Rural development

There is not a universally acceptable term of ‘rural development’ as it is used in different ways and in vastly different contexts. It is a multidimensional concept and concerns the development of agriculture and related activities (e.g. villages, socio-economic

infrastructure, community services,) and interactions between various factors at economic, social and institutional level in rural areas to improve the quality of life. In the words of Robert Chambers ‘Rural development is a strategy to enable a specific group of people, poor

rural women and men, to gain for themselves and their children more of what they want and need. It involves helping the poorest among those who seek a livelihood in the rural areas to demand and control more of the benefits of rural development. The group includes small scale farmers, tenants and the landless’.93

Rapid changes in the international economy such as globalization, improved

communications and a reduction of the transportation costs and the increasing of non-farm activities, have confronted rural regions with some challenges but also with significant opportunities for rural policy by a re-examination of objectives and instruments.

91 _{OECD (2005e) ‘Trends in Agricultural and Rural Development Policies in OECD Countries’} background paper by the OECD Secretariat for the conference ‘The Coherence of Agricultural and Rural Development Policies’. Bratislava, 24-26 October 2005.

92 _{OECD (2005d) Regions at a Glance. Paris: OECD Publishing.}

93 _{Chambers, R. (1983) Rural Development: Putting the Last First. London; New York:} Longman, page 147.

44

More specifically, technical progress (e.g. mechanization, better seed, breeding qualities, better resource management) drove the orientation towards higher efficiency rates to produce more food with less production resources in terms of labour, land, capital with the effect of a continuous rural-urban migration and less farmers were able to supply more food for the growing number of urban consumers.94 _{During the 1960-1998 period, the number of} full time farmers decreased just one fourth of the 1960 number (from 2,4 to 0,6 mill.) while the average farm size tripled (from 9,3 to 33,4 ha) and the consumers supplied by each farmer increased seven times (from 17 to 124).95

In addition, from the socio-economic stand point production structures were not adapted to global markets and there was a slow rural job growth along with higher unemployment. This led to a reduced rural population growth causing persistent lags of human resources

development.96

The structural changes brought to the emergence of small and medium sized manufacturing and service enterprises owned and operated by rural entrepreneurs and serving local, regional, national and international markets; to the recognition that rural areas have an important value in terms of natural resources of environmental importance which

contributed to the growth of services for tourism and resettlement of retired families in rural areas.97

Further features on rural areas are structural changes in agriculture like regional disparities, migration and unemployment resulting from restructuring happening in the context of the global economic change, new patterns of employment, change of technologies and

composition of markets.

Agricultural policy had to look beyond the traditional aspects of commodity production. Farmers were encouraged to pursue their activity in the framework of ‘multifunctionality’ which recognizes additional values to this sector beyond food production in terms of food

94 _{BMELF (2000) Land-und Forstwirtschaft in Deutschland: Daten und Fakten. Bonn:} Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten.

95 _{BMELF (2000), page 20.}

96 _{OECD (1988) New Trends in Rural Policy Making. Paris: OECD Publications, page 15.} 97 _{OECD (1988), page 18.}

45

security and quality, animal welfare, cultural and historical heritage values, environmental quality, landscape and biodiversity.98

In this context, rural development could be recognized as a multi-level development process rooted in historical traditions.99

The first level concerns global interrelations between agriculture and society. Agriculture produces also ‘public goods’ (e.g. beautiful landscapes, natural resources) and gives an important contribution to those areas that lag behind in development terms.

The second level concerns a new development model for the agriculture sector. Until the early 1990s, intensification, specialization, industrialization strongly limited development in agricultural sector with a decline of the farm numbers and employment opportunities. Many rural development experiences were seen as the search for a new agricultural development model creating synergy and cohesion between activities at farm level but also with other rural activities. While modernization fostered the specialization of the agricultural

production and also its segregation from other rural activities, the synergy between activities appears strategic and desirable in rural development. Particularly important are synergies to favour specific farm styles, good and services, between local and regional authorities.100 In the third level, individual farm household, rural development concerns the redefinition of identities, strategies, interrelations and networks which are historically and culturally rooted. Even here the coordination between agricultural and non-agricultural activities is an important source of synergy.

At the fourth level of the countryside and its economic actors, the rural is no longer the monopoly of farmers. New forms of rural development activities for different actors must be developed for access to opportunities and resources in new arenas (e.g. rural tourism, nature and landscape conservation).

The fifth level concerns the variation in the rural development policies, programmes and

institutions in the different countries. There are three aspects to be dealt such as the

98 _{Cahill, C. (2001) ‘The Multi-Functionality of Agriculture: What does it mean?’, EuroChoices,} Vol.1(1), pp. 36-41.

99 _{Van der Ploeg, J. D., Renting, H., Brunori, G., Knickel, K., Mannion, J., Marsden, T., De} Roest, K., Sevilla-Guzm͙án, E., Ventura, F. (2000).

100 _{Guzmán Casado, G., González de Molina, M. and Sevilla Guzmán, E. (2000) Introducción a}

la agroecologia como desarollo rural sostenible. Madrid, Barcelona, Mexico: Ediciones

46

coherence between different policies and programmes, their synergy and the effects on rural development institutional settings for the production and marketing of agricultural goods. Some of these settings may be fundamental to rural development while others may be irrelevant.101 _{The institutional setting of rural development, the multi actor process,} drives towards a decentralized rural policy approach where the relations between the local and the central strengthen the process.

The last level concerns the multi-faceted quality of the rural development such as the

preservation of nature values and landscape management, agritourism, organic farming and local products. Other activities adopted by family farms are direct marketing, the

development of care activities, innovative forms of cost-reduction. In this context, farm units which are considered ‘superfluous’ in the modernization process acquire new roles and new interrelation not only with other farms but also with the urban population.102

All of these changes in the structure and the importance of rural economy have consequences for the policy-makers that need to consider agriculture as continuously

playing a defining role in rural landscapes and being a vector of great public support for rural areas. They have to reckon with these new challenges as the economic character of the rural areas is no longer synonymous with agriculture and a distinction must be made between the diversification of agriculture and the development of rural areas as well as between farming and non-farming interests. Given these trends, agriculture needs to be incorporated into a comprehensive rural development strategy.