New Actors in Rural Development - The LEADER Approach and Projectification in Rural Croatia

Abstract

LEADER has often been praised as a successful approach to rural development, although its implementation is not without scholarly critiques. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of how LEADER, now in its initial phase in Croatia, operates within the shifting local power relations in rural areas. We focus on questions concerning the social background of the new LEADER project class, financing, the influence of local politics and the trust and involvement of the local population. Since factors contributing to success and failure of EU programmes have often been attributed to their localization into a specific territorial context, among other things, we use a regional and typological approach in selecting 10 LAGs for conducting in-depth semi-structured interviews. The results indicate that, in relation to the local territorial context, the differentiation between the internal and external project classes might be useful as an analytical tool. Furthermore, we have confirmed that there might be pitfalls in using financial criteria as the only instrument of assessment for evaluation which disregards whether the projects implemented are inclusive and responsive to the needs of the whole of local populace -which runs contrary to the basic tenets of LEADER. Finally, the role of local politics has been specifically identified in two diametrical territorial contexts (rural periphery, and more dynamic developed areas).

Principal Component Analysis of the LEADER Approach (2007–2013) in South Western Europe (Extremadura and Alentejo)

“…The benefits of the LEADER Approach in European rural areas are clear, particularly because it gives the population an opportunity to participate in the creation and implementation of development strategies. Several authors analyzed LEADER in various European regions, either by studying the results at a quantitative level (mainly through the number of projects executed [21][22][23][24]), or by qualitatively investigating the social aspect of the approach. For example, Mondéjar et al [25] stated that LEADER does not arise exclusively for the attainment of quantifiable economic or social objectives, but as a laboratory of ideas with which to experiment innovation and transfer results.…”

25 Years of the Leader Initiative as European Rural Development Policy: The Case of Extremadura (SW Spain)

“…These are research studies in which the distribution of investments by population and area, funding by actions and the type of promoters are presented. Different European regions further away from Extremadura have also been studied, as is the case with Greece (Iakovidou, Koutsouris, & Partalidou, 2002), Italy (Osti, 2000), Romania (Marquardt, Möllers, & Buchenrieder, 2012) and Croatia (Lukic & Obad, 2016). In all these cases, the management of LEADER Approach and its implementation through diversifier projects is analysed, especially tourism-related initiatives.…”

Private capital in the rural development programme: the case of the Apulia Region, Southern Italy

“…The function of policies in facilitating or promoting private local development depends upon the institutional and social 'ability' of stakeholders in leveraging available policies (Mantino 2005). On the other hand, many factors that have contributed to the success (and failure) of EU programmes have often been attributed to their localisation in a specific territorial context (Lukić-Obad 2016). Several scholars have highlighted how agricultural plurality, diversification, and institutional networks can play critical roles in developing rural capital, one of the most important indicators of rurality (Lukić 2013, McKitterick et al 2016.…”