1 / 16

RE-INVENTING THE RURAL BETWEEN THE SOCIAL AND THE NATURAL

Resilience and adaptation in the project state Gusztáv Nemes, Chris High nemes@ econ.core.hu c.high @ open.ac.uk. RE-INVENTING THE RURAL BETWEEN THE SOCIAL AND THE NATURAL XXIII European Society for Rural Sociology C ongress Vaasa, Finland 17-21 August 2009. Outline .

thome
Download Presentation

RE-INVENTING THE RURAL BETWEEN THE SOCIAL AND THE NATURAL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Resilience and adaptationinthe project stateGusztáv Nemes, Chris Highnemes@econ.core.huc.high@open.ac.uk RE-INVENTING THE RURAL BETWEEN THE SOCIAL AND THE NATURAL XXIII European Society for Rural Sociology Congress Vaasa, Finland 17-21 August 2009

  2. Outline • The New RuralParadigm and theProject State • Whyit is notworking? • Hungarian Leader – the veterinary horse • Resilience and adaptationthroughreflexiveagency

  3. The ‘new rural paradigm’ (OECD 2006) • A shift from subsidising declining sectors, areas, socialgroups, towards investment to develop an area’s most productive activity • Valorisation of local specificitiesresources • Decentralised administration and management • Embracemulti-level governance Bryden 2007 Paradox – whydoesnotwork?

  4. The era of the ‘Project State’ • Counter-narrativeto Welfare State • Project state – an institutional system that has arisen to deliver the ‘New Rural Paradigm’ • Project state – reasons for failure: The nature of projectsand project management Failure of multi-levelgovernance

  5. Tyranny of projects- projects ruling actors • Creating exclusion • Impeding co-operation, • management tools from business (logframe,SWOT, etc.) • competition • match funding • Fixed support Difficult to sustain results and dev. capacity

  6. Multi-level governance tendtofailforlack of: genuine decentralisation (power, responsibility, capacity missing on lower levels) Partnership and real participation on every level(interest-harmonisation, animation, beliefe in the system) appropriate institutions, and communication(interest representation, development capacity, continuity) effectivesociallearning and evaluation(no improvement of developmentpolicies and institutions)

  7. What is behindfailure/successmulti-levelgovernance? • Political culture, participative democracy; • Strength of civil society, social networks; • Existing development capacity • Approach of the centre to decentralisation; These vary greatly, BUT backward areas are likely to be weak in these too…

  8. 2007-13 LEADER HUNGARY Action research, supportedbyNorwegian Financial Mechanism: Local development policies in a Europeanproject state-a systemic analysis of institutional bricolage 2009-2011 Ex-ante evaluator of RDP LAG member Planninggroup + mentoring (variousLAGs) NAURAMA Alliance

  9. The Hungarian LEADER Programme The veterinaryhorse

  10. Problemsduringplanning Little time to set up LAGs; Strong incentives to make them large (Ours - 60 villages, 184 LAG members); Rural Development Training and Consultation Institute – 400 employee, BUT control NOT help No training or professional support, no financial resources for local planning (5000 working hours) Planning to strict, standard, badlydesigned – online! 4 month, with ever changing guidance Strongartificial competition betweenLAGs

  11. Problemsduringimplementation • Politicalaimsdominate • AdministrativeProcedureAct • Lack of trust, human decisions, • Insufficientcentraladministration • Divide and conquer, etc… System shouldcollapsbutdoesn’t WHY?

  12. Resilience and adaptation Reflexiveagency Enthusiasm, energy Capacities Creativebricolage Mediation, translation Networking Sociallearning

  13. Reflexiveagency – therural bites back I. Fromrabishpickingtohightech • Capacities andcreativebricolage

  14. Reflexiveagency – therural bites back II. Spontaneousco-operation Lobbying onregionallevel Sociallearning

  15. Reflexiveagency – therural bites back III. Co-operation‘forthefun of it’ Enthusiasm and networking

  16. Thank you for your attentionGusztáv Nemes, Chris Highnemes@econ.core.huc.high@open.ac.uk

More Related