Search results

The neo-endogenous approach to rural development puts great importance on territorialization, and aligns with place-based strategies and with microentrepreneurship because both concepts consider local specificities and leveraging local resources. This chapter analyzes characteristics of rural tourism establishments in Vojvodina, Northern Province of Serbia, of which the majority are microenterprises. The discussion focuses on aspects of microenterprise functioning such as human capital, offers, revenues, and non-material benefits. The aim is to analyze the local embeddedness of rural tourism microenterprises and their contribution to neo-endogenous rural development. Our results reveal that microentrepreneurs are embedded in rural places, but they face numerous constraints which in turn limits the benefits host communities might receive from place-based rural tourism development.

Wealthy rural areas, or rural areas in wealthy regions, have a specificity that should be taken into consideration both in empirical and theoretical research. In most of the cases, rural development in these areas depends not only on the capacity of rural communities to mobilise endogenous resources, but also to be able to link endogenous resources with outside networks. In Italy this approach has widely been put into practice through strategies centred on the link between local food and its place of production. To explore the implications of this link, the paper will explore the implication of an adoption of the concept of ‘terroir’. Terroir can be seen as a mix of a set of localised invariants in the space related to natural, cultural, and social spheres. It is highly specific of a place, as it is produced and reproduced through localised processes. The peculiarity of the ‘terroir’ is that it is embodied into the product, which means that it is the source of local products’ identity and specificity. Local products are then a component of a broader socio-technical system, and product and terroir co-evolve. What are the mechanisms that make local products keys to rural development in a neo-endogenous perspective? In a neo-endogenous perspective, valorisation of local products is mainly related to its capacity to be recognised and evaluated by outside observers as different (and possibly better) from others. This capacity is embodied into what Bourdieu calls symbolic capital. Symbolic capital becomes a thread linking ‘terroir’ and the product to external observers, and convey to them meanings like notoriety, reputation, and trust. In order to be able to create, maintain, and increase symbolic capital, rural communities activate communication practices within and outside themselves. This may generate conflicts as well as strengthen identities and alliances. Three case studies will show the network building processes related to the creation of symbolic capital and its mobilisation into food production and marketing. The Cutigliano case shows how a small community borrows symbolic capital from the outside to enhance its capacity to sell a local cheese outside the area. The Colonnata case shows the risk that neo-endogenous strategies generate interlocal conflicts, hampering its competitiveness as a whole. The Chianti case shows an internal conflict over the use of the symbolic capital with both positive effects on the public debate and potential negative effects on the cohesion of the area. All the three cases make possible a reflection on governance, and especially on the role of the state (or the regional administration) in the governance of these processes.

The aim of this chapter is to challenge the assumption that top-down approaches to economic development and growth are the best way forward for rural areas. Looking at the work of the current LEADER programme and LEADER project examples, the chapter measures the impacts of small-scale, bottom-up approaches to foster rural development. It considers the importance of the LEADER approach as a key component of the current rural policy framework.

The chapter provides a discussion of top-down versus neo-endogenous approaches to rural growth, drawing on policy and practitioner literature. Four case studies from the current LEADER programme are used to demonstrate how the LEADER approach brings about growth at a local level, and how this can be measured using a Social Return on Investment (SROI) approach.

LEADER, as a programme, can deliver sustainable and effective economic growth through a series of small-scale interventions by stimulating entrepreneurial activity in the context of neo-endogenous growth. This forms a useful complementary strand to the top-down policy of major sectoral interventions profiled in this chapter in the context of current England-wide policy approaches to economic development. The SROI approach provides an effective tool for capturing the longer term effects of LEADER.

Considering the broader SROI and sustainable credentials of LEADER-stimulated business development provides a new and more robust means of both communicating the achievements of the programme and a rationale for giving it greater prominence.

The chapter establishes a new place-based approach to considering the wider impact of LEADER projects through an SROI approach. The insights help provide new insights into the contribution of this programme to economic development in rural communities.

Smart villages are a currently discussed approach to rural development promoted by the European Union. This approach factors in the diversity of rural areas and the different nature of challenges faced by each area. The central role is assigned to local communities – formation of appropriate characteristics and attitudes that enable the creation of optimal conditions for development. This is also the result of the evolution of a Rural Development Policy, which is driven by the dynamics and direction of change of rural areas and changes in societal perception of change events in rural areas.

The implementation of this development approach at the local level requires a transformation of the current school of thinking on development and the utilization of available resources. The key role in this process is played by local governments, which are part of the local community and also represent its interests.

The chapter combines theoretical and practical issues, and represents a geographic perspective. Its first aim is to answer the question: How can local governments create the right conditions for smart development at the local level? The second aim is to discuss the smart village approach in the context of selected development concepts. This leads to a number of specific recommendations for policymakers. It also helps them to understand the approach, which is vital in the implementation of the aforesaid recommendations.

This study aims to illuminate the field conditions under which social entrepreneurship can become institutionalized and transform the existing institutional fields.

A comparative case study was conducted among three social enterprises, within different regional institutional fields, following a most different systems design: OTELO, in Mühlviertel, ADC MOURA, in Baixo Alentejo and STEVIA HELLAS in Phthiotis.

The results indicate some of the field conditions under which an institutionalization of social entrepreneurship can thrive, namely, a high civil approval, a highly institutionalized and decentralized institutional field that allows the social enterprise to remain autonomous, as well the anchoring of the venture to a pre-existing counter-hegemonic narrative or/and to an embedded network that drives the dissemination a new institutional logic forward.

The institutionalization of the voluntary collective action that social entrepreneurship embodies has significant limitations. The same is true for innovation, which tends to lose its innovative spirit as it becomes institutionalized. Future research has to explore if institutionalized social entrepreneurship can maintain a voluntary perspective and an innovative drift.

Most studies on institutional entrepreneurship deploy in-depth case studies while multi-case comparative research remains rare. The current comparative study adds significantly to the understanding of institutional entrepreneurship, as it compares different degrees of institutionalization and successful institutional entrepreneurs to non-successful ones.

With roots dating back to the early twentieth century, integrated rural development (IRD) is a term that became commonplace in international development circles in the 1960s and afterwards. Based largely on a dual concept of helping to meet basic needs and improve the overall quality of life of poor people from rural and remote regions within national contexts, IRD initiatives have undergone a series of shifts in emphases, approaches and funding schemes. The purpose of this paper is to document the historical background and development of IRD initiatives over time.

The research design for this study included a series of mixed data collection methods, including case study examples of best practices, interviews and a thorough review of the formal literature, as well as an in-depth examination of alternative and multi-media literature (e.g. project reports, policy reports, government reports, working papers, newspaper articles, internet publications, etc.).

The findings of this paper are divided into the following sections. First, key terms of IRD are defined. Next, the background and overview of IRD is introduced including addressing how IRD is viewed as an approach to development, its historical evolution over time, some major IRD initiatives and the major development organizations engaged in promoting IRD. Third, an examination of several IRD models is introduced based on recommended methodologies, noting the sequencing of interventions important to successful IRD initiatives, select examples of IRD initiatives built on public-private partnerships, and the positive and negative outcomes and impacts from select IRD approaches.

The final section focuses on conclusions and seven key recommendations (or ingredients) outlined by the author as essential for implementing successful IRD initiatives: first, create an enabling environment that is conducive and supportive of IRD; second, establish a National Policy Framework for Integrated Development, which includes IRD; third, establish supportive policies and a legal framework that is based on the National Policy Framework; fourth, include two or more sectoral approaches in the initiative (e.g. agriculture, education, health, employment, infrastructure and industry, environment, etc.); fifth, garner participation and commitment from all stakeholders during each of the planning, implementation and evaluation stages; sixth, secure initial seed capital and funding and afterwards sustained funding streams; and seventh, conduct continual monitoring and evaluation throughout the lifespan of the entire initiative with specific adherence to the four key principles of good governance: coordination, information flow, transparency and accountability.

Today, governance of food safety and quality as well as environmental aspects of food chains increasingly operates through public and private standards. This governance, as led by retail power, is often interpreted to undermine farmer’s agrarian independence by dictating detailed agricultural practices on the farm, thereby conditioning access into the food chain. Focusing on farmers’ discursive resources, agrarian writing implies an alternative social force, constructed here as farmer’s freedom. By analysing qualitative data from Finland along the theoretical axes of farmers’ interest in socio-economic achievement and willingness to comply with standards, a more nuanced understanding of farmers’ occupational freedom emerges. Freedom in economic interests and organic farming represents farmers as standard takers as standards supported values most important for them. Realizing freedom in economic creativity can be antagonistic to (public) standards and lead to contestations and negotiations for feasibility. Finally, freedom in self-sufficiency is antithetical to the commercial food chain; however, dissenting from standards displays a strong capacity to close the metabolic rift, along with organic farming. The evidence from the study suggests that farmers’ freedom has the character of a social force to modify food chains and to increase their socio-economic and environmental sustainability and to call for consumers’ freedom to join farmers’ efforts.

This paper aims to propose a knowledge transfer partnership (KTP) model, using higher education (HE) students researching in the UK. It is focused on community engagement via charitable trusts, New Opportunities Wirksworth (NOW) & Ecclesbourne Valley Rail (EVR). The researchers designed and implemented a pilot study that explored the potential of a small, yet attractive and active, market town to diversify and regenerate using tourism. This project, which has been funded by the UK Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF), has been devised to operate and monitor a KTP in the culturally important heritage market town of Wirksworth, in Derbyshire.

A systems-thinking constructivist approach is used and employs problem-based learning (PBL) through engagement of students in research and data collection. The authors identified that skills for sustainable development within the community are dependent on the reintegration of complex, inter-dependent and inter-disciplinary factors. A holistic approach to the learning and knowledge shared within the community underpins UK initiatives to promote capacity development in ways to change knowledge applications across product and service boundaries. Therefore, in addition to encouraging diversification and regeneration through tourism, this project supported the University of Derby's academic agenda to promote experiential and entrepreneurial learning in students working at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels. This paper accords with the current university initiatives to meet the student employability agenda through the application of PBL and knowledge management.

The creation of outcomes and recommendations for Wirksworth's stakeholders provides sustainability through the knowledge creation and sharing processes. There are seven outcomes that chart a path to development and knowledge transfer (KT) and sharing. The authors simultaneously provided an environment for students to gain skills and a community to acquire new knowledge, and these are the outcomes and output of this project. New learning styles may support inclusive academic practice (see related samples of PBL such as Ineson and Beresford in HLST resources 2001). Implications for building a KT community through the social capital accumulated in the project are explored.

In taking PBL from the classroom to the community, the authors have created a new KT environment in which skills can be acquired and a regeneration strategy can be tested in a work-or-practice-related setting. Students recognise that they are building learning for themselves that is unique in that it cannot be recreated in a classroom setting. The authors see this project developing into a robust long-term partnership between communities and institutions with KT benefits to teaching staff in addition to students. These benefits will include new skills for PBL, working collaboratively with partners in the community to develop key skills in HE students, innovation in assessment, inclusive learning and teaching, experiential and entrepreneurial learning in practice.