Potential and Complexity of Implementing Financial Instruments in the Framework of Rural Development Policies in Italy—The Friuli Venezia Giulia Revolving Fund

Abstract

Although in recent years some credit institutions have shown a willingness to support agricultural entrepreneurs, there is still a lack of private financing or co-financing in the agricultural sector. Many farms, in fact, are not able to meet the indicators or to provide the fees required by banks to obtain investment loans. The financial instruments introduced by the European Commission within the Rural Development Programme aim at supporting access to credit for farms to make them more economically viable, competitive, and suited to market requirements. The objective of this paper is to analyze the role played by the financial instruments introduced by the European Union to support and encourage the improvement of farms and, in general, the agriculture, forestry, human capital, and rural development in Italy. The paper explores the topic in detail by presenting a case study of a region that has successfully applied these instruments using a revolving fund with a special background. The quantitative data used in this study are administrative; some information was obtained through a survey. Regional information on the implementation of this fund is examined in terms of both opportunities and limitations to highlight the best practice. The findings suggest that certain conditions are required to develop and implement effective financial instruments: a real and effective collaboration between regional administration, banking institutions, and farms that are willing to grasp the newness; a reasonable period of time (some years); know-how because knowledge and experience are crucial, together with the ability to face complexity both in terms of normative issues and financial engineering instruments themselves. Several implications derive from these findings.

Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency: European Regional Policy and the Role of Financial Instruments

“…The European Commission's shift from grant instruments to repayable instruments in the effective use and management of structural funds was intended to promote better economic and social impact. The most commonly cited impacts in the literature include the following [20,24,[61][62][63][64]:…”

“…FIs promote bankable investments that target public objectives in situations where achievable market returns fail to attract private investors [23]. Funding involving FIs is provided for financially viable investments that cannot obtain sufficient funding from market sources [24]. This kind of public intervention fills the financial gap between money demand and supply and offers an alternative to non-refundable grants.…”

Comparative Analysis of the Use of Financial Instruments – Regional Perspective

“…Despite the high popularity of non-refundable grants among beneficiaries, repayable financial instruments have their advantages. Among those most often mentioned in the literature are (Cisilino and Licciardo, 2022;Wishlade and Michie, 2018;Matshkalyan andFeher, 2017, Financial Instruments ..., 2014):…”