1. Rural-Urban linkages and social cohesion: a position paper
Cities Research Centre
Rural-Urban linkages and social cohesion: a position paper
Ian Smith and Paul Courtney

2. Rural-urban linkages What were we asked to do?
Writing the position paper
What are we trying to achieve today?

3. Structure of the day Setting out a conceptual framework
Morning: What are the cohesion outcomes of rural-urban linkages?
Afternoon: What are the means of promoting rural-urban linkages?
What can the Commission do?
Key respondents and rounding up

4. Remember The paper is the start of a conversation and not the end
The conversation will continue after today

5. A conceptual framework for Rural-Urban linkages and social cohesion
Cities Research Centre
A conceptual framework for Rural-Urban linkages and social cohesion
Paul Courtney

6. Presentation Structure
Defining the nature of urban-rural linkages
Defining social cohesion
Social cohesion and social/territorial capital
Measuring social cohesion
A conceptual framework
Operationalising social cohesion
Discussion points

7. Defining rural-urban linkages
Lack of clarity and complexity underestimated
Two-way flows which are functional and structural
Movements of people goods, capital,
Social transactions and administrative / service provision / Governance
Flows of technology, lifestyles
Interdependencies and increasingly complex inter-relations
Geographic (territorial) and socio-economic (relational) space

8. Defining social cohesion
Academic (Sociology and Psychology):
Social and economic relevance
Solidarity and division of labour (Durkheim)
Communities, groups and memberships.
Shared values; reducing disparities; common enterprise; facing shared challenges
Nature and extent of socio-economic divisions in society
Group membership: how members can shape the conditions of their environment

9. Defining social cohesion
Policy perspective – social and economic:
Achieving Integration – income differentials; labour market access; housing conditions; social networks; community interaction; whilst:
Recognising differences and interdependences
Focus on social networks and community interaction leads debate to Social capital (Networks, norms, trust, reciprocity)

10. Social Cohesion & Social Capital
Implicit and explicit relationship well documented, and contested
Tool to achieve or sub-set of cohesion? Societal or group level?
Social Capital – individual and group levels (i.e. networks);
Social Cohesion – General condition of society (networks may be exclusionary, thus high social capital but low levels of cohesion)
Need to tackle social exclusion and cohesion in tandem

11. Social cohesion and territorial capital – economic goals
Business networks, customs, solidarity, mutual assistance, agglomeration economies and natural/cultural endowments
Process by which social capital mobilised through R-U linkages integral to an area’s territorial capital with economic goals of enhancing efficiency and productivity

12. Measuring social cohesion
Means-end and Pluralistic approaches
Council of Europe’s multi-dimensional approach:
Equity in enjoyment of rights; dignity & recognition; occupational and family development; participation and commitment
Half of indicators focussed broadly on social capital
Chan et al’s two-by-two framework:
Horizontal – cohesion within civil society
Vertical – State-citizen cohesion

13. A Conceptual framework
Shared identity
Social capital
Rural-urban linkage/ inter-dependency:
movement of people, goods, capital; social transactions; and administrative and service provision
Thematic governance arrangements/ delivery vehicle
Intervention/ co-ordinated actions
That reinforces/ provides capacity to support…
That shape…
That reinforce/ support…
Reduce social/ economic inequalities
Shared identity of place
Territorial capital
Reduce spatial inequalities
Spatial governance arrangements/ delivery vehicle

14. Operationalising social cohesion and rural-urban linkages
Labour market linkages
Rural-urban migration
Rural-urban partnership working

15. Labour market linkages
Division of labour supports dependence, supports social cohesion, thus labour market patterns and commuting important
Research shows varying patterns of employment decentralisation and journey to work times
Combining residential and employment land use will help support services, stocks of human and social capital
Related to wider patterns of rural-urban migration

16. Rural-urban Migration
Patterns of rural-urban flows of human and social capital and implications for civil society differentiated and difficult to predict
In-migration of urban professionals can create tensions but can add to civic vibrancy
Out-migration from rural areas can lead to spiral of decline, although return migration can bring urban knowledge, skills and networks
As a form of linkage, impacts of commuting are variable according to sector and distance

17. Rural-urban partnership working
Limited evidence indicates that a number of opportunities and barriers exist
But that good practice can be sought
To be examined in the context of the vignettes

18. Discussion points
Can we foster social cohesion through rural-urban linkages? Are rural-urban linkages special?
Should we attempt to measure social/territorial cohesion derived from rural-urban linkages and if so how?
Is there merit in considering social cohesion separately from the territorial agenda?

19. Rural-Urban linkages: do they foster cohesion?
Cities Research Centre
Rural-Urban linkages: do they foster cohesion?
Ian Smith

20. Discussion points
Can we foster social cohesion through rural-urban linkages? Are rural-urban linkages special?
Should we attempt to measure social/territorial cohesion derived from rural-urban linkages and if so how?
Is there merit in considering social cohesion separately from the territorial agenda?

21. Vignettes – illustration
How will we illustrate the issues?
Seven vignettes in paper:
Inter-municipal partnership in Umeå, Sweden.
NGO-driven work with disadvantaged urban youth
Combined Universities in Cornwall
Tackling out-migration by young people in the Pays Berry Saint Amandois
Counteracting digital exclusion through broadband in Kuyavia-Pomerania
Joining up public transport in the Prague metropolitan area
Realignment of family protection and child-welfare service in Pécs ‘micro-region’ (Hungary).

22. Case vignettes Inter-municipal partnership in Umeå
Implementing a Broadband Network in Kuyavia-Pomerania
Social farming: Netherlands
Imayla (NGO-led) social cohesion & youth – SW England
Prague Integrated Transit System
Realignment of family protection and child-welfare services, Pécs
Combined Universities in Cornwall
Tackling issues for young people: Pays Berry Saint-Amandois
Source of base map: Wikipedia reproduced under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License

23. What was being done? Infrastructure building Improving public services
Training and employment
Tackling social problems

24. Creating social cohesion through experience
Imayla creates learning environments for disadvantaged young people
Young people from disadvantaged urban areas taken to experience rural environments (cohesion within group)
Also social farming – later
Are rural-urban linkages special?

25. Cohesion through improving public services
Improving family support services in Pécs (Hungary)
Re-organisation of service at city-region level
Improved access, specialist service and quality control
Are rural-urban linkages special?

26. Propositions
Proposition 1: cohesion outcomes of rural-urban linkages need to benefit both rural and urban communities
Proposition 2: cohesion can be the unintended or secondary outcome of linkages
Proposition 3: territorial and social cohesion are generally linked but they do not have to be
Proposition 4: linkages are good for dealing with service deficits, migration issues, shared experiences

27. Rural-Urban linkages: do they foster cohesion?
Cities Research Centre
Rural-Urban linkages: do they foster cohesion?
Some thoughts from our case vignettes

28. Rural-Urban linkages: how do you create them?
Cities Research Centre
Rural-Urban linkages: how do you create them?
Ian Smith

29. Making rural-urban linkages
Outline some key ideas
What have we learnt from EU initiatives
Vignette illustrations
What you think

30. Rural-Urban Partnerships
Benefits/opportunities
Reduced polarisation
Ability to address regional issues
Intelligence of local concerns at strategic level
Inclusion of multiple stakeholders
Increased global competitiveness
Increased capacity to provide fiscal relief for revitalisation
Challenges/constraints
Political and cultural differences
Difficulties in cross-collaboration and building trust
Lack of regional policy frameworks and ambiguous structures
Operational complexity of process
Lack of resources
Competition between local authorities

31. Partnerships: EU initiative experience
Partnerships are important for problem identification and project delivery
Partnership programmes need to be integrated and area-based
Transfer of lessons at EU level important
Partnerships need to be encouraged to be innovative

32. Case vignettes Inter-municipal partnership in Umeå
Implementing a Broadband Network in Kuyavia-Pomerania
Social farming: Netherlands
Imayla (NGO-led) social cohesion & youth – SW England
Prague Integrated Transit System
Realignment of family protection and child-welfare services, Pécs
Combined Universities in Cornwall
Tackling issues for young people: Pays Berry Saint-Amandois
Source of base map: Wikipedia reproduced under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License

33. Institutional structures in vignettes
Voluntary local government associations (with and without incentives)
Regional partnerships
Non-governmental partnerships
Partnerships for identifying priorities and partnerships for delivering projects

34. Voluntary associations of municipalities
Giving small ‘rural’ authorities a voice: the city-region of Umeå
Umeå – city region of 143,000 residents
Voluntary association brings together 6 municipalities to pool some resources – this partnership identifies priorities
Project partnerships take forward projects calling on EU co-finance
Transferability? Probably good if have strong local government

35. Non-governmental public partnership
Providing HE for Cornwall – Combined Universities in Cornwall
500,000 population of which 92% ‘rural’ and small towns
Partnership of 6 universities (independent public sector) comes together around accessing EU co-finance
Provides HE courses
Transferability? Depends on capacity of non-governmental sector

36. Propositions
Proposition 1: partnership is crucial in the delivery of rural-urban linkages – both in terms of issue identification and project delivery
Proposition 2: partnerships will probably mostly depend on local government but is not the only form of partnership
Proposition 3: EU co-finance/support has been important in facilitating rural-urban linkage
Proposition 4: lessons on partnership can be transferred across Europe

37. Rural-Urban linkages: how do you create them?
Cities Research Centre
Rural-Urban linkages: how do you create them?
Some thoughts from our case vignettes