IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aieacp/124105.html

Misurare la buona governance dei territori rurali: un possibile set di indicatori

Author

Listed:
  • Franceschetti, Giorgio
  • Da Re, Riccardo
  • Secco, Laura

Abstract

Il significato più comune e condiviso del termine governance si riferisce alla capacità della pubblica amministrazione di gestire e dirigere network, coinvolgendo attori pubblici e privati di varia natura in processi politico-decisionali, promuovendo il dialogo, la condivisione di responsabilità, la partecipazione e il coordinamento di molti attori a molti livelli. Modalità organizzative e d’interazione tra i vari soggetti che siano in grado di garantire una “buona governance”, soprattutto in relazione all’uso delle risorse naturali e a alla valorizzazione del capitale sociale, stanno diventando fattori chiave nello sviluppo rurale. Il concetto di “buona governance” riflette la crescente domanda espressa dalla società civile di maggior partecipazione dei vari portatori d’interesse nei processi decisionali; di maggior trasparenza e collaborazione tra i soggetti, anche con l’obiettivo di un apprendimento collaborativo e di miglioramento delle proprie capacità; nonché di una maggior responsabilità ambientale e sociale, anche con l’obiettivo di scelte collettive in grado di garantire la sostenibilità. Un’adeguata valutazione della qualità della governance è un utile strumento di supporto decisionale, nelle fasi di formulazione, attuazione e revisione delle politiche pubbliche e dei progetti di sviluppo locale dei territori rurali. Tuttavia, negli attuali strumenti di monitoraggio e valutazione delle politiche di sviluppo rurale e dei loro impatti si sono riscontrati limiti notevoli specie quando oggetto della valutazione sono i progetti di sviluppo locale ed i relativi soggetti attuatori. La governance, nello specifico della tutela e gestione delle risorse naturali, costituisce un capitolo essenziale della cosiddetta bio-economia, e gli indicatori proposti a questo fine sono tutti ispirati al mantenimento dell’energia, e più in generale delle risorse naturali, nella prospettiva di una sostenibilità del sistema socio-economico anche a livello locale Il presente contributo intende illustrare un metodo di valutazione della qualità della governance locale in ambiti rurali, attraverso un originale set di indicatori testati in alcune realtà territoriali.

Suggested Citation

  • Franceschetti, Giorgio & Da Re, Riccardo & Secco, Laura, 2012. "Misurare la buona governance dei territori rurali: un possibile set di indicatori," 2012 First Congress, June 4-5, 2012, Trento, Italy 124105, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aieacp:124105
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.124105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/124105/files/Franceschetti%20et%20al_%20misurare%20la%20qualita%20della%20governance%20un%20set%20di%20indicatori.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.124105?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. Gibson, Clark C. & Ostrom, Elinor & Ahn, T. K., 2000. "The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 217-239, February.
    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. Birolo, Linda & Secco, Laura & Da Re, Riccardo & Cesaro, Luca, 2012. "Multi-system governance within the EU rural development policy: a proposal for LAGs self-evaluation in the LEADER program," Politica Agricola Internazionale - International Agricultural Policy, Edizioni L'Informatore Agrario, vol. 2012(4), pages 1-17.

    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. Robert Costanza & Shuang Liu, 2014. "Ecosystem Services and Environmental Governance: Comparing China and the U.S," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 160-170, January.
    2. Grillitsch, Markus & Asheim, Björn & Fünfschilling, Lea & Kelmenson, Sophie & Lowe, Nichola & Lundquist, Karl Johan & Mahmoud, Yahia & Martynovich, Mikhail & Mattson, Pauline & Miörner, Johan & Nilsso, 2023. "Rescaling: An Analytical Lense to Study Economic and Industrial Shifts," Papers in Innovation Studies 2023/11, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    3. Dale Rothman & Patricia Romero-Lankao & Vanessa Schweizer & Beth Bee, 2014. "Challenges to adaptation: a fundamental concept for the shared socio-economic pathways and beyond," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(3), pages 495-507, February.
    4. Burak Güneralp & Michael K Reilly & Karen C Seto, 2012. "Capturing Multiscalar Feedbacks in Urban Land Change: A Coupled System Dynamics Spatial Logistic Approach," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 39(5), pages 858-879, October.
    5. Merrie, Andrew & Olsson, Per, 2014. "An innovation and agency perspective on the emergence and spread of Marine Spatial Planning," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 366-374.
    6. Poteete, Amy R. & Ostrom, Elinor, 2008. "Fifteen Years of Empirical Research on Collective Action in Natural Resource Management: Struggling to Build Large-N Databases Based on Qualitative Research," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 176-195, January.
    7. Elissa Waters & Jon Barnett, 2018. "Spatial imaginaries of adaptation governance: A public perspective," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(4), pages 708-725, June.
    8. Hanna Ahlström & Amanda Williams & Emmy Wassénius & Andrea S. Downing, 2025. "Deepening the Conversation on Systemic Sustainability Risks: A Social-Ecological Systems Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 199(3), pages 495-506, July.
    9. Steven M Manson, 2007. "Challenges in Evaluating Models of Geographic Complexity," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 34(2), pages 245-260, April.
    10. Lucia Vergano & Paulo A.L.D. Nunes, 2006. "Analysis and Evaluation of Ecosystem Resilience: An Economic Perspective," Working Papers 2006.25, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    11. Lopolito, Antonio & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Sica, Edgardo, 2022. "The role of proximity in sustainability transitions: A technological niche evolution analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    12. Leandra R. Gonçalves & Mayara Oliveira & Alexander Turra, 2020. "Assessing the Complexity of Social-Ecological Systems: Taking Stock of the Cross-Scale Dependence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-22, August.
    13. Sarah Birrell Ivory & R. Bradley MacKay, 2020. "Scaling sustainability from the organizational periphery to the strategic core: Towards a practice‐based framework of what practitioners “do”," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 2058-2077, July.
    14. Heo, Cindy Yoonjoung & Kim, Bona & Park, Kwangsoo & Back, Robin M., 2022. "A comparison of Best-Worst Scaling and Likert Scale methods on peer-to-peer accommodation attributes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 368-377.
    15. Fikret Berkes, 2017. "Environmental Governance for the Anthropocene? Social-Ecological Systems, Resilience, and Collaborative Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-12, July.
    16. Jessica Cockburn, 2022. "Knowledge integration in transdisciplinary sustainability science: Tools from applied critical realism," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 358-374, April.
    17. Reshma Shrestha & Jaap Zevenbergen & Fahria Masum & Mahesh Banskota, 2018. "“Action Space” Based Urban Land Governance Pattern: Implication in Managing Informal Settlements from the Perspective of Low-Income Housing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, June.
    18. Wiegant, Daniel & Peralvo, Manuel & van Oel, Pieter & Dewulf, Art, 2020. "Five scale challenges in Ecuadorian forest and landscape restoration governance," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    19. Yoder, Landon & Roy Chowdhury, Rinku, 2018. "Tracing social capital: How stakeholder group interactions shape agricultural water quality restoration in the Florida Everglades," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 354-361.
    20. Vermaat, Jan E. & Eppink, Florian & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M. & Barendregt, Aat & van Belle, Jasper, 2005. "Aggregation and the matching of scales in spatial economics and landscape ecology: empirical evidence and prospects for integration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 229-237, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:ags:aieacp:124105. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aieaaea.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.