1

Rural services: European policies and

experiences

Dr Sarah Skerratt

Senior Researcher & Team Leader:

Rural Society Research

2

Outline of presentationOutline of presentation

• Rural services in Europe :

– Typical challenges

– Why focus on rural services?

• Policy and other responses

– Diversity of “solutions”

– Solutions dependent on cultural and political histories

– Examples: Finland and Scotland

• So…? Next steps?

3

Rural services in Europe: typical challengesRural services in Europe: typical challenges

• Low population density

• Low critical mass

• Ageing population

• High cost per head

SR = Substantially Rural; PR = Predominantly rural (OECD)

Source: Copus et al, 2007, p.13

4

Why focus on rural services? [1/3]Why focus on rural services? [1/3]

• EC White Paper (2004) on Services of General Interest:– “The access of all citizens and enterprises to affordable

high-quality services of general interest throughout the territory of the Member States is essential for the promotion of social and territorial cohesion in the European Union, including the reduction of handicaps caused by the lack of accessibility of the outermost regions…” (Section 3.3., p. 8)

5

Why focus on rural services?[2/3]Why focus on rural services?[2/3]

• “The demographic structure of rural regions is often not appropriate to support provision of local public services. Because these regions have difficulty in establishing the necessary critical mass of facilities, producer services and infrastructure… the economy does not generate employment opportunities and there are strong incentives for young people to move away. This kind of vicious circle, in which unemployment and lack of services lead to rural exodus has been a common pattern in rural regions ever since the agricultural sector began to shed unemployment… (OECD (2006) New Rural Paradigm, pp.30-31)

6

Why focus on rural services? [3/3]Why focus on rural services? [3/3]

• “Local public services are a precondition for development, and are not only related to the well-being of the population, but also to the potential to attract and retain economically active population, enterprises and, thus, growth and sustainability of population settlements” (OECD, 2008).

If not…Cycle of declineIf not…Cycle of decline

8

• So, given that there is agreement…

• How are rural services addressed through rural policies in Europe?

9

First, some history of EU policy…First, some history of EU policy…

• “Innovative approaches to service delivery and place-based tools are providing some solutions, but the overwhelming financial focus of EU rural development policy remains sectoral policy and agriculture subsidy oriented…”

(OECD, 2008, p.2)

• Some argue that rural development would have even less funds if it weren’t for the agricultural lobby, e.g.:– “In Europe, rural development interests benefit from

being part of a coalition via the CAP that includes agriculture.” (Shortall, 2008, p.36)

10

What does this mean?What does this mean?

• In EU, spending for rural development (that is, beyond the land-based sector) therefore remains tiny…

• It remains fragmented, both between and within Member States

• It is compartmentalised, e.g.– LEADER (main bottom-up rural development tool): =

one-third of one percent of the EU budget for agriculture and structural operations

• Also, there is “subsidiarity”… two examples =>

11

Subsidiarity - an example:Subsidiarity - an example:

• Universal service is a key concept the Community has developed in order to ensure effective accessibility of essential services.

• It establishes the right of everyone to access certain services considered as essential and imposes obligations on service providers to offer defined services according to specified conditions…

• The concept allows common principles to be defined at Community level and the implementation of these principles to be left to Member States, thus making it possible to take account of specific situations in each country, in line with the principle of subsidiarity” (Section 3.3., page 8)

12

Another example: Rural Development Regulation 2007-2013Another example: Rural Development Regulation 2007-2013

• Rural Development Regulation: overall design at EU level (4 Axes and a range of Measures), with MS discretion.

• This means that:• Member States are implementing their Rural

Development Programmes =>• 94 national & regional rural devt progs operating• Different MS balances between Axes, and “new

challenges”• Different levels and amounts of MS co-funding

13

What does this mean for rural services in Europe?What does this mean for rural services in Europe?

• Where strong national (Member State) interventions exist, rural services can be addressed in a relatively coherent way

• Otherwise, rural services continue to be:– Compartmentalised into sectoral budgets, rather than

place-based/territory-based– Subject to short-term “pilots” or interventions…– Subject to political priorities and changes– Incoherent => “hot spots” and “not spots”

• This is one consequence of subsidiarity

14

Two examples of howMember States are

addressing rural services

15

Finland and Scotland: policiesFinland and Scotland: policies

• Both similar population size = approx 5M • Although density: Finland = 17/km2; Scotland = 65/km2)

• Finland (INTEGRATED rural devt policies):• Leading example of best practice in EU since 1988• “Concept of integrated rural policy may be more fully applied in

Finland than in any other EU country” (Halhead, 2004)

• Scotland (National Performance Framework):• National Framework underpinning “respectful partnership”

between central and local government• National Service Outcomes• EU Regional Priorities & LEADER

Finland’s rural areas:Finland’s rural areas:

• 3 types:– Urban-adjacent– Rural heartland– Sparsely populated

rural areas:• 89% of territory = 5th

highest in OECD countries;

• 53% of total population = 2nd highest in OECD countries

17

Finland national RURAL policyFinland national RURAL policy

• “Broad”:• Includes all policies and actions of government which can

impact on rural areas – national & regional; all sectors.

• “Narrow”:• Focuses on measures and tools specifically targeted at rural

development, both EU and national.• Regionally-specific, cross-sectoral co-operation, extensive

partnership and participation

• Developed by Rural Policy Committee (most Departments, MPs, national rural organisations) established 1988.

• Evolved through national administrations• Coherent policy fabric, incorporating EU Progs• New Rural Programme every 4 or 5 years• Underpinned by Local Action Groups, Village Action Groups,

Municipalities etc

18

How are rural services delivered?How are rural services delivered?

• Municipalities produce about 2/3 of basic services – essential and frequently needed services such

as education, social and health care, culture, environment and technical infrastructure.

• The rest is produced by the national government, private sector and non-governmental organisations.

19

Rural services priorities in FinlandRural services priorities in Finland

1. Policies oriented to restructure the service delivery mechanisms and foster co-operation between local authorities.

2. Innovative ways of service delivery such as multi-functional and multi-purpose points of delivery, mobile services, telematic and electronic services

3. Involving the private and the third sectors in the delivery of public services

– Triple & Quadruple Helix Models in Northern Periphery

20

Integration of people into processIntegration of people into process

• Integration of “hot spots”, ideas, actions & individuals into national framework and strategy

432 Municipalities (smallest = 200

people) 58 LEADER Local Action

Groups (10K-90K)

people)

19 Regional Councils

Ministerial committee

Rural Policy Committee (est. 1988)

Finnish Parliament Rural Network (est. 2003)

Regional RP Committees

Village Action Association (19 regional)

21

Paijanne 5-Villages network around lake:an individual with vision

Key features:•Seasonal•Events & Issues•Intranet•Network-building, offline & online

22

Café with internet facilities and support, targeting all ages:

Another individual with vision…

23

Finland: a conclusion…Finland: a conclusion…

• “The mainstream Local Action Group method will supersede the EU’s agriculture-based approach to rural economic development, which is conceptually obsolete” (Eero Uusitalo, Secretary General, Rural Policy Committee, Finland)

24

Rural ScotlandRural Scotland

• 75% = predominantly rural = top 10 of OECD countries

• 17% population living in rural regions (OECD share = 23%) and it is rising, especially in accessible regions

25

Scotland: classification of rural areasScotland: classification of rural areas

26

Until 2007Until 2007

• Several reviews of rural services (since 1999 when Scottish Parliament began)

• No specific “rural services” policy; still sectoral (transport, health, education):– Rural Service Priority Areas (RSPAs) were identified

but… a new Government came in, with a new framework… RSPAs disappeared…

• Individual agitation and action => service delivery in rural Scotland, where:– private companies would not step in and – Government did not want to “distort” market…

27

Pulteneytown Peoples ProjectPulteneytown Peoples Project

• One of 15% most deprived areas in Scotland • Sustained since 2002

– Resident survey of local needs– Housed in local community

• Breakfast & after-school club• Independent living for 16-25 year olds• Skills training

– Numerous awards

28

29

30

Scotland: policy landscape

31

32

We live in well-designed, sustainable places where we are able to access the amenities & services we need

We have strong, resilient &supportive communities where people take responsibility fortheir own actions & how they affect others

Our public services are highquality, continually improving,efficient & responsive to localpeople’s needs

33

Single Outcome AgreementSingle Outcome Agreement

34

35

Regional Priorities: Thriving CommunitiesRegional Priorities: Thriving Communities

Priority Code

Thriving Rural Communities Priorities Relevant packages

FOR31 Improved viability and well being of Scotland's rural communities. Particularly proposals that:

support the provision of buildings and facilities for local communities, where the need and demand has been clearly demonstrated

encourage communities to increase their capacity to sustain and promote economic development, e.g. through the ownership and development of small business space, involving the use of historic buildings, etc.

help communities to meet service needs identified through community planning

help communities to take over delivery of local services from existing public service providers, using community ownership or other forms of business models that encourage self sufficiency and sustainability

encourage social enterprise and community-led service provision, particularly where this assists in sustaining a key local service or facility.

36

36

EU: LEADEREU: LEADER

• 20 LAGS covering 95% rural Scotland

• Budget = 5% of SRDP = £38M

• Bottom-up method of delivering support for rural development through implementing a local rural development strategy.

• Capacity-building• Multi-partner (3 sectors)

37

So… rural services in Scotland…So… rural services in Scotland…

• We still have “hot spots” and “not spots”– Within Regional Priorities & LEADER:

• We see projects, but still within project lifecycle, competing for funds…

• 3 different administrative areas at same level

– With National Performance Framework:• beginning to see more emphasis on local, place-

based fitting into strategic plans and outcomes• Outcomes across Government Directorates

38

From these examples:From these examples:

• What are next steps for rural services policies? – Meaningful, workable partnerships, through

devolution within national framework– Diversity - integration – harness people’s

energy– Move from “spending” to “investment” (lengthen

the timeframe, be strategic, focus on outcomes rather than outputs)

• Align investment with strategic outcomes• Stability over time (as in Finnish policy)

39

OECD: Next steps? OECD: Next steps?

1. Supply of services should be designed to match characteristics and assets of different rural regions

2. Government should move from a logic of spending to a logic of investment

3. Effective and inclusive governance is key to rural service delivery

– Recognise change in role for top-level government– Facilitate knowledge-pooling and simplify decision-making

processes– Engage local communities and integrate local expectations– Mainstream rural proofing of sectoral policy

(OECD, 2008)

40