IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/eurcho/v9y2010i1p24-29.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Evaluation of Rural Development Policy: Macro and Micro Perspectives L’évaluation de la politique de développement rural: perspectives macro et microéconomiques Die Evaluation der Politik zur Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums: Mikro‐ und Makroperspektiven

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Midmore
  • Mark D. Partridge
  • M. Rose Olfert
  • Kamar Ali

Abstract

The Evaluation of Rural Development Policy: Macro and Micro Perspectives Effective rural development (RD) policy requires transparent goals, specific objectives, well‐defined metrics to measure success, and rigorous evaluation to justify sound policy. Such evaluation can employ aggregate indicators of impact (a macro approach) and/or more disaggregated information (a micro approach). Each has its place. Changes in population and population structure provide a key macro indicator of the success of rural development policy, since individuals reveal the attractiveness of rural areas by ‘voting with their feet’. By using additional data on the factors that attract people to rural areas, the targeting of rural development policy can be improved. Policymakers frequently need to examine specific policy initiatives in detail to determine their impact, if any, and how and why they achieve their effects. The example of farm diversification policy in the EU illustrates that information obtained from case studies can help not only to elaborate the impact of policy but also illuminate how that impact is generated. Without complementary in‐depth inquiry, scope for making sense of quantitative indicators, which have been the primary focus of evaluation in the EU, is limited; but without a broad base of measurement, the usefulness of insights derived from case study analysis is also restricted. Pour qu’une politique de développement rurale soit efficace, il faut des buts transparents, des objectifs précis, des unités de mesure du succès bien définies et une évaluation rigoureuse pour justifier une bonne politique. Cette évaluation peut employer des indicateurs d’impact agrégés (approche macroéconomique) et/ou des informations plus désagrégées (approche microéconomique). Chacun a un rôle à jouer. L’évolution de la population ou de sa structure est un indicateur macroéconomique‐clé du succès de la politique de développement rural car les individus révèlent l’attirance d’une zone rurale en “votant avec les pieds”. A l’aide de données supplémentaires sur les facteurs d’attirance vers les zones rurales, le ciblage des politiques de développement rural peut être amélioré. Les décideurs de l’action publique doivent fréquemment examiner en détail les programmes particuliers pour identifier leur incidence, si elle existe, et pour déterminer comment et pourquoi ils produisent leurs effets. L’exemple de la politique de diversification dans l’Union européenne montre que les informations obtenues à partir d’études de cas peuvent aider, non seulement à identifier les incidences de la politique, mais aussi à comprendre comment elles se produisent. Sans une enquête approfondie supplémentaire, l’interprétation des indicateurs quantitatifs sur lesquels porte principalement l’évaluation dans l’Union européenne est limitée; mais sans indicateurs de mesure de grande portée, l’utilité des informations tirées des études de cas est aussi restreinte. Eine effektive Politik zur Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums erfordert transparente und präzise Ziele, klar definierte Messgrößen zur Erfolgsbestimmung sowie eine gründliche Evaluation zur Ausrichtung einer effizienten Politik. Eine solche Evaluation kann sich aggregierter Wirkungsindikatoren (Makroansatz) und/oder disaggregierterer Daten (Mikroansatz) bedienen – beide Informationsebenen sind wichtig. Änderungen in der Bevölkerungszahl und ‐struktur stellen einen entscheidenden Makroindikator für den Erfolg der Politik zur Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums dar, da die Menschen die Attraktivität des ländlichen Raums anhand ihrer Bereitschaft bewerten, sich in diesen Gegenden anzusiedeln („Abstimmung mit den Füßen”). Wenn zusätzlich berücksichtigt wird, weshalb sich Menschen von ländlichen Gegenden angezogen fühlen, führt dies zu einer verbesserten Zielsetzung in der Politik zur Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums. Häufig müssen die Politikakteure bestimmte politische Initiativen ganz genau in Augenschein nehmen, um deren Auswirkungen – falls überhaupt vorhanden – und wie und weshalb diese erzielt werden zu bestimmen. Das Beispiel der Politik zur Förderung der Diversifikation landwirtschaftlicher Betriebe in der EU zeigt, dass Daten aus Fallstudien nicht nur zur Bestimmung von Politikauswirkungen genutzt werden können, sondern auch, um darzulegen, wie diese Auswirkungen hervorgerufen werden. Ohne eine weiterführende vertiefende Datenerhebung kann die eigentliche Bedeutung der quantitativen Indikatoren, auf die sich die Evaluation in der EU konzentriert, nur begrenzt ermittelt werden. Allerdings ist ohne eine hinreichende Breite der Datenerfassung der Nutzwert der Ergebnisse aus der Fallstudienanalyse ebenso eingeschränkt.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Midmore & Mark D. Partridge & M. Rose Olfert & Kamar Ali, 2010. "The Evaluation of Rural Development Policy: Macro and Micro Perspectives L’évaluation de la politique de développement rural: perspectives macro et microéconomiques Die Evaluation der Politik zur Entw," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 9(1), pages 24-29, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:9:y:2010:i:1:p:24-29
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1746-692X.2010.00155.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-692X.2010.00155.x
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    2. Mark D. Partridge & Dan S. Rickman & Kamar Ali & M. Rose Olfert, 2008. "Lost in space: population growth in the American hinterlands and small cities," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(6), pages 727-757, November.
    3. Herrera, Yoshiko M. & Kapur, Devesh, 2007. "Improving Data Quality: Actors, Incentives, and Capabilities," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 365-386.
    4. Mark Partridge & Ray D. Bollman & M. Rose Olfert & Alessandro Alasia, 2007. "Riding the Wave of Urban Growth in the Countryside: Spread, Backwash, or Stagnation?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(2), pages 128-152.
    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. Psaltopoulos, Dimitrios & Phimister, Euan & Ratinger, Tomas & Roberts, Deborah & Skuras, Dimitris & Santini, Fabien & Gomez y Paloma, Sergio & Balamou, Eudokia & Espinosa, Maria & Mary, Sebastien, 2011. "An Ex-ante Rural/Urban Analysis of Common Agricultural Policy Options," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114780, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Pisani, Elena & Burighel, Laura, 2014. "Structures and dynamics of transnational cooperation networks: evidence based on Local Action Groups in the Veneto Region, Italy," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 3(3), pages 1-21, December.
    3. Lindberg, Gunnar, 2011. "Linkages: economic analysis of agriculture in the wider economy," Department of Economics publications 2432, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Economics.

    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. Partridge, Mark D. & Olfert, M. Rose & Ali, Kamar, 2009. "Towards a Rural Development Policy: Lessons from the United States and Canada," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 39(2), pages 1-17.
    2. Goetz, Stephan J. & Partridge, Mark D. & Deller, Steven C. & Fleming, David A., 2010. "Evaluating U.S. Rural Entrepreneurship Policy," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-14.
    3. Yu Xiao, 2011. "Local Economic Impacts Of Natural Disasters," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(4), pages 804-820, October.
    4. Manisha Jain, 2018. "The effect of distance on urban transformation in the Capital Region, India," International Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 37-50, January.
    5. Partridge, Mark D. & Rickman, Dan S., 2012. "Integrating regional economic development analysis and land use economics," MPRA Paper 38291, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Emery N. Castle & JunJie Wu & Bruce A. Weber, 2011. "Place Orientation and Rural–Urban Interdependence," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 179-204.
    7. Partridge, Mark D. & Tsvetkova, Alexandra, 2018. "Local ability to "rewire" and socioeconomic performance: Evidence from US counties before and after the Great Recession," MPRA Paper 89313, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Paolo Veneri & Vicente Ruiz, 2016. "Urban-To-Rural Population Growth Linkages: Evidence From Oecd Tl3 Regions," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(1), pages 3-24, January.
    9. Anping Chen & Mark D. Partridge, 2013. "When are Cities Engines of Growth in China? Spread and Backwash Effects across the Urban Hierarchy," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(8), pages 1313-1331, September.
    10. Lehtonen Olli & Tykkyläinen Markku, 2014. "Potential Job Creation and Resource Dependance in Rural Finland," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 6(3), pages 1-23, September.
    11. Pender, John & Reeder, Richard, 2011. "Impacts of Regional Approaches to Rural Development: Initial Evidence on the Delta Regional Authority," Economic Research Report 262240, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    12. Mark D. Partridge & Dan S. Rickman & Kamar Ali & M. Rose Olfert, 2009. "Do New Economic Geography agglomeration shadows underlie current population dynamics across the urban hierarchy?," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 88(2), pages 445-466, June.
    13. Tsvetkova, Alexandra & Partridge, Mark & Betz, Micael, 2016. "Entrepreneurial and Wage and Salary Employment Response to Economic Conditions Across the Rural-Urban Continuum," MPRA Paper 75781, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Berdegué, Julio A. & Soloaga, Isidro, 2018. "Small and medium cities and development of Mexican rural areas," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 277-288.
    15. Joanna P. Ganning & Kathy Baylis & Bumsoo Lee, 2013. "Spread And Backwash Effects For Nonmetropolitan Communities In The U.S," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 464-480, August.
    16. Hisamitsu Saito & Munisamy Gopinath & JunJie Wu, 2011. "Inter-Regional Spillovers and Urban-Rural Disparity in U.S. Employment Growth," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1129, European Regional Science Association.
    17. Lehtonen Olli & Tykkyläinen Markku & Voutilainen Olli, 2012. "Root causes of rural decline in economic well-being in Finland," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 4(3), pages 217-239, January.
    18. Jungyul Sohn, 2012. "Does City Location Determine Urban Population Growth? The Case Of Small And Medium Cities In Korea," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 103(3), pages 276-292, July.
    19. Hannu Tervo, 2009. "Centres and Peripheries in Finland: Granger Causality Tests Using Panel Data," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(4), pages 377-390.
    20. Niclas Lavesson, 2017. "When And How Does Commuting To Cities Influence Rural Employment Growth?," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 631-654, 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:24-29. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.