Rural networks in the funding period 2007 - 2013: A critical review of the EU policy instrument

Rural Networks have been implemented as an instrument to enhance EU rural development policies in the funding period 2007-2013. Gaps in European programme documents concerning the networks' purpose and their evaluation led to a survey of the National Network Units being conducted in 2010. Besides investigating how these gaps are bridged nationally, the survey aimed to provide an overview of the development of the networks, of the initial experiences and challenges faced in running the networks, and to assess their potential impact. Empirical findings show that the networks probably support rural development (policies) and create added value. However, ways of demonstrating this impact in quantitative terms are lacking. Member states tend to stick closely to the specifications provided by the Commission and rarely go beyond them even if they are inadequate - even though this is legally possible. As a result, one purpose originally envisaged for the networks, namely to contribute to improving governance, is neglected. The paper provides proposals for modifying EC Regulations so as to enhance rural networks' impact and points to the need for further theoretical research corroborating the networks' value and increasing their effectiveness. -- Für die Förderperiode 2007-2013 wurden Netze für den Ländlichen Raum als Politikinstrument zur Aufwertung der EU Politik zur ländlichen Entwicklung aufgebaut. Unzulänglichkeiten in den EU Programmdokumenten im Hinblick auf die Zweckbestimmung und die Evaluierung der Netze gaben Anlass, im Jahr 2010 eine Umfrage unter den Nationalen Vernetzungsstellen durchzuführen. Es sollte einerseits der Frage nachgegangen werden, wie auf nationaler Ebene mit den regulatorischen Lücken umgegangen wird, andererseits zielte die Umfrage darauf ab, die Entwicklung der Netze zu erfassen, sowie erste Erfahrungen und Herausforderungen im Bezug auf das Management der Netze und ihre potentiellen Auswirkungen auszumachen. Die empirischen Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Netze wahrscheinlich die Umsetzung ländlicher Entwicklung(spolitik) unterstützen und einen Mehrwert hervorbringen. Allerdings fehlt es an Mitteln, diese Wirkungen quantitativ nachzuweisen. Ferner, da die Mitgliedstaaten dazu tendieren, sich stark an den EU Vorgaben zu orientieren und nicht über diese hinauszugehen, auch wenn sie unzureichend sind, wird das ursprünglich für die Netze vorgesehene Ziel, einen Beitrag zur Verbesserung von Governance zu leisten, allseits vernachlässigt. In dem Papier werden Vorschläge für mögliche Modifizierungen der EU Verordnungen gemacht, die die positive Wirkung der Netze verstärken könnten. Außerdem wird der Bedarf an netzwerktheoretischer Forschung zur Unterlegung des Werts der Netze für den Ländlichen Raum und zur Vergrößerung ihrer Effektivität herausgestellt.National Rural Networks,Policy Instrument,Rural Development,CAP,Netze für den Ländlichen Raum,Politikinstrument,Ländliche Entwicklung,GAP

Rural networks in the funding period 2007-2013: A critical review of the EU policy instrument.

Rural Networks have been implemented as an instrument to enhance EU rural development policies in the funding period 2007-2013. Gaps in European programme documents concerning the networks’ purpose and their evaluation led to a survey of the National Network Units being conducted in 2010. Besides investigating how these gaps are bridged nationally, the survey aimed to provide an overview of the development of the networks, of the initial experiences and challenges faced in running the networks, and to assess their potential impact. Empirical findings show that the networks probably support rural development (policies) and create added value. However, ways of demonstrating this impact in quantitative terms are lacking. Member states tend to stick closely to the specifications provided by the Commission and rarely go beyond them even if they are inadequate – even though this is legally possible. As a result, one purpose originally envisaged for the networks, namely to contribute to improving governance, is neglected. The paper provides proposals for modifying EC Regulations so as to enhance rural networks’ impact and points to the need for further theoretical research corroborating the networks’ value and increasing their effectiveness

Evaluating the implementation process of LEADER in Romania

LEADER supports integrated rural regional development. The programme is characterized by a participatory and bottom-up approach, public-private partnerships, multi-sectoral regional development strategies and innovation. An obligatory Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) was set up for evaluating EU interventions. The CMEF builds upon sets of common indicators and evaluation questions. Romania, where LEADER is currently introduced, has set national priorities for the programme implementation. For assessing the impact of LEADER in Romania meaningfully, an extension of the CMEF is needed. This paper, identifies and suggests appropriate indicators. Social Network Analysis is proposed as a tool for investigating intangible outcomes of LEADER in a quantitative way

National Rural Networks Lessons for policy formation and implementation within the CAP post 2013

I National Rural Networks (NRNs) have been introduced as a new policy intervention under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) in the period 2007-2013. Major tasks ascribed to the NRNs are: transferring information on rural development measures to rural stakeholders, identifying good practices, and organising exchange of expertise and know-how. Classified as Technical Assistance, the NRNs are expected to increase the effectiveness of the EAFRD and to contribute to the improvement of policy delivery and governance. However, neither a common intervention logic nor an evaluation system has been established for the NRNs. This paper examines the NRNs’ potential for added value creation and for achieving their objectives of improving policy delivery and governance. Special attention is devoted to the NRN in the post-socialist new member state Romania with little experiences in EU policies. The NRNs have so far raised hardly any scientific interest making empirical work essential for approaching our research objectives. Besides outlining the networks’ theoretical potential from the literature, practical experiences with the NRNs were gained from surveys amongst network units across the EU and Romanian network members in 2010. Results allow for drawing an intervention logic underlying the instrumental idea of the NRNs, highlighting strengths and weaknesses in implementation, and providing lessons against which the legislative proposals for the Common Agricultural Policies post 2013 are discussed

IMPLEMENTING A NATIONAL RURAL NETWORK: CHALLENGES FOR ROMANIA

The establishment of National Rural Networks is a requisite for all EU member states following adoption of the 2005 Rural Development Regulation. Although networking, particularly in the form of exchanging experience and/or establishing partnerships, is not a novelty, the setting up of national rural networks is envisaged by policy makers in Brussels as an instrument that will enhance the effectiveness of rural development policy across the Community. However, the implementation of such an instrument represents a challenge for the new member states. This is particularly the case for Romania, where experience with networking is sparse. Building on a survey of network members in Romania, this paper identifies major challenges for the actors involved and explores the potential for networking in that country. Findings show that Romania's NRN faces difficulties in exploiting the benefits that ânetworkingâ theoretically offers. For Romania, where administration and beneficiaries lack experience and capacities, and where the policy delivery process needs to be improved, the potential technical assistance through the NRN is likely to have a significant impact, but there is a long way to go. Keys for successful implementation are clearly defined endogenously grown objectives, sufficient communication and the political will.National Rural Network, Romania, Rural Development, Policy instrument, EU, Community/Rural/Urban Development,

THE EU’S TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FUNDS FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT: A GOOD IDEA WITH INSUFFICIENT CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK? - EXPERIENCES FROM ROMANIA -

Technical Assistance (TA) funds are provided to ensure the effectiveness of the EU’s rural development policies and maintaining administrative standards. Hence, a sufficient evaluation system for TA is missing. Considering ongoing debates on the Common Agricultural Policy in the next funding period and general claims for cuts and restructuring in public sector going along with the financial crisis, in this paper we raise the question if the current interventional design is ultimately supportive. Possible risks lie, for example, in conflicts between European and national interests, high administrative burdens and incentives for misspending. Based on insights of a 2010 field study conducted in Romania, we take up the case of this new member state. Adapting Galbraith’s Star Model of organisational design we show that TA is indeed used insufficiently to overcome ineffectiveness in the Romanian agricultural administration. Failures are caused among others by the general budget deficit, weak management, and a lack of (political) will as well as by the instrumental design itself. Findings are discussed by reviewing selected TA measures against common policy evaluation criteria. Our results offer essential input for the strategic, targeted use of TA and its instrumental design, and suggest an (alternative) approach to its evaluation

Understanding farmer uptake of measures that support biodiversity and ecosystem services in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)

Recent scientific research highlights the urgent need to protect Europe’s remaining – and rapidly declining– biological diversity. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is one of the major tools with which policymakers in the European Union (EU) can achieve this aim. However, so far, the CAP has proved largely ineffective – or even detrimental – to this goal. With relatively localised exceptions, the Policy’s notable success in ensuring supplies of food and fiber by supporting Europe’s farmers has been at the expense of environmental objectives. This report presents the findings of an Expert Working Group (EWG) convened to explore the ways in which the Common Agricultural Policy could be made more effective in protecting biodiversity and delivering associated ecosystem services, particularly through the implementation of effective biodiversity measures by Europe’s farmers. The EWG was established with a focus on Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs), a policy instrument introduced tothe CAP in the period 2014 - 2020, who broadened this remit to also consider evidence from other measures. In the first of three main strands of research (Step A), we synthesised the findings of recent reviews that investigate the most beneficial measures for biodiversity on farmland. In the second (Step B), we reviewed the factors affecting the design and selection of these measures at European, national and farm scales. In the third (Step C), we used our findings to develop recommendations for improving the impacts of the CAP on biodiversity and associated ecosystem services. The bulk of our work focused on Step B, in particular a new assessment of factors affecting farmer’s uptake of relevant measures, and a series of interviews with farmers’ representatives to further develop our insights and findings

Understanding Farmer Uptake: What measures are most promising to deliver on supporting biodiversity and ecosystem services in the next round of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)?

EU EKLIPSE Mechanis