Social innovation in rural governance: A comparative case study across the marginalised rural EU

Chatzichristos, Georgios; Hennebry, Barraí

doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.06.004

Cited by 31 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Through their relations and projects, community‐based social enterprises engage in public and community, therefore, political, discussions that affect the development of their rural localities. The role played by the community‐based social enterprises in this study as actors supporting the institutionalisation (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006) of a plural economy within their rural areas stresses the public and political dimension of these organisations (Laville et al., 2006), thus their active participation and relevance in the governance of rural areas (Chatzichristos & Hennebry, 2023).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Support structures for a plural economy in rural areas? Analysing the role of community‐based social enterprises

Olmedo,

Rinne‐Koski,

O'Shaughnessy

et al. 2023

Sociologia Ruralis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community‐led innovative solutions, including community‐based social enterprises, have been brought to the fore as significant actors with the potential to contribute to neo‐endogenous rural development. Through 34 interviews with stakeholders of four community‐based social enterprises operating in rural Ireland and Finland, we analyse the role of these organisations in the institutionalisation of plural (socio‐)economic relations within different rural areas of Europe. Our findings demonstrate how community‐based social enterprises can act as enablers and supporters of local markets, channels of redistributive resources and coordinators of local reciprocity, thus, contributing to ‘institutional thickness’ within their localities. We also show how structural differences, such as the role of local government in Finland and Ireland, can partially explain the role of these organisations as rural development actors. Finally, our article stresses the relevance of developing research and policies from a socially embedded and pluralistic view of the economy to provide nuanced analysis and realistic solutions to the complex challenges that rural areas face.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Support structures for a plural economy in rural areas? Analysing the role of community‐based social enterprises

Olmedo,

Rinne‐Koski,

O'Shaughnessy

et al. 2023

Sociologia Ruralis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This differentiated approach to rural village governance is also widely used in other countries' rural governance. As Chatzichristos and Hennebry (2023) suggest in their study that cohesive communities provide an enabling environment for innovative governance in marginalized rural areas, it is then possible to use local action groups as leaders responsible for defining and ensuring the implementation of rural development strategies. Merrell (2022), on the other hand, argues that blockchain technology has the potential to be a new innovative mechanism for the development and governance of decentralized rural communities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do socioeconomic differentiation and rural governance affect households' land transfer decisions? Evidence from China

Liu,

Wang,

Yang

et al. 2023

Land Degrad Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In rural areas, social and economic differentiation profoundly impact rural development patterns, which, in return, impacts rural village social and economic structures and the land transfer decisions of rural households residing within the village. Research on agricultural land transfer has rarely been discussed under the lens of the differentiated socioeconomic structure of rural villages, as well as rural governance capacities. This paper contributes to the existing body of research on the determinants of rural land transfer by examining the role of village socioeconomic differentiation and rural governance based on a quantitative analysis of factors at different scales. The results show that: (1) compared with clan‐based unity structure, kinship‐based split structure and dispersed structure have a positive effect on household land out‐transfer and a negative effect on land in‐transfer. (2) The homogeneity of residents had a negative impact on out‐transfer, while the financial revenue of the village had significant positive influences on households' out‐transfer. (3) The higher the trust in cadres and the evaluation of the local government, the greater the tendency of households to transfer land in, but none of this effect is significant. (4) The socialized agricultural services and the share of non‐farm have significant effects on land transfer. Moreover, households with better geographical conditions, such as those near the county capital and towns, are more likely to transfer their land out. These findings offer significant insights for the management of agricultural scale and the revitalization of rural areas in China, while also offering valuable ideas for the implementation of differentiated agricultural control and rural governance policies in other countries.

show abstract

“…Over the last decade, the idea of social innovation has been used to help throw light on complex processes of socioeconomic and spatial restructuring that have emerged at multiple levels in developed Western economies, especially as responses to the challenges confronting marginalised rural areas [1]. Social innovation has been articulated as a potential mechanism to advance sustainable development outcomes [2]; some even conceive of it as capable of ushering in potentially transformative changes towards sustainability [3], whereas others see it as capable of delivering more locally based outcomes in response to failure in the delivery of basic services by the state or markets [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Innovation: The Promise and the Reality in Marginalised Rural Areas in Europe

Slee

Lukesch²,

Ravazzoli

2022

World

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we explore the idea of social innovation as both a conceptual and practical means of delivering positive social, economic and environmental outcomes in marginal rural areas. Definitions are critically appraised, and the dual contemporary origins of the term social innovation (in management sciences and critical social science) are explored. There has been much conceptual confusion, in particular about the extent to which civil society agency is central or desirable in social innovation. Social innovation can be seen to be closely connected to a range of theories that inform both innovation and rural development, but it lacks a singular theoretical “home”. Social innovation can also have a dark side, which merits scrutiny. Three case studies illustrate social innovation processes and outcomes in different parts of Europe. Where committed actors, local enabling agency and overarching policies align, the outcomes of social innovations can be considerable. If rarely transformational, social innovation has shown itself capable of delivering positive socioeconomic and environmental outcomes in more bounded spatial settings. It seems questionable whether social innovation will survive as an organising and capacity-building concept alongside more established principles, such as community-led local development, which, although not exactly social innovation, is very similar and already firmly embedded in policy guidance or whether it will be replaced by new equally fuzzy ideas, such as the smart village approach.

show abstract

Social innovation in rural governance: A comparative case study across the marginalised rural EU

Cited by 31 publications

References 32 publications

Support structures for a plural economy in rural areas? Analysing the role of community‐based social enterprises

Support structures for a plural economy in rural areas? Analysing the role of community‐based social enterprises

How do socioeconomic differentiation and rural governance affect households' land transfer decisions? Evidence from China

Social Innovation: The Promise and the Reality in Marginalised Rural Areas in Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About