1. Leader+ Steering Committee 31 January-1 February 2007 - Bruxelles Lessons from Leader for the New Rural Development Regulation European Commission

2. Contents  Objectives and rationale of the study  Steps of the activity, progress  Methodology  Preliminary results from good practice  Lessons for an expanded use of the data base  Lessons for the next programming period  Lessons for the capitalization of Leader  Conclusions

3. Objectives and rationale of the activity  1. Leader+ good practices provide useful references, already experienced, to understand and better implement Reg.1698/05. Actions have taken place in one or more of the 4 axes and may include linkages between axes. The data base may be used for guidance for the next programming period.  2. Good practices and pilot actions have been until now considered and transferred individually. However as a set of practices they are shaping rural development know-how and policymaking. This aspect has received little attention. This know-how, could be useful for  EU and Member States,  Candidate Countries  Old and new Leader Groups  Third countries’ rural policies

4. The steps of the activity  Step 1: classification of good practice and pilot action data sheets on the basis of:  the sector/axis which benefits from the action (as if it would have taken place with the current regulation)  the link between areas of intervention (the four axes) that these actions have “spontaneously” realized through Leader programmes The rationale is to “wear a new pair of glasses” (the new regulation) and take a fresh look at Leader actions (the data base) in order to capitalize on the Leader experience for the next programming phase

5. The steps of the activity: second  Step 2: Analysis of the new classification of good practice and pilot actions:  By axis: range of actions undertaken in each of the 4 axes using the criteria of the main sector benefiting from the action (this is different from present criteria)  By type of linkage between the axes: agriculture and diversification; agriculture and environment; environment and diversification The rationale is to:  show the variety of actions already experimented with Leader in each axis: gives ideas for possible measures and for using the Leader approach  identify the most recurrent patterns of linkages between axes and their mutually reinforcing effect

6. Progress so far and timing  Today I will report on progress with steps 1 and 2, with first indications of the result of the analysis (step 3, final see conclusions)  The discussion of today will help to orient and focus the final report (end of February)  The final report may be the basis for further work in preparation of the seminar on “the capitalisation of Leader” (April 2007)

7. Methodology used Database currently holds:  155 data sheets of “Good Practice” These are currently classified by Leader theme selected:  Use of new know-how and new technologies  Improving the quality of life in rural areas  Adding value to local products  Best use of natural and cultural resources This classification does not allow a reading by axis of these data sheets, thus a reclassification is necessary to match the conceptual structure of Reg.1698/05

8. Methodology used (continued)  In order to reclassify “good practice” these have been considered as if taking place within the framework of Reg.1698/05  Actions which may be assimilated to measures included in axis 1, 2, 3 or 4 (in this case only actions of capacity building such as studies, training, animation and mobilization)  Furthermore, if the good practice or pilot action was linked with more than one axis, this was also classified  Axis 3, which has the greatest number of actions has been split into two “sub-axis”:  Diversification of the rural economy  Quality of life in rural areas Note: no quantitative conclusions because the sample is not representative of the universe of Leader actions

9. Preliminary results: good practice 1st axis: involving farmers and farm products, forestry, processing and marketing, quality products: 29 data sheets  Linkages: most frequent with 3rd axis, but few examples also for 2nd and 3rd axis quality of life. 2nd axis aiming mainly at the environment: landscape, natural resources: 8 data sheets  Linkages with diversification of the rural economy for tourism(environment as opportunity rather than as constraint)

10. Preliminary results: good practice 3rd Axis (Diversification of the rural economy)  Good practices involving tourism, marketing of the area with all its products, cultural and natural resources and services (museums, trails, events, health), crafts, gastronomy, entrepreneurship: 73 data sheets  Linkages most frequent with 1st axis 3rd Axis (quality of life)  Good practices involving services to the rural population such as shops, care, communication (ICT, transport) leisure youth, women, employment: 32 data sheets; (Northern countries more?)  Linkages with 2nd and 4th axis most frequent 4th axis (capacity building only): 13 data sheets

11. Preliminary results  Diversification of the rural economy is largely predominant, followed in order by quality of life, agriculture, environment, capacity building  There are sufficient cases to:  give examples of actions which came up with the Leader approach “spontaneously”,  of the type of linkages that have been found between each axis

12. 1. Preliminary lessons for an expanded use of the data base  Many classifications and uses are possible of the data base, activity data sheets could be considered as building blocks about policy practice but also as indicators of rural development know-how;  Database has been used so far on a case by case basis, for the transfer of individual experience: an integrated use of the data sheets (as pieces of a puzzle that has to be assembled so that a pattern emerges) has not been attempted yet;  On an individual basis good practices and pilot actions remain an underutilized source of information  We may use “policy glasses” as has been done here to check whether practice is coherent with the conceptual policy framework  We could also construct a framework for rural development know how resulting from the set of actions

13. Preliminary lessons for next programming period Farmers and diversification  Examples of activities involving farmers and links with measures for diversification of the rural economy are numerous and varied, and involve all countries  Farmers’ presence in Leader groups might have been underestimated and could be better exploited as reference in the next programming period  There is little evidence in Leader of linkages between first and second axis (agriculture and environment)  Are these indications that there is a “productive preference” rather than an “environmental preference” for farmers?

14. Preliminary lessons for next programming Environmental issues in rural areas  Environmental concerns are more important as a link (secondary) rather than as main sector benefiting from an action  It is more often included in links with quality of life activities than with diversification of rural economy or with agriculture  As might have been expected the links with tourism and leisure activities is the most frequently found way of introducing environmental issues in rural actions  Environmental issues are perceived as an asset rather than as a constraint for rural development, well integrated with other dimensions (social and economic)

15. Preliminary lessons for the next programming period Diversification of the rural economy  Sub-axis for which the largest number of references were found, we may assume that the “other sectors” of the rural economy have been acting as push, mobilizing factors for farming integration, less so for environment.  It reflects a “productive” evolution of rural areas  Extremely high diversity of actions shows good results of bottom-up, pilot approach

16. Preliminary lessons for the next programming period Quality of life in rural areas  Apparently a stronger concern for Northern countries than for Southern ones (linked with urban proximity and older more developed economies)  Relatively more often actions are undertaken in this sector without links to other sectors or only with the environment  More importance given to leisure, image, identity building, specific target groups (youth)

17. Preliminary lessons for capitalization of Leader  The capitalization of Leader experience is a more comprehensive concept than the capitalization of single practices or actions  Since rural development policies have originated in practice rather than theory (differently than agricultural policy), the capitalization of experience becomes a key and strategic task for the future  Capitalization may mean the “codification” of know-how and policy approach: Leader provides an exceptional source of information because of its bottom-up and participatory approach, reflecting rural needs.  This codified knowledge may be also the object of transfer, just as individual actions.

18. Future work: contents of Step 3  The best practices reclassified with the logic of Reg. 1698 may be used in different ways:  Give evidence of the exemplary nature of the Leader approach for rural policymaking for the current programming period (4 axes + linkages between them)  Show the applications that the Leader approach could have in each axis to stakeholders which have not been involved in Leader group actions.  Provide a reference to the “spontaneous” linkages and forms of integration between measures that have already proved useful and effective for rural development  Show the contribution of individual actions in shaping rural development know-how and rural policymaking