Are stakeholders ready for CLLD? Case study Nitra 2015 International Master in Rural Development 1.
-
Upload
buddy-parsons -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
1
Transcript of Are stakeholders ready for CLLD? Case study Nitra 2015 International Master in Rural Development 1.
Are stakeholders ready for CLLD?
Case study Nitra 2015International Master in Rural Development
1
OUTLINE
1. Introduction
2. Attendance statistics
3. Key success factors
4. Evaluation tools
5. Findings from the field research
6. SWOT analysis
7. Conclusions and recommendations2
INTRODUCTION
Nassim
Kazusa
Maria
Matteo
Kamrul
Gabriel
Emily
Tyler Enrique Katarina
3
4
ATTENDANCE STATISTICS
● Three interviews covering:1. Management Authority 2. Paying Agency3. Nitra Region Administration
● 7 LAGs● 78 people together
5
ATTENDANCE STATISTICS
6
Nu
mb
er o
f p
eop
le
Framework of finding key factors
Leader
Preparation for LAGs/LDS
Implementation of LDS
Monitoring and Evaluation
Bottom-up
Public-private
partnership
Area-based
Multi-sectorial design
Innovative approach
Networking
Cooperation
Seven Principles
Key success factors - National level
Principle Key factors
Bottom up Training actions and promotion of linkages among local stakeholders.
Public-private partnership
High transparency and clarity in rules and governance
Area based Evaluation and diffusion of multiplier effect, side effect, long term effect for development of the area
Multi-sectorial design Wider range of measures for a higher number of beneficiaries from different sectors
Innovative approach Transfer of good practices (workshops, database…)
Networking of local partnership
Prioritization of strategies that are already involved in networks/coop. projects
Cooperation projects Promotion of conditions for transnational projects
Principle Key factors
Bottom-up Ensuring the open access to all stakeholders
Key success factors - LAG level
Public-private partnership
Emphasaizing networking across private & public sector
Area based Selectting projects which promote regional identity and higher use of local resources
Multi-sectorial Attracting and involving all the sectors in the decision-making process and implementation
Innovative approaches
Ensuring that projects include the factor which is new in the territory
Networking of local partnership
Facilitating interaction between different institutional levels horizontally and vertically
Cooperation projects
Ensuring that knowledge is transferred with other interregional and international LAGs
EVALUATION TOOLS
Interviews
Followed by an Analytical Method
Qualitative data collection
Questions under 3 sections1. LAG preparation,
selection and contracting 2. LDS implementation3. Monitoring and Evaluation
Focus groups
Participatory approach to collect data from different stakeholders gathered
Questions under 3 sections1. LAG development2. Development and
implemention of LDS3. Self-assessment and
Evaluation
10
FINDINGS - INTERVIEWS
- Networking as buzzword for the Capacity Building. What about the NRN?
- Participatory Approach for desiging the call for proposal. Is it well organised?
- Selecting LAGs. What are the Critical Factors?
- Supporting the implementation of the LDS. Is money everything?
- Evaluation system. How can we use it better?
Average “Perceived” degree of readiness for CLLD in Slovakia? → 7
11
FINDINGS – FOCUS GROUPS
● Bottom-up and area-based: Local stakeholders initiated LDS to form LAG in the local territory.
● Partnership: Mayors, NGOs, schools, entrepreneurs, farmers and other stakeholders formed LAG with partnership.
● Multi-secotoral: Projects like agro-tourism, agricultural diversification combine multiple sectors such as health, education, economic and cultural sectors.
12
FINDINGS – FOCUS GROUPS
● Innovation: New projects (outdoor gym, museum) have been introduced in the area.
● Networking: Knowledge exchange has been enhanced through interaction among managing authority, paying agency, LAGs and other stakeholders.
● Cooperation: Projects related to heritage and agro-tourism have brought together different national and transnational partners.
13
Strengths Weaknesses
LEADER Principle: Area Based
• Prioritize LDSs that have higher geographical impact (e.g. regional level)
• Lack of influence on the Public Procurement Legislation (cross sectional)
• Deficient formal evaluation to determine regional impact
LEADER Principle: Cooperation
• Financial support to LAGs for cooperation projects (move to weakness or opportunity)
• Lack of strategic vision for supporting TNC
• Language barrier (don’t speak languages other than Slovak)
LEADER Principle: Bottom Up
• Support for Training/workshops to educate LAGs (build capacity; MA and RA)
• Designing of call of proposal are mainly done top down
• Lack of control for supporting tools for capacity building (training/workshop)
• Perception of LAGs: information and knowledge transfer is not sufficient
LEADER Principle: Networking
• Lack of human capital
• Low involvement of the NRN
• Lack of communication (between 3 agencies: MA, PA, and RA)
LEADER Principle: Public Private Partnership
• No evidence of interest in offering tools for attracting collective/individual private investors
• Complexity of bureaucracy, high administrative burden and delay in payment, discouraging private investors
LEADER Principle: Innovation
• No evidence of encouragement of a strong coordination and connectivity among different organizations (University, Farm Advisory Group, Research Center, etc.) (cross-cutting)
LEADER Principle: Multi-sectoral strategies
• LAG/LDS selection criteria includes the LAG’s orientation of non-public sector
• Integration of Regional Policy for tourism/regional brand with the LEADER program
National Level SWOT Analysis
Opportunities
Threats
LEADER Principle: Area Based
• Use of formal evaluation (including the participatory approach) and self-assessment to determine regional impacts
• Selection of LAGs based on unique and strategic natural resources
• Distribution of funds is not dependent upon the number of participants/beneficiaries in a LAG
LEADER Principle: Innovation
• European Innovation Partnership linkage to foster innovation at LAG level
• Uneven distribution of authorities and institutional organization between the regions.
LEADER Principle: Cooperation
• New measures that allow diverse types of regional cooperation
LEADER Principle: Networking
• Overall improvement of NRN (activities, engagement and networking)
• Higher amount of resources allocated to this measure
LEADER Principle: Multi-sectoral strategies
• Favoring the selection of LDS with a high degree of multi-sectoral LOCAL cooperation
• Wider range of measures that increase job opportunities in several sectors
LEADER Principle: Public Private Partnership
• Wider range of measures that allow more non-governmental participation
• High acknowledgement of new market opportunities (eco-tourism) from the LAGs
• Improving the access to funds
• Public procurement legislation (cross-cutting)
LEADER Principle: Bottom Up
• Higher participation of pro-active and experienced LAGs in the design and implementation of the program
• Unexpected changes in requirements of National legislation
• Public procurement legislation (cross-cutting)
LAG Level SWOT Analysis
Strengths Weaknesses
LEADER Principle: Area Based
• High use of local resources (natural beauty of territory; historical/cultural heritage)
• Existence of micro-regions
• Large number of small municipalities
LEADER Principle: Bottom Up
• Enthusiasm and development of possibilities - better future for communities - motivation
• High awareness among stakeholders; farmer initiatives
• Increased participation of beneficiaries and volunteers - mobilization - cooperation
• Working groups didn’t include all inhabitants
• People not interested in public affairs - hard to get feedback
LEADER Principle: Public-Private Partnership
• Ability to reach compromise and consensus in the community (common vision)
• Partnerships strengthened in region as compared to in the past
• Dominant position of mayors
LEADER Principle: Multi-Sectoral Strategies
• Common project among multi-sectoral stakeholders
• Increased experience in agri-tourism
LEADER Principle: Networking
• Mutual exchange of information between LAGs
• Lack of communication between stakeholders and managers extend the time to reach a consensus
LEADER Principle: Cooperation
• Trust among LAG members
• Development of cooperation and partnerships; exchange of knowledge (with international partners)
• Cooperation between experienced and new LAGs
LEADER Principle: Innovation
• Innovative services and products• E.g. Passport
stamps and wool mill
LAG Level SWOT Analysis
Opportunities
Threats
LEADER Principle: Area Based
• Local branding• Preserving historical
and cultural traditions• Extension of territory
- more territory• More experience in
local development and feeling of identity of local people - cultural and local
LEADER Principle: Bottom Up
• Community leaders• More proactive
involvement of local stakeholder
• Bureaucracy• Administration
problem - changing of rules, procedure
LEADER Principle: Public-Private Partnership
• Enhanced private-public partnership
• Lack of interest of public sectors
LEADER Principle: Multi-Sectoral Strategies
• Wider range of measures to be implemented via LDS
• Lack of diversity of multi-sectoral projects
• Lack of financial resources
LEADER Principle: Networking
• Broader contacts with experts in the field• Visit other LAGs• External
consultants• Potential increase in
social capacity
• Competitiveness among different LAGs and difficulty to conduct the strong lobbying
LEADER Principle: Cooperation
• International cooperation
• Paying agency - time lapse of money, recalling payment, difficulty to collect decent amount of money at the initial stage
• Low sustainability of projects - difficulty to keep running
LEADER Principle: Innovation
• Problematic public procurement - competition
• Compliance to the strict rules of public procurement
LAG Level SWOT Analysis
CONCLUSIONS: Area-Based Are stakeholders ready for CLLD in Slovakia?
Key Findings
Strong regional promotion of brands and
services
Complex public
procurement requirements
Conclusions
Recognition of unique
regional factors
Restrictive requirements
RecommendationsBetter
marketing – country-wide
Less restrictions for
smaller projects
Improvement of quality of
life
CONCLUSIONS: Bottom-up Are stakeholders ready for CLLD in Slovakia?
Key Findings
Existing training and
support systems
Trust and reciprocity
Conclusions Supportive training exists
LAGs are accomplishing
projects
RecommendationsBetter tailored
support
Continue to increase regional
involvement
CONCLUSIONS: Partnership Are stakeholders ready for CLLD in Slovakia?
Key FindingsDisillusioned
private sector
ConclusionsBelief that
funds are for public sector
Funds directed to
involved LAG members
RecommendationsOrganization of
collective private investors
Foster entrepreneurship
and private investment
Project bias towards
public sector
Minority groups are
not represented
Include minority
groups in the LAG
CONCLUSIONS: Multi-Sectorial Are stakeholders ready for CLLD in Slovakia?
Key Findings
High potential to promote multi-sector
projects
Conclusions Priority – but not effective
Allowance for wider range of measures
Recommendations
Improvement of integration between policies
Activities aimed at transferring of knowledge
and experience
CONCLUSIONS: Innovation Are stakeholders ready for CLLD in Slovakia?
Key Findings
Uneven distribution of organizations
among regions
High level of social and
cultural capital
Conclusions
Disconnect between
extension, research, and stakeholders
Recommendations
Participate in networks
fostering new ideas and new
innovation
CONCLUSIONS: Networking Are stakeholders ready for CLLD in Slovakia?
Key Findings
Weak connection
and inclusiveness
Conclusions
Strong networks within the
LAG
NRN not meeting needs
Recommendations
Improvement of
effectiveness of the NRN
Peer-to-peer evaluations
LAGs creating own
network
LAG Lobby Body
CONCLUSIONS: Cooperation Are stakeholders ready for CLLD in Slovakia?
Key FindingsBinding
competitive nature
Region-focused
Conclusions
LAGs ‘competing’ instead of
cooperating
Concern with own region
and not bigger picture
Recommendations
Collective action to
tackle main problems
Promote multi-level
governance
CONCLUSIONS
Are stakeholders ready for CLLD in Slovakia?
YES!
26