Development and testing of a model for assessing sustainable rural development using a multicriteria analysis

Abstract

Ruralni i održivi razvoj te održivost su pojmovi koji se u današnje vrijeme često spominju kako u znanstvenim radovima tako i u političkim raspravama i medijima. Ruralni razvoj prioritet je u Europskoj uniji i podupire se financijskim sredstvima iz specifičnih fondova. Istovremeno, održivost je ključna riječ za Europsku uniju prilikom konstruiranja programa i politika za sve ljudske aktivnosti. U ovom je radu promatran održivi ruralni razvoj na županijskoj odnosno NUTS 3 razini prvenstveno radi dostupnosti podataka, ali i zato što bi se održivi razvoj neke države trebao temeljiti na podjednakom razvoju svih njezinih dijelova. Održivi ruralni razvoj promatran je s aspekta snošljivosti i tolerancije triju sastavnica (ekološke, ekonomske i društvene) koje su vrednovali predstavnici različitih profesionalnih institucija. Pomoću dobivenih pondera i statističkih podataka određeni su kvantitativni pokazatelji pojedine sastavnice u određenom ruralnom prostoru što može biti podloga za izradu strategija razvoja i djelovanje lokalnih i regionalnih čelnika s ciljem poboljšanja održivog razvoja. U radu su postavljena tri cilja, a to su: identificirati najprikladniji skup indikatora za mjerenje održivog ruralnog razvoja na NUTS 3 razini, izraditi model za mjerenje održivog ruralnog razvoja na NUTS 3 razini i testirati model na primjeru četiriju hrvatskih županija. U radu je pomoću višekriterijske analize, AHP metodom izrađen model za mjerenje održivog ruralnog razvoja na NUTS 3 razini koji se sastoji od petnaest indikatora podijeljenih u tri skupine: ekološka, ekonomska i društvena. Osim glavnog modela, na osnovu vrednovanja svih ispitanika, napravljene su i četiri inačice: prema mišljenju predstavnika znanstveno-nastavnih institucija, predstavnika LAG-ova i udruga, predstavnika državnih i županijskih institucija i model u kojem svi kriteriji i potkriteriji imaju jednake vrijednosti lokalnih prioriteta. Model je testiran na primjeru četiriju županija od kojih je Zadarska županija ostvarila najbolje rezultate u pogledu ruralne održivosti, slijedi je Koprivničko-križevačka, zatim Brodsko-posavska i posljednje plasirana je Vukovarsko-srijemska županija. Testirane su i četiri inačice modela i prema svima je vodeće mjesto zauzela Zadarska, a slijedi je Koprivničko-križevačka županija.Rural development, sustainable development and sustainability are nowadays often mentioned in scientific publications, as well as in political discussions and media. Rural development is considered as a priority in the European Union and is financially supported from designated funds, while sustainability is a keyword for the European Union processes of creating programs and policies for all human activities. The concept of sustainable development consists in three components: ecological, economic and social, which in ideal conditions equally contribute to the objective, but in reality, growth and development in one component's domain negatively affects the growth and development of the remaining sustainability factors. Due to the law of scarcity, one has to choose a way to use the scarce resources and to establish their development priorities. In order to determine development priorities and sustainable development components in which a particular area falls behind, a measuring tool is necessary. Since in Croatia no sustainable development measurement for all of its components has been conducted, it was decided to create such model using a multicriteria analysis and the AHP method and to test it on NUTS 3 level. The aims of this paper are: to identify the most appropriate set of indicators for measuring sustainable development on NUTS 3 level, to create a model for measuring sustainable rural development on NUTS 3 level and to test the model on the example of four Croatian counties. In the chapter Previous Research, the author provides an overview of the research in the domain of rural development, sustainability and sustainable development and methods used for measuring sustainability and sustainable development. In Materials and Methods, the multicriteria analysis is described in more detail, some of its methods are specified, while special focus is put on the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), used for the purpose of achieving research goals. It explains the procedure of creating the model using this method and some basic theoretical assumptions of the method. The chapter Research Results is divided in several subchapters to track more easily both the process of creating the model and finally its testing on the selected counties. In the subchapter Suggested Indicators with Explanations, based on a review of literature, a set of 47 indicators was developed, divided in three groups: ecological, economic and social. For each suggested indicator, there is a clarification of the importance of its measuring, a list of authors who used it in previous research and an explanation how it would be measured if selected by respondents as one of 15 indicators included in the model. In the subchapter Selection of Sustainable Rural Development Indicators, the author presents the results of the research conducted on the pattern of 47 respondents: representatives of scientific-educational institutions, LAGs and state and county institutions. The following 15 indicators were selected to enter the model: availability of potable water, investment in sustainable energy sources and energetic efficiency, share of ecological agriculture in total agriculture, existence of recycling and composting infrastructure, biodiversity of animal and plant species, unemployment rate, availability of infrastructure objects connected to agriculture, gross domestic product per capita, productivity of agricultural production, diversification of economic activities on the rural area, age structure, availability of education facilities, education structure, availability of health facilities and population growth between two censuses. This subchapter also lists the indicators which would enter the model if the research was limited to a single of the abovementioned respondent groups. The subchapter Creating a Rating Model of Sustainable Rural Development shows local priorities of the three indicator groups, as well as of each of the 15 chosen indicators. The most important indicator group for achieving sustainable rural development are the economic indicators, with local priority value 0.415, followed by the social, with local priority value 0.309, while the lowest value of local priority, 0.275, is attributed to the ecological indicators. Different groups of experts, formed based on their workplace, placed different value to particular indicator groups. Thus, representatives of academic teaching personnel consider the social group of indicators to be the most important, while the representatives of LAGs, state and county institutions evaluated the economic indicators as the most important. If individual indicators are observed, the indicator with the highest value of local priority is availability of potable water (0.286), and the lowest value is attributed to the share of ecological agriculture in the total agriculture (0.127). The subchapter Entering Data into the Model includes all data for individual indicators for each of the four counties on which the model was tested (Brod-Posavina, KoprivnicaKriževci, Vukovar-Srijem and Zadar). Along with the statistical data, the chapter contains tables with key for assigning weight when ranking the counties by the selected indicators. In the last subchapter, Testing the Model on Four Selected Counties, as indicated by the title, the model was tested. Apart from the original model which includes all expert groups' opinions, three model versions were made based on the experts' occupation, and a model version in which all criteria and subcriteria bear equal local priority value. Zadar County received the highest ratings among the observed counties in the original model, as well as in all four versions. This comes from the fact that this county had the best values of almost all indicators, and consequently, a difference in particular indicators' local priority values in model versions had no effect on the final result. The second-placed in all test situations was Koprivnica-Križevci, while Vukovar-Srijem and Brod-Posavina had the lowest ratings, with very small difference among the two. The chapter Discussion follows the chapter Research Results. Each subchapter of the discussion points out the problems encountered during the research, describes how they were resolved and recommends ways of possible improvement. A comprehensive model such as this one, which was created using a multicriteria analysis, gives a better insight into the overall state of the territory and population, and based on the obtained comparisons an inclusive development strategy can be devised. The advantage of the used method is that different stakeholders can take part in the selection of indicators and evaluation of their importance in achieving sustainable rural development, which was in actuality done when creating this model, while the disadvantage of this research is unequal representation of each stakeholder group, which undoubtedly affected both the indicator selection and weight assignment. As a disadvantage of the model, one can point out a certain amount of subjectivity in suggesting which indicators are to be included in the model, as well as the subjectivity of each respondent in choosing the indicators and their weight assignment. This subjectivity was not entirely avoidable, but it was substantially neutralized by heterogeneity of respondents' professional orientation. The paper ends with the chapter Conclusions, where the achieved aims are briefly stated, hypotheses are reflected upon and possible further research and model improvement is suggested. This paper identifies the most appropriate set of indicators for measuring sustainable rural development on NUTS 3 level. 15 indicators were selected, which were then subdivided into three groups: ecological, economic and social. A model for measuring sustainable rural development on NUTS 3 level was created using a multi-criteria AHP method in the program Expert Choice 2000 which can be used, with minor adjustments, on the area of the entire European Union. The model was tested on the territory of four counties, of which Zadar County exhibited the best results in rural sustainability, followed by Koprivnica-Križevci, then Brod-Posavina and Vukovar-Srijem with the lowest results. Four versions of the model were also created, according to the opinion of the representatives of scientific-educational institutions, LAGs and associations, state and county institutions, and a model where all criteria and subcriteria have equal local priority values. Local priority values of the criteria and subcriteria differ in these models according to the professional orientation of the respondents. Economic criteria have been confirmed as the most important in achieving sustainable rural development, but this was not critical for the final ranking of the counties because the top-ranked county (Zadar) was also leading by the non-economic indicators. The hypothesis that the county with the highest GDP per capita will be the highest ranked considering the goal: achieving sustainable rural development, was not confirmed. Further research should certainly test the model on all Croatian counties, after which Croatia can be compared to neighbouring countries. The model is also applicable at the local level, where it could prove problematic due to nonexistent statistical data for such small territorial units. The paper's scientific contribution is the creation of a model for measuring sustainable rural development. This is the first application of such comprehensive model in Croatia. The results obtained with the model can be of use to regional and local government in detecting strengths and weaknesses in particular areas of economic, ecological and social development, which is certainly a good basis for writing rural development strategies and for the purposes of differentiation in the development policy of respective parts of Croatia. Seeing as different parts of Croatian rural space are characterized by different problems, the model provides a compromise in rating. In addition to this, the model can be used for a more effective ranking of projects applying for different measures within the Rural Development Program, primarily those whose users are local self-government units