The characteristics of rural development programmes in peripheral regions

Abstract

Peripheral regions have gained once again a growing interest in academic discussions and development policy analyses. The optimal form of development policy interventions in these territorial units can lead to reducing of territorial disparities. Peripheral regions are vulnerable to the complexity of interventions, as they are characterised by deficiencies in several areas (human capacity linked to the ability to governance, the activity or initiative of local society, lack of internal financial and external development resources, etc.), which cannot be addressed by any development method. It is therefore particularly important for the development of peripheral regions that the instrument used should be able to respond to local needs, help to strengthen local governance capacity and contribute to a more efficient use of development resources. After the integration into the European Union, there have been several attempts in Hungary to intensify development policy interventions, especially in peripheral areas, with the aim of reducing territorial disparities between regions.

This paper contributes to the field of analysis of rural development programmes by studying intervention characteristics and available financial resources in Hungary. It examines features of the LEADER approach and spells out ways the complementary role of LEADER is being transformed into a gap-filling source of funding in peripheral regions. The study compares the resource absorption data of two programmes (LEADER and the Hungarian Village Programme) by territorial unit. The Hungarian Village Programme is a national resource for settlements with fewer than 5.000 inhabitants, focusing on four main areas: economic development, social cohesion, settlement planning and cultural heritage, and the implementation of smart technologies. The programme offers the possibility to apply for several target areas at the same time, with 100% public funding. In this way, municipalities could apply for several objectives that were not strictly necessary, but which could have a positive impact on the community. If we look at the characteristics of the Hungarian Village Programme at the national level, we can conclude that it does not differ from the territorial distribution of EU funds, neither in its trend nor in the development classification of the assisted areas.

Our research shows that all bottom-up programmes can be successful in deprived areas if the leaders of the municipalities are people with local embeddedness, who are known and trusted by the target group. Therefore, the results of the projects implemented have had a positive impact in the municipalities, significantly improving the quality of life of the inhabitants and making continuous work a part of they life. The success of the programmes required local knowledge, personal contacts, flexibility, responsiveness, and the right competences on the intervention side. A value-conscious and engaged local society is a cornerstone of bottom-up projects because a strong community means a robust settlement image. The key to the success of a bottom-up approach is the ability to engage, even down to the individual level, and to ensure participation in shaping the vision. The intensity of involvement is important both during the programming period and the development process. Our observations indicate that it is generally very strong during the planning period, while it is indirect (often representative) during the decision-making, implementation and monitoring phases, or in programme elements that are explicitly based on involvement (training, events, environmental programmes, etc.).