1. Disintegration, the reason for policy failure – an analytical model of integrated rural development By: Gusztáv Nemes (Hungarian Academy of Sciences – Institute of Economics) Chris High (Open University – Systems Department)
Introduction
Rural disadvantages - access and resources
Two rural development systems – ‘central administrative’ and ‘local heuristic’
Integrated versus non-integrated rural development – two simple models

2. 40 years’ of EU and domestic policies, positive discrimination
Everyday aspiration of local people to make rural life better
RESULTS:
Environmental and social degradation, depopulation, growing geographical disparities, etc.
WHY RURAL POLICIES DO NOT WORK WELL?
HOW COULD WE DO BETTER?

3. RURAL DISADVANTAGES ACCESS AND RESOURCES
Rural areas have comparative disadvantages
access-type disadvantages;
Results of underdevelopment of different infrastructures, resulting in limited communication of people, goods, capital and information; from and to backward rural areas
physical; economic; and political (or policy) access.
resource-type disadvantages
Results in the limited ability to produce goods and services, saleable on the global market;
financial, human, and institutional resources
Core policies usually promote access type disadvantages
Access – two-way concept, without improved local resource base can cause damage

4. TWO RURAL DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
Europeanisation = improving access, diminishing traditional protections, exposing rural areas to global (unequal) competition.
Rural development is:
external (central) intervention - to protect the loss of rural values during Europeanisation through: rules, financial aid, rural policies in general
aspiration of local people - to improve their own lives through: unlocking local resources and attracting external ones, searching for ‘new futures’

5. TWO RURAL DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
1. Central-administrative system of rural development
Based on top-down intervention of the political centre
Comprises of: EU and domestic policies, centrally redistributed resources, strategic development plans, bureaucratic knowledge, central rules, high level interest groups, NGOs, etc.
Institutionalised character (with written procedures)
External resources for intervention
Narrow information
Aimed at quantifiable results
Can have high level, longer term objectives
Central development logic (modernist paradigm)
Main aim is to provide access and a ‘peaceful environment’ for economic development for the economic centre
Level: EU-domestic-regional (?)

6. TWO RURAL DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS
2. Local-heuristic system
Based on endogenous bottom-up processes
Comprises of: local actors and values; local development plans; social networks and kinship relations; local authorities, innovative individuals, development associations and partnerships, etc.
Low level of institutionalisation
Builds on local resources, but often needs external help
Based on responsive local knowledge and wide information flows
Main aim is to improve local life, giving flexible responses to external challenges, keeping benefits for the locality
Local development logic (new development paradigm)
Level: sub-regional and bellow

7. Human actors Local heuristic system:
Local leaders, entrepreneurs, etc.
Their work effects their lives – they risk their own money
Embeddedness – moral control
Insightful knowledge on local matters, but often little understanding of central rules
Very committed and less objective
Main concern is the betterment of rural life / non-quantifiable results
Central-administrative system
Politicians, high level public servants, etc.
Deal with others’ life, do not risk their own money
High up in the system – broad vision, objectivity
Under bureaucratic and political control
Insightful knowledge of bureaucratic rules but low information on local
Main concern is to comply with the political centre, accountability, transparency
Risk evasion

8. Integrated versus non-integrated rural development – two simple models
Central Administrative System of Rural Development – characterised by top-down, exogenous interventions, high level of institutionalisation, bureaucratic control, written rules and procedures, the modernist technological regime and quantifiable targets;
Central Development Resources – financial resources in the central development budget, available for redistribution through the central system;
Local Heuristic System of Rural Development – characterised by bottom-up processes, heuristic aspiration of local people to improve their lives, flexible responses to challenges, social networks, diversity, multifunctionality, and synergistic effects;
Local Development Resources – rural values (natural, cultural, social), understood as resources, which often have to be unlocked or reconfigured if they are to be used for local economic development;
Access-type Disadvantages – limiting access (physical, economic, policy) and the free movement of goods, people and capital to and from backward areas;
Resource-type Disadvantages – (financial, human, institutional) limiting the ability of rural areas to produce goods and services saleable on the global market;
Result – the outcome of the development process: to a certain extent upgraded access and enhanced production capacity, resulting in either more balanced or biased environment for local economy and society.

9. The non-integrated system of rural development

10. The integrated system of rural development

11. Information flows in the non-integrated development system

12. Information flows in the integrated development system

13. Thank You for your attention!