Abstract
In the most recent LEADER programming periods, there has been an important shift in rural development policy, from a purely sectorial, productivist approach to a more integrated, territorial one. In fact, rural development within the framework of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has become particularly important and effective throughout Europe, by taking on the huge but vital task of rediscovering the potential and capabilities of rural territories. Within the framework of the Common Agricultural Policy, rural development has played an increasingly significant role throughout Europe, by introducing methodological innovations, especially in governance and practices. In this way, it has rediscovered the potential and the capacity of rural areas, addressing problems that are common to many European regions such as depopulation, inadequate infrastructure and basic services and a lack of human and social capital crucial to stimulate innovation. From this perspective, it is important to identify particular local features and resources that can offer advantages for local development. However, major innovations in terms of policy, governance and skills are also required. Evidence from experiences across Europe indicates that the Common Agricultural Policy, through the LEADER approach, supports these goals and is trying to reduce regional inequalities. It seeks to solve contextual problems and acts as a laboratory for building local capacities and experimenting with new ways of meeting the needs of local communities under the neo-endogenous development approach. From this point of view, and assuming the role of agriculture over time, the territorial context plays a central, strategic role in rural development. Therefore, it is fundamental to understand the context in which these experiences take place and the point of view adopted to describe it. This chapter, based on the neo-endogenous approach, the reflections emerging from literary review and recent programming documents, aims to analyze the priority strategic objectives for sustainable development, the main territorial factors underlying it and potential successful experiences on a local scale in the Italian region of Apulia, an interesting case study for Italy due to the socioeconomic importance of agriculture in the region and the processes of transformations within the context of LEADER in recent years. Combining data and cartographic analysis, we will describe the main regional characteristics going on to identify by a preliminary analysis the structural problems and potential drivers of innovation, important factors that are concentrated in specific areas. This study will enable us to identify dynamics, emerging problems, policy recommendations and indications for regional development and the future of the CAP, focusing in particular on marginal rural areas.
This research was funded by APULIA REGION, POR PUGLIA FESR-FSE 2014/2020—European Social Fund approved with Decision C (2015) 5854 of 13/08/2015 “Research for Innovation (REFIN)”.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This is confirmed by the increasing dissemination of data, and the support for their creative and innovative application in strategic sectors such as agriculture, as in the case of the International Copernicus Observatory.
- 2.
From the data of farms, Utilized Agricultural Areas, Total Agricultural Areas in the last 5 agricultural censuses compared with the basic data of 1982 (see Istat, 2022a).
- 3.
The agricultural systems in Italy can be classified according to the dominant type of farm structure. Within this classification, six types of farm structure have been identified; five of these are dominated by farms of just one or two sizes (micro-small, medium-small, medium, medium-large, large), while the other, defined as “tabular”, shows a balanced mix of farms of all sizes (Grillotti Di Giacomo, 2000).
References
Asheim, B. T., & Gertler, M. S. (2006). The geography of innovation: Regional innovation systems. In J. Fagerberg & D. C. Mowery (Eds.), The oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 291–317). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286805.003.0011
Bissanti, A. (1977). La Puglia. In AA.VV., Capire l’Italia. I paesaggi umani (Vol. 1–Book, Section, pp. 166–179). TCI.
Bock, B. B. (2016). Rural marginalisation and the role of social innovation; A turn towards nexogenous development and rural reconnection. Sociologia Ruralis, 56(4), 552–573. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12119
Bosworth, G., Annibal, I., Carroll, T., Price, L., Sellick, J., & Shepherd, J. (2016). Empowering local action through neo-endogenous development; The case of LEADER in England. Sociologia Ruralis, 56(3), 427–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12089
Cejudo, E., & Labianca, M. (Eds.). (2017). Politiche di sviluppo rurale. Metodi, strategie ed esperienze internazionali a confronto. Wip Edizioni.
Cejudo, E., & Navarro, F. (Eds.). (2020). Neoendogenous development in European rural areas. Springer.
Commission, E. (2021). EU biodiversity strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2779/677548
Colamonico, C. (1926). La Geografia della Puglia. Profilo monografico regionale. Cressati.
Colamonico, C. (1939). La più antica Carta Regionale della Puglia. Cressati.
Colamonico, C. (1960). Memoria illustrativa della carta della utilizzazione del suolo della Puglia. CNR Roma.
Colamonico, C. (1970). La casa rurale nella Puglia. Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Vol. 28. Leo S. Olschki Editore.
Copus, A., Skuras, D., & Tsegenidi, K. (2008). Innovation and peripherality: An empirical comparative study of SMEs in six European union member countries. Economic Geography, 84(1), 51–82. JSTOR. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30033157
Dax, T., & Oedl-Wieser, T. (2016). Rural innovation activities as a means for changing development perspectives an assessment of more than two decades of promoting LEADER initiatives across the European Union. Studies in Agricultural Economics, 118, 30–37. https://doi.org/10.7896/j.1535
Dipartimento per lo Sviluppo e la Coesione Economica. (2014). Strategia Nazionale per le Aree Interne: Definizione, obiettivi, strumenti e governance. Materiali UVAL (No. 31). https://www.agenziacoesione.gov.it/strategia-nazionale-aree-interne/documentazione/
ESPON. (2010). EDORA—European development opportunities for rural areas. Applied Research Project 2013/1/2.
ESPON. (2017). PROFECY—processes, features and cycles of inner peripheries in Europe. https://www.espon.eu
ESPON. (2020). ESCAPE European shrinking rural areas: Challenges, actions and perspectives for territorial governance. https://www.espon.eu
ESPON. (2022). Entrepreneurial regional governance: Societal innovation beyond spatial frontiers. Policy paper. https://www.espon.eu
European Commission. (2017). Comunicazione della Commissione al Parlamento Europeo, al Consiglio, al Comitato Economico e Sociale Europeo e al Comitato delle Regioni. Il futuro dell’alimentazione e dell’agricoltura (COM/2019/640 final). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/IT/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52019DC0640
European Commission. (2018). Regolamento (UE) 2021/2115 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio del 2 dicembre 2021 recante norme sul sostegno ai piani strategici che gli Stati membri devono redigere nell’ambito della politica agricola comune (piani strategici della PAC) e finanziati dal Fondo europeo agricolo di garanzia (FEAGA) e dal Fondo europeo agricolo per lo sviluppo rurale (FEASR) e che abroga i regolamenti (UE) n. 1305/2013 e (UE) n. 1307/2013. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115/oj
European Commission. (2019a). Building stronger agricultural knowledge and innovation systems (AKIS) to foster advice, knowledge and innovation in agriculture and rural areas. https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2019-04/building-stronger-akis_en_0.pdf
European Commission. (2019b). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social committee and the Committee of the Region. The European Green Deal. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex:52019DC0640
European Commission. (2019c). The post-2020. Common agricultural policy: Environmental benefits and simplification. https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-01/cap-post-2020-environ-benefits-simplification_en_0.pdf
European Commission. (2020). Commission staff working document. Analysis of links between CAP Reform and Green Deal (SWD 2020 93). https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2020-05/analysis-of-links-between-cap-and-green-deal_en_0.pdf
Fløysand, A., & Jakobsen, S.-E. (2011). The complexity of innovation: A relational turn. Progress in Human Geography, 35(3), 328–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132510376257
García-Cortijo, M. C., Castillo-Valero, J. S., & Carrasco, I. (2019). Innovation in rural Spain. What drives innovation in the rural-peripheral areas of southern Europe? Journal of Rural Studies, 71, 114–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.02.027
Gkartzios, M., & Scott, M. (2014). Placing housing in rural development: Exogenous, endogenous and neo-endogenous approaches. Sociologia Ruralis, 54(3), 241–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12030
Grillotti Di Giacomo, M. G., & De Felice, P. (2021). In attesa dei risultati dell’ultimo Censimento generale dell’agricoltura. Come utilizzare i dati aderendo alla realtà territoriale: Riflessioni di metodo. Rivista Geografica Italiana—Open Access, 3. https://doi.org/10.3280/rgioa3-2021oa12538
Grillotti Di Giacomo, M. G. (2000). Atlante tematico dell’agricoltura italiana. Società Geografica Italiana.
Istat. (2022a). 7° Censimento generale dell’agricoltura: Integrazione dei primi risultati. Tavole. Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. https://www.istat.it/it/archivio/273753
Istat. (2022b). 7° Censimento generale dell’agricoltura. Primi risultati. Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. https://www.istat.it/it/archivio/272404
Labianca, M. (2016). From technological to social innovation: Objectives, actors, and projects of the European rural development program (2007–2013) in the Puglia region. Norois, 241, 49–65. https://doi.org/10.4000/norois.5999
Labianca, M. (2022). Towards the new common agricultural policy for biodiversity: Custodian farmers for sustainable agricultural practices in the Apulia region (South of Italy). Belgeo, 4, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.4000/belgeo.5711
Labianca, M., & Navarro Valverde, F. (2019). Depopulation and aging in rural areas in the European Union: Practices starting from the LEADER approach. In E. Cejudo & F. Navarro (Eds.), Despoblación y transformaciones sociodemográficas de los territorios rurales: Los casos de España, Italia y Francia (pp. 223–252). SIBA, University of Salento.
Labianca, M., De Rubertis, S., Belliggiano, A., & Salento, A. (2016). Innovation in rural development in Puglia, Italy: Critical issues and potentialities starting from empirical evidence. Studies in Agricultural Economics, 1316–2016–102852, 9. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.234968
Labianca, M., De Rubertis, S., Belliggiano, A., Salento, A., & Navarro, F. (2020). Social innovation, territorial capital and LEADER experiences in Andalusia (Spain) and in Molise (Italy) (pp. 111–131). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33463-5_6
Labianca, M. (2017). LEADER: attuazione, valutazione e governance in alcune esperienze europee nella programmazione 2007–2013. In E. Cejudo & M. Labianca (Eds.), Politiche di sviluppo rurale. Metodi, strategie ed esperienze internazionali a confronto (pp. 51–76). Wip Edizioni.
Labianca, M. (2021). Towards a visionary approach for rural areas. From the key features to planning the future of LEADER. SIBA, University of Salento. https://doi.org/10.1285/i26113775n5
Maccallum, D., Moulaert, F., Hillier, J., & Vicari, S. (2009). Social innovation and territorial development. Ashgate.
Moulaert, F., Martinelli, F., Swyngedouw, E., & González, S. (2005). Towards alternative model(s) of local innovation. Urban Studies, 42(11), 1969–1990. JSTOR. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43197218
Ray, C. (2001). Culture economies: A perspective on local rural development in Europe. Newcastle University.
Ray, C. (2006). Neo-endogenous rural development in the EU. The Handbook of Rural Studies, 1, 278–291. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608016
Riggio, A., & Varraso, I. (Eds.) (2016). Common agricultural policy role and value in a changing world. Food—Agriculture—Environment as key factors in order to get through the current global economic crisis. Geotema, 52. https://www.ageiweb.it/geotema/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/GEOTEMA_52.pdf
Toschi, U. (1952). Tipi di paesaggi e paesaggi tipici in Puglia e in Emilia. Istituto di Geografia della Università degli Studi di Bari. Memorie N. 15. Officine Grafiche Principato.
Unioncamere. (2021). Cruscotto di indicatori statistici. Progetto SISPRINT. Dati nazionali.
Acknowledgements
This work has been supported by the project “Successes and failures in the practice of neo-endogenous rural development in the European Union (1991–2014). RURALWIN” funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness within its Excellence Programme, CSO2014-56 223-P. The work has been developed within the project REFIN—Research for Innovation of the Puglia Region 2020–2023 (UNIFG513-CUP D74I19003340002), held at the Department of Economics, University of Foggia.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Labianca, M. (2024). The Role of Local Factors in the Spatial Concentrations for Rural Development. An Application in the Apulia Region (Italy). In: Cejudo-García, E., Navarro-Valverde, F.A., Cañete-Pérez, J.A. (eds) Win or Lose in Rural Development. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48675-3_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48675-3_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-48674-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-48675-3
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)