IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i18p8028-d1477798.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Different Strategies of the Italian Regions within the 2023 2027 Rural Development Programme

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Piras

    (Department of Agriculture Sciences, University of Sassari, Viale Italia 39/a, 07100 Sassari, Italy)

  • Antonio Pulina

    (Department of Agriculture Sciences, University of Sassari, Viale Italia 39/a, 07100 Sassari, Italy)

  • Pierluigi Milone

    (Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile ed Ambientale (DICA, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering), University of Perugia, 06125 Perugia, Italy)

Abstract

Following the European Commission’s approval of the CAP Strategic Plan and the 21 Italian region (CSR)-related strategic documents, the financial aspect that characterized the single national CAP plan was made available. Here, we present and analyze the final data on the distribution of public resources for interventions between 2023 and 2027. This marks a pivotal period of strategic information for those who follow the evolution of the rural development policy, providing vital indications of policymakers’ priorities. In Italy, where rural development policy is highly regionalized, it is difficult to acquire an overall view of the strategic choices adopted by the individual regions. The primary objective of this article is to offer a comprehensive and enlightening synopsis of the regional choices in the CSRs. It aims to identify shared strategic paths in rural development, with a specific focus on the financial allocation in each of the three historical macro-objectives of the CAP: the competitiveness of the agri-food sector, the protection of the environment, and the revitalization of rural areas. Cluster analysis classification allows for aggregating the strategies adopted, allowing for comparisons across the Italian regions. The results show three regional groups focused on environmental strategy, structural investment measures, and resource distribution that is more balanced between these two approaches. Identifying the strategic choices made by the regions allows policymakers to predict different development trajectories and the progress of the expenditure indicators over the years. At the moment, it is impossible to verify whether the policy mix defined in the budget allocation is consistent with the strategic statements.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Piras & Antonio Pulina & Pierluigi Milone, 2024. "The Different Strategies of the Italian Regions within the 2023 2027 Rural Development Programme," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-14, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:18:p:8028-:d:1477798
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/18/8028/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/18/8028/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Midmore, Peter & Langstaff, Lesley & Lowman, Stephen & Vaughan, Alison, 2008. "Qualitative evaluation of European Rural Development Policy: Evidence from Comparative Case Studies," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44434, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Aisling Murtagh & Maura Farrell & Tuomas Kuhmonen & Louise Weir & Marie Mahon, 2023. "The Future Dreams of Ireland’s Youth: Possibilities for Rural Regeneration and Generational Renewal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-15, June.
    3. Fabrizio De Filippis & Daniela Storti, 2002. "Le politiche di sviluppo rurale nell´unione europea: un secondo pilastro tutto da inventare," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0025, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    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. Whelan, Adele & McGuinness, Seamus & Barrett, Alan, 2021. "Review of International Approaches to Evaluating Rural and Community Development Investment and Supports," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number RS124.
    2. Psaltopoulos, Demetris & Balamou, Eudokia & Skuras, Dimitris & Ratinger, Tomas & Sieber, Stefan, 2011. "Modelling the impacts of CAP Pillar 1 and 2 measures on local economies in Europe: Testing a case study-based CGE-model approach," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 53-69, January.
    3. Dylan Bradley & Janet Dwyer & Berkeley Hill, 2010. "The Evaluation of Rural Development Policy in the EU L’évaluation de la politique de développement rural dans l’Union européenne Die Evaluation der Politik zur Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums in der ," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 9(1), pages 15-20, April.
    4. Catia Zumpano, 2009. "The Italian Network for Rural Development: Challenges and Weaknesses," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 4, December.
    5. Riccardo Crescenzi & Fabrizio De Filippis & Fabio Pierangeli, 2015. "In Tandem for Cohesion? Synergies and Conflicts between Regional and Agricultural Policies of the European Union," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(4), pages 681-704, April.
    6. Margherita Scoppola, 2005. "Agricultural Policies of the EU in the New Member States: Development or Re-Distribution?," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 1, March.
    7. Roberto Henke & Maria Carmela Macrì & Daniela Storti, 2005. "Multifunctionality and Rural Development in the EU: A Comparative Analysis," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 2, May.
    8. Riccardo Crescenzi & Guido Fabiani, 2007. "Globalisation and convergence of the agro-food systems of the industrial economies," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 2, May.
    9. Iveta Vrabková & Pavel Šaradín, 2017. "The Technical Efficiency of Local Action Groups: a Czech Republic Case Study," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 1065-1074.
    10. 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.
    11. Roberto Henke, 2002. "From the Mac Sharry Reform to Agenda 2000: The Cap Greening Process," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 1, May.
    12. Eleni PAPADOPOULOU & Christos PAPALEXIOU & Nikolaos HASANAGAS, 2012. "Participatory Evaluation Of Rural Development Programmes: A Qualitative Approach In The Case Of Modernisation Of Agricultural Holdings In Greece," Regional Science Inquiry, Hellenic Association of Regional Scientists, vol. 0(1), pages 81-94, June.
    13. Riccardo Crescenzi & Fabrizio De Filippis & Fabio Pierangeli, 2011. "Synergies and conflicts between EU policies and the objective of territorial cohesion," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0132, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    14. Fabrizio De Filippis & Roberto Henke, 2010. "Cap Between First and Second Pillars: Looking into EU Spending on Agriculture," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 3, September.
    15. Lillemets, Jüri & Fertő, Imre & Viira, Ants-Hannes, 2022. "The socioeconomic impacts of the CAP: Systematic literature review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:18:p:8028-:d:1477798. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.