IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/eurcho/v9y2010i1p42-47.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating RD Policies for Social and Human Capital Development L’évaluation de la politique de développement rural en termes de développement du capital social et humain Die Evaluation von Politikmaßnahmen zur Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums zur Entwicklung von Sozial‐ und Humankapital

Author

Listed:
  • Jim Kinsella
  • Stephan J. Goetz
  • Mark D. Partridge
  • Steven C. Deller
  • David Fleming

Abstract

Evaluating RD Policies for Social and Human Capital Development In the EU, building social capital and developing human capital are increasingly seen as key to development in rural areas. Social capital is fundamentally about human interrelationships and networks. Evaluation of policy initiatives to promote social capital needs to go beyond indicators of conventional economic outcome measures such as jobs created and income generated and to encompass growth in the processes by which social capital works. Human capital in the form of education and skills possessed by individuals is linked with productivity and incomes. In the US, federal funding of human capital formation in support of rural entrepreneurship has been limited, fragmented and uncoordinated but activities in this area hold promise. The evaluation of entrepreneurial programmes needs to overcome many statistical problems such as selection bias regarding which firms received ‘treatment’ and how to identify causality. In particular there is a lack of indicators on the returns to investment in entrepreneurship. While the two case studies face their own sets of particular problems, they share the characteristic of a lack of data on relevant indicators that evaluators need in order to reach sound judgements. This points to the importance to evaluation of the design of the rural data system and scheme monitoring mechanisms. Dans l’Union européenne, la construction d’un capital social et le développement du capital humain sont de plus en plus considérés comme des éléments‐clé du développement des zones rurales. Le capital social est fondamentalement une question de relations humaines et de réseaux. L’évaluation des politiques de promotion du capital social doit aller au‐delà des indicateurs de mesure des résultats économiques conventionnels comme les emplois créés et les revenus générés. Elle doit prendre en compte la croissance des processus par lesquels le capital social fonctionne. Le capital humain, en termes d’éducation et de capacité des individus, est liéà la productivité et aux revenus. Aux États‐Unis, les fonds fédéraux pour la formation du capital humain en soutien à l’entreprenariat rural ont été limités, fragmentés et non coordonnés mais les activités dans ce domaine sont prometteuses. L’évaluation des programmes en faveur de l’entreprenariat doivent venir à bout de nombreux problèmes statistiques comme le biais de sélection par rapport aux entreprises qui sont concernées et l’identification de la causalité. Il existe en particulier un manque d’indicateurs sur les retours sur investissement dans l’entreprenariat. Les deux études de cas ont leur propre type de problèmes particuliers mais ils ont en commun le manque de données pour établir les indicateurs pertinents dont les évaluateurs ont besoin pour former un jugement sérieux. Ceci indique qu’il est important pour l’évaluation de concevoir des systèmes de données rurales et des mécanismes de suivi des programmes. In der EU werden der Aufbau von Sozialkapital und die Entwicklung von Humankapital zunehmend als entscheidende Größe bei der Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums betrachtet. Beim Sozialkapital geht es hauptsächlich um die wechselseitigen Beziehungen und Netzwerke zwischen Menschen. Die Evaluation politischer Initiativen mit dem Ziel, den Aufbau von Sozialkapital zu fördern, muss auch Indikatoren berücksichtigen, die über die herkömmlichen wirtschaftlichen Zielkriterien hinaus gehen, wie z.B. neu geschaffene Arbeitsplätze und erwirtschaftetes Einkommen, und muss zudem das Wachstum in jenen Prozessen erfassen, die vom Anteil am Sozialkapital abhängen. Das Humankapital, das sich Menschen in Form von Bildung und Kompetenzen aneignen, trägt zu Produktivität und Einkommen bei. In den USA ist die öffentliche Förderung der Bildung von Humankapital durch Unterstützung des Unternehmertums im ländlichen Raum begrenzt, fragmentiert und unkoordiniert – Aktivitäten in diesem Bereich sind jedoch viel versprechend. Die Evaluation von Programmen zur Unternehmensförderung muss zahlreiche statistische Probleme überwinden: Es müssen die Unternehmen identifiziert werden, die von den Maßnahmen betroffen wurden. Weiterhin ist die Kausalität zu klären. Insbesondere besteht ein Mangel an Indikatoren für die Verzinsung von Investitionen in Unternehmertum. Die beiden Fallstudien haben zwar ihre ganz eigenen Probleme, haben aber gemeinsam das Problem, dass sie eine für Evaluatoren nicht ausreichende Datenmenge im Hinblick auf relevante Indikatoren aufweisen. Aussagekräftige Beurteilungen sind daher nicht möglich. Hierdurch wird unterstrichen, wie wichtig die Ausgestaltung von Datenerfassungssystemen im ländlichen Raum und von Mechanismen zur Überwachung der Programme für die Evaluation ist.

Suggested Citation

  • Jim Kinsella & Stephan J. Goetz & Mark D. Partridge & Steven C. Deller & David Fleming, 2010. "Evaluating RD Policies for Social and Human Capital Development L’évaluation de la politique de développement rural en termes de développement du capital social et humain Die Evaluation von Politikmaß," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 9(1), pages 42-47, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:9:y:2010:i:1:p:42-47
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1746-692X.2010.00151.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-692X.2010.00151.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1746-692X.2010.00151.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Janet Dwyer & Jill Findeis, 2008. "Human and Social Capital in Rural Development - EU and US Perspectives," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 7(Special I), pages 38-45, April.
    2. Gregg A. Lichtenstein & Thomas S. Lyons, 2006. "Managing the Community’s Pipeline of Entrepreneurs and Enterprises: A New Way of Thinking About Business Assets," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 20(4), pages 377-386, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pisani, Elena & Franceschetti, G. & Secco, L. & Da Re, R., 2014. "Trust in the LEADER approach: the case study of the Veneto region in Italy," 2014 Third Congress, June 25-27, 2014, Alghero, Italy 197453, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    2. Carmel Anderson & Jacki Schirmer & Norman Abjorensen, 2012. "Exploring CCS community acceptance and public participation from a human and social capital perspective," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 687-706, August.
    3. Marquardt, Doris & Mollers, Judith, 2010. "Evaluating the implementation process of LEADER in Romania," 118th Seminar, August 25-27, 2010, Ljubljana, Slovenia 94734, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jan Fałkowski & Maciej Jakubowski & Paweł Strawiński, 2014. "Returns from income strategies in rural Poland," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 22(1), pages 139-178, January.
    2. Ion Lucian Ceapraz & Catherine Delhoume, 2014. "What Type Of Social Capital Is Engaged By The French Dairy Stockbreeders? A Characterization Through Their Professional Identities," Romanian Journal of Regional Science, Romanian Regional Science Association, vol. 8(1), pages 69-86, JUNE.
    3. Timothy Komarek & Scott Loveridge, 2015. "Firm Sizes And Economic Development: Estimating Long-Term Effects On U.S. County Growth, 1990–2000," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(2), pages 262-279, March.
    4. Craig Wesley Carpenter, 2016. "The Dynamics Of Latino-Owned Business With Comparisions To Other Ethnicities," Working Papers 16-33, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    5. Jean-Marc Callois & Bertrand Schmitt, 2009. "The role of social capital components on local economic growth: Local cohesion and openness in French rural areas," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 90(3), pages 257-286.
    6. Loveridge, Scott & Miller, Steven R. & Komarek, Timothy M. & Satimanon, Thasanee, 2012. "Assessing Regional Attitudes about Entrepreneurship," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 42(3), pages 1-13.
    7. Callois, Jean-Marc & Schmitt, Bertrand, 2009. "The role of social capital components on local economic growth: Local cohesion and openness in French rural areas," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 90(3).
    8. Dwyer, Janet & Clark, Mike & Kirwan, James & Kambites, Carol & Lewis, Nick & Molnarova, Anna & Thompson, Ken & Mantino, Francesco & Tarangioli, Serena & Monteleone, Alessandro & Bolli, Martina & Fagia, 2008. "Review of Rural Development Instruments: DG Agri project 2006-G4-10. Final Report," MPRA Paper 50290, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Ion Lucian Ceapraz, 2012. "Social capital as a measure of innovation for rural clusters: the case of France and US," ERSA conference papers ersa12p1003, European Regional Science Association.
    10. Thorstensen Erik & Forsberg Ellen-Marie & Underthun Anders & Danihelka Pavel & Řeháček Jakub, 2016. "Regional Development and Climate Change Adaptation: A Study of the Role of Legitimacy," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 8(3), pages 207-226, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:9:y:2010:i:1:p:42-47. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.