IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/eurcou/v10y2018i4p543-565n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the Partnership Governance Able to Promote Endogenous Rural Development? A Preliminary Assessment Under the Adaptive Co-Management Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Pappalardo Gioacchino

    (Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics, Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment (Di3A), University of Catania, Via Santa Sofia 98-100, 95123 -Catania, Italy)

  • Sisto Roberta

    (Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics, Department of Economics, University of Foggia, Largo Papa Giovanni Paolo II - 71100 -Foggia, Italy)

  • Pecorino Biagio

    (Professor of Agricultural Economics, Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment (Di3A), University of Catania, Via Santa Sofia 98-100, 95123 -Catania, Italy)

Abstract

Ever increasingly more, all the actors directly or indirectly involved in the planning processes express the need to know the effects deriving from the implementation of rural development policy. In this direction, evaluation can make an important contribution, fostering the development of a ‘good policy’ as underlined by EU regulations. Among the specific evaluation questions developed by the Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, one of them relates to the improvement of governance. Considering the Adaptive Co-Management (ACM) approach’s capacity as a proxy of the quality of network governance, the study aims to propose the ACM theoretical framework as a suitable model with which to study the social interactions between actors in the smallest unit of the LEADER process (i.e., the local action group’s (LAG’s) partnership governance). The proposed methodology is subsequently tested on a specific case study through the evaluation of the partnership governance of two case studies in the South of Italy. The empirical evidence supports the idea that ACM approach may represent a new model to assess the quality of the implementation process of the LEADER Programme. In addition, the ACM approach can lead to a new organizational and self-evaluation model of LAGs which places an emphasis on the importance of the relational process among its members.

Suggested Citation

  • Pappalardo Gioacchino & Sisto Roberta & Pecorino Biagio, 2018. "Is the Partnership Governance Able to Promote Endogenous Rural Development? A Preliminary Assessment Under the Adaptive Co-Management Approach," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 10(4), pages 543-565, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:eurcou:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:543-565:n:2
    DOI: 10.2478/euco-2018-0031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/euco-2018-0031
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/euco-2018-0031?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. Schouten, Marleen A.H. & van der Heide, Martijn M. & Heijman, Wim J.M., 2009. "Resilience Of Social-Ecological Systems In European Rural Areas: Theory And Prospects," 113th Seminar, December 9-11, 2009, Belgrade, Serbia 57343, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Analyzing collective action," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(s1), pages 155-166, November.
    3. Mantino, Francesco, 2009. "Typologies of governance models," Reports 157975, National Institute of Agricultural Economics, Italy - INEA, Rural Development Policies.
    4. Unknown, 2008. "Institute of Agricultural Economics," Economics of Agriculture, Institute of Agricultural Economics, vol. 55(3).
    5. Petrick, Martin, 2013. "Reversing the rural race to the bottom: an evolutionary model of neo-endogenous rural development," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 40(4), pages 707-735.
    6. Sisto, Roberta & Lopolito, Antonio & van Vliet, Mathijs, 2018. "Stakeholder participation in planning rural development strategies: Using backcasting to support Local Action Groups in complying with CLLD requirements," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 442-450.
    7. Kim Pollermann & Petra Raue & Gitta Schnaut, 2014. "Multi-level Governance in Rural Development: Analysing Experiences from LEADER for a Community-Led Local Development (CLLD)," ERSA conference papers ersa14p1071, European Regional Science Association.
    8. Pollermann, Kim & Raue, Petra & Schnaut, Gitta, 2014. "Multi-level Governance in rural development: Analysing experiences from LEADER for a Community-Led Local Development (CLLD)," EconStor Conference Papers 104063, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Pollermann, Kim & Raue, Petra & Schnaut, Gitta, 2016. "Implementation and impacts of the LEADER-approach – reflections on the intervention logic of a participatory approach for rural development," EconStor Conference Papers 148578, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    2. Pollermann, Kim, 2018. "Participants in participative processes – who they are and what they think about participation," EconStor Conference Papers 190762, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    3. Pollermann, Kim, 2019. "Participation in rural development – the view of non-participants," EconStor Conference Papers 209647, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    4. Pollermann, Kim & Fynn, Lynn-Livia, 2021. "Place-based and participative approaches: reflections for policy design in rural development," EconStor Conference Papers 267150, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    5. Pollermann, Kim & Fynn, Lynn-Livia & Schwarze, Stefan, 2021. "What are favouring conditions for the implementation of innovative projects in Community-Led Local Development (CLLD) approaches?," EconStor Conference Papers 228489, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    6. Robert Roßner & Dimitrios Zikos, 2018. "The Role of Homogeneity and Heterogeneity Among Resource Users on Water Governance: Lessons Learnt from an Economic Field Experiment on Irrigation in Uzbekistan," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(03), pages 1-30, July.
    7. Siyang Zhang & Minjuan Zhao & Qi Ni & Yu Cai, 2021. "Modelling Farmers’ Watershed Ecological Protection Behaviour with the Value-Belief-Norm Theory: A Case Study of the Wei River Basin," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-17, May.
    8. Mogaka, Violet Moraa & Mbatia, O.L.E. & Nzuma, Jonathan M., 2012. "Feasibility of Biofuel Production in Kenya: The Case of Jatropha," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126427, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Bulut, Harun & Lawrence, John D., 2007. "Meat Slaughter and Processing Plants’ Traceability Levels Evidence From Iowa," 2007 Conference, April 16-17, 2007, Chicago, Illinois 37576, NCCC-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting, and Market Risk Management.
    10. James, Jennifer S. & Pardey, Philip G. & Alston, Julian M., 2008. "Agricultural R&D Policy: A Tragedy of the International Commons," Staff Papers 43094, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    11. Götz, Christian & Heckelei, Thomas & Rudloff, Bettina, 2010. "What makes countries initiate WTO disputes on food-related issues?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 154-162, April.
    12. D'Artis Kancs & Pavel Ciaian, 2010. "Factor content of bilateral trade: the role of firm heterogeneity and transaction costs," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(3‐4), pages 305-317, May.
    13. Erenstein, Olaf, 2009. "Zero tillage in the rice-wheat systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains: A review of impacts and sustainability implications," IFPRI discussion papers 916, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    14. Khalid Haniza, 2015. "Spatial heterogeneity and spatial bias analyses in hedonic price models: some practical considerations," Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, Sciendo, vol. 28(28), pages 113-128, June.
    15. Richter, Andries & Grasman, Johan, 2013. "The transmission of sustainable harvesting norms when agents are conditionally cooperative," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 202-209.
    16. Rosa, Franco & Nassivera, Federico & Iseppi, Luca, 2018. "Sunflower oil innovation, claim assessment and consumer’ motivations to accept this food," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276875, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    17. Akin-Olagunju, O. & Yusuf, S. & Okoruwa, V., 2018. "Harmonization of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards in Cocoa Trade: How Competitive are the Major Exporting Countries?," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277463, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Maurizio Prosperi & Roberta Sisto & Antonio Lopolito & Valentina C. Materia, 2020. "Local Entrepreneurs’ Involvement in Strategy Building to Facilitate Agro-Food Waste Valorisation within an Agro-Food Technological District: A SWOT-SOR Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-15, June.
    19. Osman Gulseven & Kasirga Yildirak, 2020. "Indemnity Payments in Agricultural Insurance: Risk Exposure of EU States," Papers 2003.05726, arXiv.org.
    20. Uetake, Tetsuya, 2012. "Providing Agri-environmental Public Goods through Collective Action: Lessons from New Zealand Case Studies," 2012 Conference, August 31, 2012, Nelson, New Zealand 136071, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    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:vrs:eurcou:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:543-565:n:2. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.