Motive der (Nicht-)Umstellung auf Öko-Landbau

Der Anteil der Öko-Landbaufläche in Deutschland soll nach dem Willen der Bundesregierung bis zum Jahre 2010 auf 20 Prozent der landwirtschaftlichen Fläche(LF) steigen.Um dieses ambitionierte Ziel zu erreichen, müssen die Rahmenbedingungen für den Öko-Landbau verbessert werden. Dafür sind Erkenntnisse notwendig, welche Faktoren aus Sicht der Landwirte eine Umstellung und Beibehaltung des Öko-Landbaus hemmen oder fördern. Das Institut für Ländliche Strukturforschung (IfLS) führte hierzu im Rahmen des Bundesprogramms Ökologischer Landbau eine Untersuchung durch (Schramek und Schnaut, 2004). Ein Kernelement waren 362 persönliche Befragungen von Landwirten (sowohl konventionell als auch ökologisch wirtschaftend) im Frühjahr 2003

Hemmende und fördernde Faktoren einer Umstellung auf ökologischen Landbau aus Sicht landwirtschaftlicher Unternehmer/innen in verschiedenen Regionen Deutschlands (unter Einbeziehung soziologischer Fragestellungen)

Ein Zuwachs ökologisch wirtschaftender Betriebe hängt u. a. entscheidend von den Beweggründen landwirtschaftlicher Betriebsleiter ab. Die vorliegende Untersuchung beschäftigt sich mit der Frage, welche Faktoren Betriebsleiter an der Umstellung auf Ökolandbau hindern oder dazu bewegen und wie eine dauerhafte Umstellung gewährleistet werden kann. Dazu wurden im Frühjahr 2003 insgesamt 362 landwirtschaftliche Betriebsleiter (konventionell und ökologisch wirtschaftender Betriebe) in fünf deutschen Untersuchungsregionen persönlich befragt. Die Untersuchung beleuchtet die verschiedenen Stufen des Adoptionsprozesses, von der ersten Wahrnehmung des Ökolandbaus als alternatives Landbewirtschaftungssystem bis hin zur Umstellung. Unabhängig von Produktionsrichtung und Untersuchungsregion befürchten konventionelle Betriebsleiter einen unsicheren Absatz und zu niedrige Erzeugerpreise für Öko-Produkte sowie zunehmende Beikrautprobleme im Ackerbau. Dies sind auch tatsächlich Probleme, mit denen viele Öko-Betriebsleiter nach ihrer Umstellung verstärkt zu kämpfen haben oder hatten. Für viehhaltende Betriebe erweisen sich die Auflagen zur Tierhaltung nach der EG-Öko-Verordnung als besonderes Hemmnis; häufig genügen die bestehenden Stallungen, insbesondere mit Anbindehaltung, nicht der EG-Verordnung. Für Marktfruchtbetriebe ist ein bedeutender Hinderungsgrund, dass mit der Umstellung Ackerkulturen mit gesichertem Absatz aufgegeben werden müssten – ein gewichtiges Argument insbesondere bei Betrieben mit Zuckerrübenkontingenten. Neben der Identifikation wichtigster Hemmfaktoren wurden folgende Einflussfaktoren einer Umstellung vertiefend untersucht: – Absatz und Vermarktung von Öko-Produkten; – Investitionen, die mit Umstellung auf Ökolandbau erforderlich werden; – Anreizwirkung der Extensivierungsprämie; – Arbeitsbelastung; – Flexibilität konventioneller Betriebsleiter bezüglich Veränderungen in ihrer Produktion; – Bereitschaft zu Betriebskooperationen im Zuge einer Umstellung; – Anerkennung des Ökolandbaus bei Bevölkerung und landwirtschaftlichem Berufsstand. Aus den Ergebnissen der Untersuchung wurden Handlungsempfehlungen abgeleitet, die sich an Politik, landwirtschaftliche Berater sowie Betriebsleiter gleichermaßen richten

Rural Development experiences in Germany: opportunities and obstacles in fostering smart places through LEADER

To discuss the impact of LEADER on improving ‘smart places’, the findings of the evaluation of Rural Development Programmes in Germany are presented. A survey of Local Action Group (LAG) members shows positive results about the quality of cooperation and communication within the LAG. Although there are obstacles for innovation, LEADER shows what is already possible in very different fields such as youth projects for qualifications, concepts for sustainable use of energy or innovative ways to organise social infrastructure. Relevant obstacles are bureaucratic restrictions. To use the opportunities, it is advisable not to set narrow limits for the size of the regions; the regions should decide on this themselves. Also, for the selection of projects no narrow administrative restrictions should apply to the kinds of projects that are eligible. To benefit from the original strengths of the LEADER approach, greater freedom for locally managed actions would be required

Contributions for the quality of life through a participative approach for rural development – Experiences from Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (Eastern Germany)

The challenges for the quality of life in rural areas in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, connected with structural economic and demographic changes, raise the question of how to find appropriate policy interventions in the specific situation of transitions countries. One approach to bring forward rural development is LEADER, a locally managed, place-based form of policy intervention. LEADER is bottom-up oriented and participatory with own regional budgets to fund projects. There are 13 LEADER-regions in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. To discuss the question of appropriate policy interventions, experiences in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern will be considered and a comparison with the LEADER-experiences in western Germany will be made. Therefore, the findings of the evaluation of Rural Development Programs (RDPs) in six federal states in Germany will be used to examine the performance of the LEADER-approach. In general a survey of LAG-members shows positive results regarding the performance of LEADER with no major discrepancies between Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and western Germany, but there are differences in participation structures (less working groups, but a higher share of female LAG-members in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern than in western Germany) and the role of the state sector. Problems for funding innovative projects were common, especially at the beginning of the funding period. To use the original and intended strengths of the LEADER approach, greater freedom for the Local Actions Groups (LAG) would be required (also in the European policy framework).Der Beitrag beschäftigt sich mit LEADER als partizipativem Entwicklungsansatz für Ländliche Räume. Dazu werden die spezifischen Bedingungen in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern im Vergleich mit westdeutschen Bundesländern untersucht und die Eignung dieses Entwicklungsansatzes zur Verbessertung der Lebensqualität betrachtet

Multi-level Governance in rural development: Analysing experiences from LEADER for a Community-Led Local Development (CLLD)

In the last funding periods there was steady increase in the number of LEADER-regions in Europe, and, at least in Germany, it is already evident that this gain will continue: for the 2014-2020 funding period there around 300 LAGs expected in comparison to 244 LAGs in the last period. For the new funding period new regulations envisages a Common Strategic Framework (CSF) to provide all EU Funds with a set of basic rules in line with the general principles - partnership, multi-level governance, equality and sustainability. Now there are common options for a so-called “Community-Led Local Development” (CLLD). Although LEADER is commonly called a bottom-up approach, it has to be pointed out that there is a high influence through a superordinated framework of funding regulations. So more precisely LEADER is neither "top-down" nor "bottom-up", but can classified as a “down up”-approach. This clarifies the basic understanding for the terms used in the context of multi-level governance. Second there is a look on the state of the art of LEADER-related research in the view of LEADER as a "down up" approach. Anyhow the experiences with LEADER in the last 25 years can give valuable insights. Altogether, the literature review already supports the need to have a multi-level-view on CLLD

Implementation and impacts of the LEADER-approach – reflections on the intervention logic of a participatory approach for rural development

One approach to support a smart rural development is LEADER, which is funded by the European agricultural fund. A general assumption about LEADER-approach is that the implementation of the LEADER-principles (like participation, cooperation, bottom up-orientation) creates an added value because of a better identification of local needs and solutions, more commitment of stakeholders and a greater scope for innovation. To reflect the implementation and impacts of the LEADER-approach we can present results from the evaluation of Rural Development Programs (RDPs) in six federal states in Germany. Object of evaluation are more than 100 LEADER-regions

Evaluation von Maßnahmen der Schwerpunkte 1 und 2 der ELER-Verordnung: Ableitung von Indikatoren auf der Basis vorhandener Daten

--

LEADER - an approach to innovative and suitable solutions in rural areas?

The research presented is part of the evaluation of Rural Development Programmes (RDP) in seven German “Länder” (federal states).Innovation is often mentioned as an important pillar of the development of rural areas. One part of Rural Development Programmes, which explicitly addresses innovation, is LEADER: a bottom up-oriented, participatory approach with cooperation by local actors in rural areas. In LEADER, a Local Action Group (LAG) with stakeholders of different institutions and origins comes together as a kind of a public-private partnership and decides about the financial support for regional projects. The LAG can be seen as a kind of new “network of practice.” In this context it is important for the LAGs to assemble people with various backgrounds and to foster a good communication and cooperative climate. A survey of LAG-members shows positive results: there are improvements in the “cooperation beyond administrative borders” (respectively, narrow village boundaries), in the “improving of understanding views from other groups” and in the „cooperation between different groups.” Thus LEADER is an example of how an external programme can connect actors from different interest groups who would, without this programme, in part not have met. In addition, LEADER offers the possibility to try out new approaches, as the regions have access to their “own” funding budget to implement their ideas. But in practice the possibilities of funding experimental or innovative projects via LEADER depend very much on the extent to which the RDPs are able to provide a suitable framework to fund projects outside the standard menu of measures. The assessments of the LAG-managers show that the real possibilities are limited, particularly compared with the former funding period (LEADER+). But despite these limitations, we found LEADER- projects fostering innovation in very different fields

Rural Development experiences in Germany: opportunities and obstacles in fostering smart places through LEADER

To discuss the impact of LEADER on improving ‘smart places’, the findings of the evaluation of Rural Development Programmes in Germany are presented. A survey of Local Action Group (LAG) members shows positive results about the quality of cooperation and communication within the LAG. Although there are obstacles for innovation, LEADER shows what is already possible in very different fields such as youth projects for qualifications, concepts for sustainable use of energy or innovative ways to organise social infrastructure. Relevant obstacles are bureaucratic settings. To use the opportunities, it is advisable not to set narrow limits for the size of the regions; the regions should decide on this themselves. Also, for the selection of projects no narrow administrative restrictions should apply to the kinds of projects that are eligible. To benefit from the original strengths of the LEADER approach, greater freedom for locally managed actions would be required