IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper



  • Fucilli, Vincenzo
  • De Blasi, Giuseppe
  • Acciani, Claudio


With the reforms of Structural Funds there has been a considerable tightening of the guiding principles of Community actions. Among these, a primary role has been given to evaluation. In this context, the paper deals with what has been realized for the evaluation of rural development policy, comparing various experiences in Italy with reference to the Rural Development Plans. The aim is to verify, on the basis of (meta) criteria, the methodological contents of the mid term evaluation reports of 14 RDPs in the centre-north of Italy. Through the analyses and the comparisons of these reports, the paper is an attempt to reconstruct the “quality” of the evaluations with specific reference to the methodological aspects, the models and the procedures adopted by the evaluators.

Suggested Citation

  • Fucilli, Vincenzo & De Blasi, Giuseppe & Acciani, Claudio, 2008. "MID TERM EVALUATION OF RDPs IN ITALY: COMPARING MODELS," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6447, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa107:6447

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Bartolini, Fabio & Finn, J. & Kurz, Isabelle & Samoggia, Antonella & Viaggi, Davide, 2005. "Using Information from Mid Term Evaluations of RDP for the Multicriteria Analysis of Agri-environmental Schemes," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24738, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Peter Midmore, 1998. "Rural Policy Reform and Local Development Programmes: Appropriate Evaluation Procedures," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 409-426.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Evaluation; Rural Development Plans; Mid Term; Metaevaluation; Community/Rural/Urban Development; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:eaa107:6447. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: .

    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.