The Arkleton Trust seminar report will be forthcoming later 
this year. Meanwhile, the following brief resume gives a 
flavour of the subjects discussed. It has been prepared by 
Katalin Kolosy, Peter Willis, Peter Baumann and myself.

regards to all
John Bryden
________________________________________________

The Arkleton Trust 1999 Seminar on Rural Development 
19 - 21 March 1999

A  Brief Synopsis.

Rural Development, European Enlargement and Agenda 2000

Participants from Central and Eastern European Countries - Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia - gathered with social scientists, practitioners from seven EU countries and representatives of  Scottish regional and national authorities involved in rural development, to discuss the implementation of Agenda 2000 in Europe at large. The presence of the Director for Rural
Development of the European Commission lent an optimal quality to the debate on this particularly complex and pressing issue.  The seminar was held under 'Chatham House' rules, which allow participants to speak freely without the fear of being quoted!

Five main issues were identified and discussed.

1.  The relationship between agriculture and rural development

If competitive agriculture entails no export subsidies and multi-functional production, large numbers of farms, farmers and agricultural workers in Eastern and Western Europe will have to find other livelihoods.  Rural policies must reckon with this and so should  not be framed from an agrarian point of view only.  A distinction must be drawn between the diversification of agriculture and the development of rural areas, as well as between farming and non-farming interests.

2.  The levels of government and their competences

In most European countries, central authorities are strongest and best resourced, and generally adopt sectoral approaches.  This makes it difficult for local authorities adopting integrated approaches to rural development to find partners among central authorities.  Funding integrated local development projects is already problematic because:
(a)  central authorities are under increasing pressure to economise; 
(b)  local authorities and agencies have limited resources and fiscal capacities; 
(c)  both local and central resources tend to be earmarked in ways that render it difficult to make the funds that are available fit integrated projects devised at local levels. 

3.  Disparities and cohesion

In general, territorial policies are based on the concept of disparity, monitored through national
socio-economic indicators. The horizontal measure for rural development (future Article 33 of  the Rural Development Regulation of Agenda 2000) may threaten the ability of poorer regions and organisations to obtain strong financial support because of the match-funding obligations. 

4.  The strategies for rural planning and policies in CEECs

The SAPARD (Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development) will come into effect on  1 January 2000, with an indicative budget of  0.5 b Euros per annum.  SAPARD  seeks to help candidate countries: 
(a) implement  the acquis communautaire as it relates to the CAP and structural adjustment of agriculture and rural areas;
(b) reach economic convergence.
These strategic objectives give rise to high entry costs for CEECs.  In some, such as  Romania, they compromise the current financial allocation for rural development policies.  In others, such as  Hungary, they  provide an opportunity to consider sacrificing compensatory payments for agriculture in order to gain  larger payments in support of agri-environment and forestry development plans.  In the long run this could create more sustainable growth for rural communities.  Poland, Slovenia and Estonia seem inclined to follow a middle course,  separating schemes for diversifying the activities of small farms from those targeted at large farms aimed at improving competitiveness. 

5. The concept of partnership

Partnerships in rural development policies and practice may take several forms. 
(a)  Vertical partnerships involve the various levels of governance - local, regional, national, and international bodies.  These are often implemented through operational programmes.
(b)  Horizontal partnerships engage the various investment and development agencies in designing and implementing  integrated plans.
(c)  Mixed vertical - horizontal ('diagonal') partnerships may be formed in some circumstances, involving the regional level in high-level policy making.
(d)  Local partnerships are formed by the representatives of the plural economy in the locality and are  always area-based.  Their success depends on:
* a clear mandate to implement policy;
* broad social representation;
* a range of complementary  skills;
* ability to manage risk.

In discussing these and related matters, the central issues, explicit and implicit, raised by Agenda 2000 emerged in greater clarity.   The difficulties that must be dealt with if it is to be implemented successfully became apparent, but so too did the scope there may be to find ways of dealing  with them.  Considerable reservations were expressed about the ‘horizontalisation’ of the ESF and EAGGF structural measures, and the problems this would pose for integrated rural development at territorial levels.

The Arkleton Trust  will be issuing a report on the proceedings of the seminar shortly.

_________________________________________________
----------------------
john bryden
[log in to unmask]





%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%