised by top-down,
  exogenous interventions, high level of
  institutionalisation, bureaucratic control,
  written rules and procedures, the modernist
  technological regime and quantifiable targets
• Central Development Resources financial
  resources in the central development budget,
  available for redistribution through the central
  system
• Local Heuristic System of Rural Development
  characterised by bottom-up processes, heuristic
  aspiration of local people to improve their
  lives, flexible responses to challenges, social
  networks, diversity, multifunctionality, and
  synergistic effects
• Local Development Resources rural values
  (natural, cultural, social), understood as
  resources, which often have to be unlocked or
  reconfigured if they are to be used for local
  economic development
• Access-type Disadvantages limiting access
  (physical, economic, policy) and the free
  movement of goods, people and capital to and from
  backward areas
• Resource-type Disadvantages (financial, human,
  institutional) limiting the ability of rural
  areas to produce goods and services saleable on
  the global market
• Result the outcome of the development process
  to a certain extent upgraded access and enhanced
  production capacity, resulting in either more
  balanced or biased environment for local economy
  and society.

9
The non-integrated system of rural development
10
The integrated system of rural development
11
Information flows in the non-integrated
development system
12
Information flows in the integrated development
system
13
Thank You for your attention!