An Initiators' Perspective on the Continuity of Citizens' Initiatives in Rural Areas

Abstract

Against the backdrop of depopulation and the shift toward Big Society, citizens' initiatives in rural areas are believed to be able to mitigate the decline of service provision in rural regions. Consequently, this mitigation requires the continuity of such initiatives. However, so far, we lack an initiators' perspective on the relevance of this continuity and the factors influencing it. From a theoretical standpoint, continuity of citizens' initiatives can be understood at three levels: the participant, group, and initiative levels. Based on empirical data obtained from 157 questionnaires distributed to a variety of initiatives, and using regression analysis, the focus of this paper is twofold. First, how and at which level the initiators understand continuity of an initiative is considered. Second, factors influencing the expected continuity of an initiative are researched. The results reveal that continuity differs from merely being successful and is influenced by other factors as well. Furthermore, continuity on the initiative level—the realization of a certain goal—is most prominent in analyzing expected continuity. In conclusion, we explore the roles that citizens' initiatives can be expected to play in service provision and which levels of continuity align with these expectations.

Rural Geography Revisited: Op zoek naar de geografie in het platteland

“…Die inzet van inwoners is essentieel in de hedendaagse variant van de welvaartstaat, waarin de overheid een deel van haar taken heeft uitbesteed aan inwoners die geacht worden de boel draaiende te houden via burgerparticipatie en burgerinitiatieven. Uit onderzoek weten we dat niet iedereen mee wil of kan doen in de participatiesamenleving (Lengerer et al, 2022;Meerstra-de Haan et al, 2020;Ubels et al, 2020) en zolang het vrijwillig is moet niet-participeren natuurlijk gewoon kunnen. Het onderzoek van Joost Gieling (Gieling et al, 2019) heeft aangetoond dat mensen soms selectief participeren, afhankelijk van hun type plaatsverbondenheid, elective en selective belonging.…”

Digitalization and Social Innovation in Rural Areas: A Case Study from Indonesia*

“…We argue that using this categorization and aggregation will help determine the magnitude of the strength of "social energy", that is, the power of agents in carrying out movements for change and community empowerment, as well as shifting power towards other agents (Faucher 2010). We can expect that the stronger the motivation to participate is, the higher the level of commitment and intention to be involved in collective action is (Meerstra-de Haan et al 2020). Both top-down and bottom-up initiatives can stimulate rural social innovation, although some believe that top-down initiatives are less effective at stimulating innovative practices among rural communities (Martens et al 2020;Neumeier 2017).…”

Rural dynamics and sustainable development in Russia with particular reference to the Stavropol territory

“…Consequently, this situation encourages the migration of the rural population, particularly those of working age, thereby exacerbating the aging of the rural population and contributing to increased social isolation. In this context, the challenge of maintaining essential public services, such as health, education, and transportation, intensifies and becomes less effective (Meerstra-de Haan et al, 2020;Supule, 2020). Furthermore, the adverse impacts of climate change trigger migration due to unfavorable living and working conditions (Igić et al, 2020), thus perpetuating a vicious cycle between environmental issues and migration.…”