Who Decides and Who Invests? The Role of the Public, Private and Third Sectors in Rural Development according to Geographical Contexts: The LEADER Approach in Andalusia, 2007–2015

Abstract

In general, the LEADER programme has had a positive impact, although it has also negative aspects. In this paper, we analyse the role of the three main stakeholders (public sector, private sector and third sector) within the LEADER local action groups (LAGs) in the decision-making process and final execution of the projects, to discover whether there is any relation between those taking the decisions and those carrying out the projects, according to the degree of rurality of the different areas. Our primary source was the files for all the successfully implemented LEADER projects in Andalusia between 2007 and 2015. Relevant findings are: although the public sector plays a leading role in the LAGs and in the decision-making process, most of the projects, as measured by total investment, are carried out by the private sector; the degree of rurality is an important factor, in that private sector investors tend to invest in peri-urban spaces, while public bodies, and especially local councils, invest in remote rural areas. The LAGs play a strategic role, in terms of making up for the almost negligible input from the third sector.

Diagnosis of Rural Development Processes Based on the Stock of Social Capital and Social Networks: Approach from E-I Index

“…As has been seen in the E-I index study, the comarcas or sub-areas in which the LEADER area disaggregates, have a larger number of relevant actors, are more cohesive, but with endogamic relationships. This idea coincides with those of researchers who recognise that in those areas where political elites or lobbies act, there is a greater rural investment, while where there is an absence of SC, there is a lack of fund-raising [14,18]. It is therefore important to have a socially and territorially equitable division of the stock of SC, to avoid a disconnection and dislocation of rural territories.…”

“…SC can be understood as a requirement and/or as an outcome, which is not contradictory [45]. LEADER has fostered the SC from institutions or structures, such as Local Action Groups (LAGs), through participation and relationship building [18]. However, within this dark side of the SC, LEADER has been understood by a few as a tool at the service of elites, lobbies or clientelism [18], and even participation in the LAGs has generated a project class that is not very numerous [13], where access to and control of certain information is understood as power and, consequently, certain social groups are marginalised by not being able to access this information [46].…”

“…LEADER has fostered the SC from institutions or structures, such as Local Action Groups (LAGs), through participation and relationship building [18]. However, within this dark side of the SC, LEADER has been understood by a few as a tool at the service of elites, lobbies or clientelism [18], and even participation in the LAGs has generated a project class that is not very numerous [13], where access to and control of certain information is understood as power and, consequently, certain social groups are marginalised by not being able to access this information [46]. In order to understand the relationship between the concepts of SC and rural development, these have been studied and linked to the concepts of embeddedness and autonomy or the micro and macro levels [20,47].…”

“…Finally, after more than 30 years of implementation of the LEADER programme in European rural areas, it has had a very positive impact in terms of participation, endogenous development, democracy, and decentralisation [18,52]. However, there have also been negative aspects of the programme, such as participation, which has been more formal than real [53], the increase in bureaucratisation, the scarcity of funds or less attention from regional governments, together with the aforementioned tool of power and clientelistic networks, which has meant that the LEADER methodology is beginning to be perceived as rigid and poorly adapted to the requirements and needs of rural areas [14].…”

“…To combat social, economic and territorial problems, it is necessary to understand the role that European and national institutions have played in tackling, halting and changing demographic trends in these areas. The European Union (EU) has been applying the LEADER (Liaisons Entre Actions de Développement de L'Economie Rurale) working methodology for more than 30 years, first as a Community Initiative and then as part of Rural Development programmes based on three parts: strategy, territory and partnership Land 2023, 12, 850 2 of 28 with a bottom-up approach [17,18]. However, in none of the LEADER legislative documents is the SC directly mentioned.…”