Community‐Based Social Enterprises as Actors for Neo‐Endogenous Rural Development: A Multi‐Stakeholder Approach^☆

Abstract

Rural shrinking is an ongoing phenomenon in many parts of Europe. Against this backdrop neo-endogenous rural development has been gaining support as a conceptual and policy approach which stress the combination of local and external actors, resources and forces for enhancing an integrated development of rural areas. Within this governance framework rural social enterprises have been stressed as potential key actors contributing to rural development. This paper explores, through 36 semi-structured interviews with diverse stakeholders of two Irish community-based rural social enterprises, the role of these organizations in contributing to a neoendogenous development. Our findings show how their mobilization of the social attachment of their members, their collective character and their delivery of tangible results have been key to develop collaborative dynamics with stakeholders from different sectors and situated at various spatial scales. Moreover, these organizations have accommodated global-exogenous forces buffering their effects through locally-focused solutions which address the needs of their rural communities, despite their incapacity to address the causes of these global-exogenous trends. We conclude that rural community-based social enterprises can play a relevant role in contributing to neo-endogenous development, however, institutional frameworks that address the diversity of rural areas and that enhance balanced collaborations among different rural development stakeholders are a precondition to unlock their potential.

A creative place‐making framework – Story‐creation for a sustainable development

“…This approach is resonant with creative place‐making, which focuses on multi‐stakeholder governance. For example, rural social enterprises based in the community can form networks and be resourceful in creating locally relevant solutions that support community development (Barraket et al, 2019; Olmedo & O'Shaughnessy, 2022; Richter, 2019; Twuijver et al, 2020). However, how to shape a place, boost community well‐being, and create resilient places is yet to be thoroughly studied.…”

“…A place's development has taken many forms, especially in rural areas. Endogenous development approach is a more “bottom‐up” strategy than the early modernization effort of exogenous development, which took a “top‐down” and “external” approach (Gkartzios & Lowe, 2019; Lowe et al, 1998; Olmedo & O'Shaughnessy, 2022; Stimson et al, 2011). Although their contributions have been acknowledged, these models have also come under fire for being ineffective in sustainable development (Olmedo & O'Shaughnessy, 2022).…”

“…Endogenous development approach is a more “bottom‐up” strategy than the early modernization effort of exogenous development, which took a “top‐down” and “external” approach (Gkartzios & Lowe, 2019; Lowe et al, 1998; Olmedo & O'Shaughnessy, 2022; Stimson et al, 2011). Although their contributions have been acknowledged, these models have also come under fire for being ineffective in sustainable development (Olmedo & O'Shaughnessy, 2022). For instance, the endogenous approach has been criticized for treating rural areas as if they are separate from external global trends, while the exogenous approach has been criticized for failing to address the needs of rural communities and areas (Gkartzios & Lowe, 2019; Gkartzios & Scott, 2014; Lowe et al, 1998; Olmedo & O'Shaughnessy, 2022).…”

“…Although their contributions have been acknowledged, these models have also come under fire for being ineffective in sustainable development (Olmedo & O'Shaughnessy, 2022). For instance, the endogenous approach has been criticized for treating rural areas as if they are separate from external global trends, while the exogenous approach has been criticized for failing to address the needs of rural communities and areas (Gkartzios & Lowe, 2019; Gkartzios & Scott, 2014; Lowe et al, 1998; Olmedo & O'Shaughnessy, 2022).…”

“…For instance, the endogenous approach has been criticized for treating rural areas as if they are separate from external global trends, while the exogenous approach has been criticized for failing to address the needs of rural communities and areas (Gkartzios & Lowe, 2019;Gkartzios & Scott, 2014;Lowe et al, 1998;Olmedo & O'Shaughnessy, 2022).…”