Dr. Karen Keaveney Dr. Brendan O’Keeffe

Energising Ireland’s Rural Economy: Spatial Development Messages from Current Government Policy – Signposts from CEDRA and Local Governance:

Creating the Regions of Tomorrow:Maximising Ireland’s Reform Opportunity

Dr. Karen KeaveneyDr. Brendan O’Keeffe

Contents1. Framing the Debate – why rural matters2. Perceptions of the Rural3. Policy Paradigms

a. EU Regional Development Pointers and Frameworksb. Local Governance & Local Governmentc. CEDRA – relevance and application

4. Policy and Practice Fits5. Recommendations

1. Framing the Debate – why rural matters

Importance of Rural Regions & Territories

• Density is not necessary to be a high-performing region. • With investment, predominantly rural regions have, on

average, enjoyed faster growth than intermediate or urban regions.

• Predominantly rural regions also evidence greater variety in performance.

- OECD (2012) Promoting Growth in All Regions

2. Perceptions of the Rural … & MisperceptionsIrish Times 25/08/2014

Tailoring the (micro-level) policy response to each region’s potential points to a “neoendogenous” approach, where local knowledge and commitment is supported by advice and regulation from the EU and National levels.

Advocacy of such an approach highlights the pressing need for more appropriate indicators, and regional auditing procedures, to facilitate assessment of intangible assets.

EDORA (European Development Opportunities for Rural Areas) 2013, ESPON

tailoring responses at the appropriate

geographyneoendogenous

supported by governmentintangible assets

3. Policy Paradigmsa. EU Regional Development Pointers

and Frameworksb. Local Government and Local

Governancec. CEDRA – relevance and application

3a. EU Rural Development Pointers and Frameworks

We believe that the objectives of the EU defined in the Europe 2020 Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth can only be achieved if the territorial dimension of the strategy is taken into account, as the development opportunities of the different regions vary.We consider that the place based approach ‐ to policy making contributes to territorial cohesion. Based on the principles of horizontal coordination, evidence informed policy making and integrated ‐functional area development, it implements the subsidiarity principle through a multilevel governance approach.The development of the wide variety of rural areas should take account of their unique characteristics. We support transnational and cross border integration of regions going beyond cooperation projects and focusing on developments and results of real cross border or transnational relevance‐ .

- Territorial Agenda 2020 Towards an Inclusive, Smart and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions ‐(May, 2011).

Territorial governance matters… governance capacity underpins the development and management of local and regional development; necessary to achieve better co-ordination of policy between scales and agreement is needed on territorial development objectives amongst stakeholders, from the public and private sectors and from civil society.

- Sandra Di Biaggio, ESPON Coordination Unit.

territorial dimension

place-basedmulti-level governance

variety of rural area types

public and private sectors and from

civil society

territorial governance matters

real cross border or ‐transnational

relevance

3b Local Governance Community-Led Local Development (CLLD)“… the LEADER approach … an effective tool for handing power to ‘people on the ground’ ”

• Focus on sub-regional areas• Community-led by Local Action

Groups• Integrated, Multi-Sectoral, Area-

based… local needs and potential• Single Methodology for connected

and integrated use of funds

“More autonomous LAGs”

- Metis, 2010: 20

“one of the key features of the LEADER approach is that decisions should be made not by public authorities but by a wider local partnership, where the local government is included”

- European Court of Auditors, 2010: 18

3b Communities support CLLD

Town Hall Meetings discuss and showcaseCommunity-Led Local Development

LEADER Rally,9th July 2014

Groundswell in Favour of CLLD

3b Local Governance – Local GovernmentRecommendations by LEADER Partnerships

1. Strengthen Local Government by – devolving power from central government bureaucracy (and NOT

from local development and voluntary bodies),– Giving it a 21st century geography– Ensuring local accountability– A more flexible system that allows for innovation and local input.– Giving the SPC oversight over all statutory bodies.

2. Strengthen Local Development by– Autonomous Local Action Groups – enablers of participative

democracy and collaborative governance– Allowing for local innovation and tailored strategies – with less red

tape.– Ensure community ownership– Partnership between local government and local development.

But….1. The Local Government Reform Act (2013)• Reduce the number of Regional Authorities

• Abolition of Town Councils

• No Notable transfer of powers from central to local government

• Only One LEADER and Local Development Partnership for the Entire County??

• Community Leaders are replaced by Municipal Councillors and Executives in the LEADER and LCDP decision-making body

• Either the new Partnership will have to contend with an additional reporting / bureaucratic layer i.e. Local Authority OR

• Local Authority will implement LEADER

24 Members16 Male (66%)6 Female (25%)2 Vacancies (8%)

15 Members

Community / Voluntary

33%

Local Authority21%

State Agencies25%

Social Partners

21%

Current Membership of ILDC Board

Commu-nity /

Voluntary13%

Local Authority27%

State Agencies40%

Social Partners

13%

Local Dev. 7%

Proposed Membership of the SEC

*

* Based on two councillors and two officials

“The 2012 Action Programme for Effective Local Government proposes a regional structure which is meaningless in terms of city-region development and fails to address the governance weaknesses which inhibit development at the regional and local levels. The action programme therefore ignores international best practice regarding how effective regional development should be pursued.”

-Breathnach (2013: 51)

3c. CEDRA• A welcome spotlight on the rural.• Provides momentum.• Improves data / baselines.• Recognises territorial differentiation.but, • proposals lack spatial differentiation, due to

the straightjacket of the Local Government Reform Act.

Communities filling Vacuums and Providing ‘State’ Services

One Size fits all…..but you can have broadband,soon.

Community-Led Local DevelopmentPlace-Based Strategies (micro-regions)Focus on PotentialDifferentiationIntegrationMulti-Level Governance

4. Policy and Practice Fits• Mismatch between recent national policy and

international best practice.• Lack of an evidence-based approach.• Obsession with medieval and administrative

straightjackets.• Lack of regional and local differentiation.• Missing-out on Opportunities: CLLD and CBC• But, hope emerging from new ministry, provided it

becomes more stand-alone and assertive.

5. Recommendations• Rural Proof the in-coming NPF and put it on a statutory

footing.• Devolve power from the centre to the local in line with

successive independent recommendations.• Move away from county geographies to more flexible and

contemporary realities.• Ensure rural and local development continue to operate

via the experienced partnerships.• Support and invest in local services in conjunction with

local communities.