The Nature of Rural Development:

Towards a Sustainable Integrated Rural Policy in Europe

Raimund Rodewald in collaboration wth Peter Knoepfel

Actors, Institutions andAttitudes to Rural Development:

The Swiss National Report

Res

earc

h R

epor

t to

the

Wor

ld-W

ide

Fun

d fo

r N

atur

e an

d th

e S

tatu

tory

Cou

ntry

side

Ag

en

cie

s o

f Gre

at B

rita

in

Inst

itut d

e H

aute

s E

tude

s en

Adm

inis

trat

ion

Pub

lique

(id

heap

)

December 2000

Contents

Introduction 2

1. Rural Switzerland 51.1. How land use in Switzerland has changed 51.2. Definition of Rural Areas 72. The Institutional and Political Environment 92.1. The main actors and their role in the rural areas 9

2.1.1. Federal authorities 92.1.2. National public-law institutions 102.1.3. Independent state companies and federal public limited

companies 102.1.4. National private-law institutions 102.1.5. Cantonal, regional and local authority bodies and institutions 10

2.2. The main programmes and policies for rural areas 112.2.1. Regional policy in the strict sense 112.2.2. Federal agricultural policy 172.2.3. Other federal laws and policies with implications for rural areas 172.2.4. The inter-policy problems 19

3. Overview of the Actors and their Relationships in Rural Areas 214. Analysis of the Current Situation in Rural Areas 224.1. Methods and approach 224.2. Rural areas - more than a question of definition 224.3. The difficulties facing rural areas and actor constellations 234.4. Who decides what happens in rural areas? 295. The Challenges Facing Sustainable Rural Development 335.1. The main challenges facing rural areas in the present and future 335.2. The concept and aims of sustainable rural development 356. On the Road to Sustainable Rural Development 386.1. Summary of the strengths and weaknesses of Swiss regional policy 386.2. Regional policy in Switzerland today and potential improvements with respect to

sustainability 406.3. From the mountain regions policy to a comprehensive regional policy 447. Results of the Workshop of 19 September 2000 46References 48Annex 1: The Main Actors and their Roles in Rural Areas 50Annex 2: Other Federal Laws with Implications for Rural Areas (from Chapter 2) 62Annex 3: List of interviewees 67Annex 4: Questionnaire 68Annex 5: Translations of the Names of the Authorities, Organisations, Laws and Acronyms

referred to in the Text 70

1

Professor Peter KnoepfelIDHEAPRoute de la Maladiere 211022 Chavannes-pres-RenensUniversity of LausanneSwitzerland

Tel: (+41) 21 694 06 40Fax: (+41) 21 694 0609E-mail: peter.knoepfel@idheap.unil.ch

Raimund RodewaldSwiss Foundation for Protection of the LandscapeHirschengraben 11CH-3011 BernSwitzerland

Tel. (+41) 31 312 20 01Fax (+41) 31 312 57 81E-mail: r.rodewald@sl-fp.ch

2

IntroductionAgainst the background of the new European Union policy in the area of ruraldevelopment, in spring 2000, the WWF International launched a research project involvingten countries and aimed at defining principles for sustainable development policy for ruralareas.

WWF International describes the background, object and method of this project “Thenature of rural development: towards a sustainable integrated rural policy in Europe – acollaborative action-research project for the Worldwilde Fund for Nature (WWF)” asfollows:

BackgroundThe 1990s saw a series of incremental steps to reform rural and agricultural policiesin Europe, including changes to the Common Agricultural Policy and the StructuralFunds of the European Union (EU). However, there remain widespread concernsabout the limited scope of policy reform and the continued difficulties in resolving theserious economic, social and environmental problems experienced in Europe’s ruralareas. Further reforms are inevitable in the coming years, particularly givenpressures from world trade negotiations and from the changing relationshipsbetween Central and Eastern European countries and the EU. There is therefore anurgent need to develop new ways of promoting sustainable rural development inEurope that meets social, economic and environmental objectives in an integratedway.

The Research ProjectTo meet this challenge, WWF has commissioned a major research project called‘The Nature of Rural Development’ to run over a 3-year period. The Project isorganised in three parts. First, a Scoping Phase (‘Actors and Institutions’) isunderway from May – December 2000 to map and analyse the institutionalstructures and different understandings of rural development issues. Second,Phase I (‘Learning from Examples’) will be carried out during 2001 to developdetailed local case studies of rural development in order to identify the ingredientsof, and constraints upon, success. Finally, Phase II (‘Shaping Future PoliciesTogether’) will develop working recommendations for the promotion of sustainablerural development in Europe.

The Scoping Phase of the project involves a consortium of researchers in 10participating countries. These are: Austria; France; Germany; Hungary; Latvia;Poland; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; UK. The Scoping Phase is being co-ordinatedby David Baldock and Janet Dwyer (Institute for European Environmental Policy[IEEP], London) with Philip Lowe and Neil Ward, Centre for Rural Economy [CRE],University of Newcastle upon Tyne).

MethodologyIn each participating country, a national researcher is working with a WWF nationalofficer to identify the main organisations and institutions with an interest in ruraldevelopment issues. Key actors are being interviewed using semi-structuredpersonal interviews and telephone interviews during May, June & July 2000.

A national workshop will be held in each participating country in September 2000.At the workshops, a draft national report of research findings will be discussed

3

amongst a grouping of the key national actors involved in rural development issues.

IEEP and CRE will produce a comparative report, which analyses the over-archingfindings from the 10 participating countries, and compares and contrasts the variousinstitutional structures and attitudes towards rural development issues. Thecomparative report will form the basis of a major seminar in Brussels in November2000.”

In Switzerland, this project is being carried out by the Research and Instruction Unit:Public Policy/Environment at the IDHEAP (Director: Professor Dr Peter Knoepfel). Ourcountry represents something of an exception in that it has never had a specific policy forrural areas and will not be obliged to develop one in the future under the new EU policy.The IDHEAP made the following observations on this in an introductory text:

The term “rural development” does not really exist in Swiss federal and cantonalpolicies. Normally, we use the term of “regional economic development policies”(“regionale Wirtschaftspolitik”, Regionalpolitik). Under this (rather narrow) policy wefind all kinds of federal and cantonal grants/subsidies for State run publicinfrastructure and private economic activities (in the field of agriculture, forestry,tourism, the foundation of new small enterprises, etc.). But this is rather aneconomic development policy which certainly has environmental impacts which arestudied, today, mainly within the frame of local agenda programs (slightly granted bythe federal office of the environment, forests and landscape). When enlarging thescope of observation into the direction of policies which in some way affect the ruralenvironmental quality we certainly must add the fo llowing public policies run by thefederal State:

• agriculture policy (direct payments limited to ecologically sound agriculture likeintegrated production or biological production in the field of animal and vegetalagriculture);

• forestry policies (recently reoriented towards ecologically sound forestry);

• all kinds of infrastructural supply policies, such as national highwayconstruction, high voltage electricity lines, airports, hydroelectric power plants,railways, large touristic infrastructural facilities, such as golf-links, skiingequipment, open air sports activities, etc.);

• transportation policies;

• tourism policies (mainly mountainous tourism, especially winter tourism, golf);

• landuse policies (especially: urbanisation, transformation of the agricultural soilby its opening-up to constructions for small enterprises);

• federal national nature protection policies;

• general environmental policies.

Despite this, the IDHEAP elected to carry out this study because its directors firmlybelieve that rural areas in Switzerland will need integrated regional policies in future. Dueto the existing combination of policies, references to rural areas in this report very oftenconcern mountain regions. This should not conceal the fact that the sustainability

4

postulate is relevant not only to mountain regions but also, in particular, to the peri-urbanareas in Central Switzerland which are at risk from expansive urbanisation processes, andfor which few special policies have been developed to date. Hence, in accordance with theinstructions given, the report reflects the current status of public policies in ruralSwitzerland and also suggests that the (remaining) rural areas in Central Switzerland betaken into account by these policies in the future.

The IDHEAP commissioned Dr. phil. Biol. Raimund Rodewald to carry out this study. DrRodewald is well known as the director of the Swiss Foundation for the Protection of theLandscape (Stiftung Landschaftsschutz Schweiz), an organisation established for theprotection of rural areas. Thus, he has proven expertise in the relevant policy fields andhas experience in the relevant area (as an actor). For this reason, the projectmanagement stressed the importance of adhering to the requirements prescribed byWWF International (specifically: the holding of interviews with 15-20 persons from thewidest possible variety of backgrounds). The questions adapted to the specific situation inSwitzerland and posed during the interview are contained in the Annex 4 of this report.The questions focus on the various definitions of the content of policies for rural areas, therole of the political, economic and social actors who are active in these areas, the factorsperceived by the actors as exercising the most significant influence in terms of thedevelopment of these areas and their perception of the most important challenges theyface. The appointment of Dr Rodewald to this task was well received on all sides and hewas able to produce a finely-tuned view of the opinions held by the central actors. Therestricted schedule did not permit the inclusion of local and regional actors. This mayexplain why an astonishingly high degree of consensus emerged here among actorswhose opinions would differ significantly with respect to other policy areas . Observersfamiliar with the area will know that in every-day political reality, this consensual image isoften tarnished by bitter struggles concerning the construction of buildings which impairthe landscape or local agricultural cultivation practices.

For the above-mentioned reasons and from the perspective of the development of a trulysustainable policy, we also specifically concentrated on identifying controversial opinionsand measures. Familiarity with these contradictory actor positions will be essential to thedevelopment of a realistic strategy for sustainable development in the future.

In accordance with the requirements of WWF International, the report is divided into sixchapters which focus on (1) the definition of rural areas, (2) the institutional and politicalenvironment, (3 + Annex 1) the actors, (4) the actors’ opinions and strategies, (5) thechallenges and (6) the options for sustainable development in rural areas. The finalchapter (7) is devoted to the opinions of the actors who participated in the compilation ofthe report as recorded at a workshop held on 19 September 2000 in Berne.

5

1. Rural Switzerland

1.1. How land use in Switzerland has changed

The agricultural use of land has been a key element in the characteristic image of thelandscape in Switzerland for centuries. Since the late 1950s, however, this rural characterhas undergone a significant transformation in both qualitative and quantitative terms(Table 1). The key quantitative developments include: the expansion of settlement areas,the development of transport routes, the construction of buildings outside the designatedconstruction areas, the rationalisation and mechanisation of agriculture, constructionmeasures affecting the water system, the expansion of tourism infrastructure and supply/disposal facilities. The changes in these sectors were and are accompanied by thecorresponding federal and cantonal sectoral support policies.

Table 1: Land use in Switzerland and how it has changed (data from Arealstatistik1979/85 and 1992/97, Bundesamt für Statistik, 1992ff and Bundesamt für Raumplanung,2000)

Land Use % of Total Area of theCountry

Changes (in %) and Trends (period)

Settlement 8%**, of which approximately30% built outside ofdesignated constructionareas (not including trafficroutes)

+ 15% (since the early 1980s, rate ofconstruction since the 1960s1m2/second (or 3150 ha/year))

Agricultural land 24%* - 3% (within the last 12 years. No dataavailable for the cantons ofGraubünden and Tessin)

Alpine meadows/pastures

13%* ? (Currently being surveyed)

Forests, woods 30%* + 4% (between 1985 and 1995)

Water bodies 4%* The natural state of 90% of waterbodies has been altered (slightreversal of this trend from 1991).

Otherunproductiveareas

21%* Stable

Total area 100% (41,285 km2)

Figures for survey periods: 1979-85* and 1992-97**

In political terms, the aims of an economical use of land and the protection of thelandscape which are enshrined in Switzerland’s regional planning legislation(Raumplanungsgesetz - RPG) clash with this increasing urbanisation of rural areas.Despite the implementation of numerous programmes by the Federal Office for RegionalPlanning, the resources made available to achieve these aims have proven inadequate.Since the 1960s, land use has been increasing at a rate of 1 m2/second. Thus, the areasof soil, nature and landscape are relegated to the bottom of the overall

6

expenditure/revenue balance sheet for Swiss environmental policy (Knoepfel 1997).Switzerland also received very low grades for the maintenance of biodiversity (red lists)and habitats in the OECD Environmental Test Report (1998).

Rural areas have undergone significant changes with respect to quality in recent decades.The rationalisation of primary production has resulted in a decline in various activitieswhich help to preserve the landscape (e.g. the cultivation of fruit on tall trees, the mowingof wild hay, construction of dry stone walls, terraced cultivation and cultivation of chestnuttrees, maintenance of field boundaries and hedges, irrigation water cultivation, wickercultivation etc.) and consequently also to the homogenisation of land-use forms. This hasresulted in a loss in the diversity of our traditional agricultural landscapes. The structuralchange in agricultural policy, which was intensified from the completion of the GATTUruguay Round in 1993 and the foundation of the WTO in 1995 (dismantling of theprotected internal market, guaranteed purchasing and state support), increased thepressure on the traditional production-oriented forms of agriculture. This gave rise to adecrease in the number of farms, a slight increase in the average farm size and a declinein the numbers employed in agriculture of 6.7% for men and 19.1% for women between1990 and 1996 (Table 2) - against the background of low unemployment in Switzerland(1.8% in June 2000).

Table 2: Changes in the structure of agriculture in Switzerland (Sources: Bundesamt fürStatistik (employment statistics), Bundesamt für Landwirtschaft (numbers of farm holdingsin Switzerland and report on agriculture 2000) and Atlas der Schweiz, Bundesamt fürLandestopographie, 2000). These surveys are not statistically uniform.

Parameters of agricultural structuralchange

1990 1999 Difference(in %)

Number of farms 92.800 73,500 - 21

Average size of farms 11.5 ha 14.6 ha + 27

Number of employees 241,000 225,000 (1996) - 7

Agricultural employees as a % of allemployees

5,5% 4.3% (1998) - 22

Agricultural employees as a % of thepopulation

3.5% 3.2% (1996) - 8

The extent to which the agricultural sector is economically marginalised is alsodemonstrated by the fact that in 1990 only 14 agricultural communities (i.e. communitiesin which at least 30% or more of the workforce is employed in the primary economicsector) still existed in Swiss mountain regions (mainly Upper Emmental, Entlebuch)(Bätzing et al. 1995).

1.2. Definition of Rural Areas

It is difficult to define the concept of rural areas against the background of thesedevelopments. In the Federal Council’s report “The Principles of Regional Development inSwitzerland” (Grundzüge der Raumordnung Schweiz, Bundesamt für Raumplanung,1996), areas which provide space for living, economic activity and leisure and which playa central role in maintaining ecological equilibrium and protecting resources are defined as“non-urban areas”. Given the opposing aims of the “enhancement of economic viability”

7

and the “protection of natural and cultural resources”, the resulting concrete conflicts arepredictable. (For example, skiing tourism access projects in the unspoiledFondeital/Lanwies in the canton of Grisons, the Val de Morgins valley in Valais and BoscoGurin in Ticino, extension of the airport in Samedan, Grisons).

The Federal Council’s memo on the New Direction in Regional Policy (Bundesrat 1996)adopts the OECD indicators for the definition of rurality and hence uses the followingterms: rural regions (fewer than 50% of inhabitants living in communities with over 150inhabitants/km2), semi-rural regions (between 50 and 85%) and urban regions (more than85%). The first two categories are classified as rural areas. The MS regions (mobilitéspaciale = spatial mobility) are used to delimit the regions.

Thus, the rural areas include the 54 mountain regions (which overlap with thecorresponding rural MS regions) as defined in accordance with the IHG, the legislationgoverning the allocation of aid for mountain regions, and a further 27 non-mountainregions. In 1990, a total of 2.63 million people (38%) were living on 80% of the land inthese regions or, conversely, 62% of the population was living on 20% of the land (density450 persons/km2 as opposed to the national average of 173 person/km2 ), mainly in thecentral regions where again the land use rate is highest (2 m2/second)!

Table 3: Rural areas in Switzerland (based on OECD criteria); data from the memo on theNew Direction in Regional Policy (Bundesrat 1996)

Population and size of rural and semi-rural regions(“rural areas”)

Percentage of total for thecountry

Population 38%

Size 80%

Another option for defining rural areas is based on the concept of the Kulturlandschaft ortraditional agricultural landscape. These landscapes represent the physical outcome ofcertain modes of settlement and agricultural techniques which emerged in the process ofdirect adaptation to local (relatively immobile and not easily substituted) natural and socio-cultural resources and are still relatively identifiable in rural areas today. Nowadays,agriculture is the main factor influencing their formation, at least with respect to land use.As opposed to this, in the towns, cities and urban agglomerations an urban landscape hasemerged which is no longer dictated by land use and is largely dependent on othereconomic and socio-cultural functions which have nothing to do with the land. Hence, ruralareas could be described as those areas located outside the towns, cities andagglomerations. In general, these areas coincide fully with the above-mentioned ruralareas but only partly with the semi-rural areas.

A third approach to the description of the concept of rural areas is based on the principleof “variable geometry” (Messerli 1999). According to this principle, the regions should beconsidered from a functional rather than territorial perspective because the interactionsbetween urban centres, agglomerations and surrounding areas (i.e. rural areas) areextremely diverse. The resolution of problems in the individual sectors (transport,economic development, leisure use, environmental protection) necessitates theestablishment of new institutional bodies (corporations) within changing territorialboundaries. In particular, a greater balance between urban and rural areas is needed withrespect to the flow of finance and distribution of the costs and benefits of publicinfrastructure. The regions of the future should not, therefore, be territorially delimited from

8

urban areas but integrated into them. From this perspective, an effective regional policymust extend beyond the borders of actual rural areas (and national borders). This wouldrepresent the fulfilment of the vision of an ideal urban-rural relationship as portrayed byAmbrogio Lorenzetti in his fresco of the Allegory of Good and Bad Government painted in1338 in Siena (Rodewald 1999). This urban-rural solidarity can be built up throughrelevant actor communities, as is already happening with the eco-sponsoring of concreteaction projects (e.g. between WWF Switzerland (headquarters in Zurich) and Lugnez inGrisons, the Swiss Foundation for the Protection of the Landscape (SL) whoseheadquarters are in Berne and Ennenda in the canton of Glarus and the numeroussponsorships that exist between the central and mountain communities, such as Zofingenin Aargovia and Baltschieder in Valais).

9

2. The Institutional and Political Environment

This chapter presents the main actors involved in rural development in Switzerland as wellas the corresponding programmes and policies.

2.1. The main actors and their role in the rural areas

The following list of actors (list in Annex 1) and policies is based on the perceived strengthof their influence. It goes without saying that numerous other policy areas and laws havean influence on rural areas. However, we would like to concentrate on the main areashere. Unexpected coalitions between the individual actor groups are not unusual, e.g. (a)agreements about the Alpine Initiative (environmental associations and the governmentsof individual alpine cantons); (b) agreements concerning the New Transalpine Rail Road(NEAT), performance dependent lorry tax (LSVA), FinÖV (environmental associations,LITRA, SBB, federal government, cantonal governments); (c) latest phase of the AlpineConvention (environmental associations, SAB, mountain cantons, federal government);(d) agreement about energy taxes (environmental associations, individual commercialassociations, SAB, SBV, trade unions, mountain cantons).

2.1.1. Federal authorities

(The German titles of the various departments, bodies and organisations and translationsof acronyms can be found in Annex 6)

• Federal Office for Regional Development (ARE) (Up to 1.7.2000 known as theFederal Office for Regional Planning; the sustainability group and Alpine Convention,previously BUWAL, were integrated into the new organisation as well as the servicefor general transport questions), Federal Department of the Environment, Transport,Energy and Communication (UVEK)

• Federal Office for Agriculture (BLW), Federal Department of National Economy(EVD)

• State Secretariat for Economics (SECO), Department of Locational Support, (a)Department for Regional Development Policy (RESF), (b) Department forSwitzerland as a Business Location (WSSF), (c) Tourism Department (TOSF),Federal Department of National Economy (EVD)

• Federal Office for Housing (BWO), Federal Office for Emergency Supplies (BWL),Federal Department of National Economy (EVD)

• Federal Department of Financial Administration (EFV), Department of FinancialPlanning, Budget, Accounting, Fiscal Equalisation, Federal Department of Finance(EFD)

• Federal Department of Tax Administration (ESV), Federal Office for Buildings andLogistics (BBL) and other authorities, Federal Department of Finance (EFD)

• Federal Office for the Environment, Forests and Landscape (BUWAL), FederalDepartment of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communication (UVEK)

• Federal Office for Roads (ASTRA), Federal Office for Transport (BAV), FederalOffice for Civil Aviation (BAZL), Federal Office for Energy (BFE), Federal Office forWater and Geology (BWG), Federal Office for Communication (BAKOM), Federal

10

Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communication (UVEK)

• Federal Department of Defence, Protection of the Population and Sport (VBS)

• Federal Council (i.e. Swiss government) and Federal Department of Foreign Affairs(EDA)

• Federal Office for Culture (BAK), Federal Department of the Interior (EDI)

2.1.2. National public-law institutions

• Swiss Landscape Fund (FLS)

2.1.3. Independent state companies and federal public limited companies

• Swisscom AG, Post, SBB AG

2.1.4. National private-law institutions

• Swiss Working Group for the Mountain Regions (SAB)

• Swiss Farmers’ Association (SBV), Union of Swiss Producers (UPS), Association ofSmall and Medium Farmers (VKMB), Bio-Suisse

• WWF Switzerland, Pro Natura Schweiz, Swiss Foundation for the Protection of hteLandscape (SL), CIPRA Schweiz, Alpine Initiative, Transport Club of Switzerland(VCS)

• LITRA - Public Transport Information Service

• Swiss Sponsorship for Mountain Regions

• Swiss Mountain Aid (SBH)

• Swiss Chamber of Industry and Commerce (local), Touring Club of Switzerland(TCS), Swiss Trades Association

• Swiss Tourism Association (STV), Swiss Alpine Club (SAC)

• Swiss Consultancy Group for the Regions and Local Authorities (SEREC/BEREG)

2.1.5. Cantonal, regional and local authority bodies and institutions

• Committee of the governments of mountain cantons, etc.

• Regional development associations and regional planning associations

2.2. The main programmes and policies for rural areas

For more than twenty years Swiss rural areas are affected by numerous public policies. Tothe opposite of other European countries agricultural policies do not play the mostimportant role amongst these public activities. The official regional policy is only in a fewareas directly linked with agricultural policies (example: federal law on investment aid formountain regions – IHG).

11

The federal state’s regional policy programmes are based on Article 103 of the newFederal Swiss Constitution (structural policy) and their implementation is distributedamong various laws and authorities. For many years, regional policy in the strict sensemainly took the form of a regional economic development policy. It was created in theearly 1970s as an acknowledgement of the problem of disparity arising from the economicboom. Regional policy initially came to prominence as a policy for the support of mountainregions. From 1974, economic areas which were dominated by a single sector, i.e. themono-structural areas, and mainly, for example, clock-making, textile and tourist regions,emerged as being under threat. Nowadays, the emphasis in regional policy is increasinglyfocused on attenuating the effects of liberalisation (as a result of the restructuring ofSwisscom (telecommunications), SBB (railways) and Post (post office), cf. Chapters 2.2.3and 4 ff.). It was against this background that on 23 August 2000 the Federal Councilsought parliamentary approval for a special loan of CHF 80 million valid up to 2004 for thepurpose of topping up the IHG, the “Bonny” and the “Innotour” resolutions. 1996 saw thepublishing of the memo on the New Direction in Regional Policy and the introduction ofRegio Plus, a support instrument which is not infrastructure oriented. The associatedrevision of the IHG also set a new emphasis in the area of socio-cultural and ecologicaldevelopment programmes. It should be stressed that major aspects of regional policywere also incorporated into social policy, for example through the instrument of familysupplements in agriculture which provides higher rates for recipients in mountain regions.However, the fact that old-age, survivor’s and invalidity insurance does not make anydistinction on the basis of regions (urban and rural) is also significant with respect toregional policy. The following overview is limited to the central instruments of regionalpolicy which relate to specific areas and the environment.

2.2.1. Regional policy in the strict sense

Officially, the heading “regional policy in the strict sense” would only refer to theinstruments of SECO, Department of Spatial and Regional Development Policy (i.e. IHG,Regio Plus, Interreg, Loan Guarantees Law, Law on Hotel Loans and Bonny Resolution).However, a broader definition proves more suited to our purpose as outlined below.

Federal Law on Investment Aid for Mountain Regions (IHG) of 28 June 1974, fullyrevised version of 21 March 1997 (SR 901.1)

The aim of this law is to:

– improve the preconditions for economic development and competition in mountainregions;

– promote the realisation of regional potential;

– preserve decentralised settlement and the socio-cultural independence of themountain regions;

– support the sustainable development of the mountain regions;

– promote co-operation between local authorities, sub-regions and regions.

The fulfilment of these aims should bridge economic and social disparities. With respect tothe use of resources, the concept of decentralised concentration (i.e. the establishment ofregional centres) was the primary focus of the IHG and of all other policies.

As early as the1970s, the Swiss mountain regions were divided into 54 IHG regions wherethis law was implemented. Each region was obliged to create a development concept (the

12

2nd generation is already available) and a multi-year programme. Based on the IHG,investment aid credits are made available to the regions, local authorities, public law,private law and private bodies for the following purposes:

– infrastructure programmes which promote the business location and improvecompetitive conditions for industry, commerce, tourism and services;

– measures which upgrade residences and lebensraum and promote socio-culturalindependence;

– measures for the exploitation of regional potential and comparative advantages;

– the maintenance, upgrading and development of basic infrastructure.

Regions may receive one-off contributions for the drawing up of development concepts,for annual training and further training programmes and for special forms of inter-regionalco-operation.

Finance

The investment aid loans are promised to the cantons as global for four years. They areinterest free or low-interest and must be repaid within a maximum of 30 years. Theregional secretariats receive a maximum 50% contribution towards ongoing costs from thefederal government.

Since 1975 a total of CHF 2.53 thousand million of IHG money has been invested. A totalof CHF 91.2 million CHF was pledged in 1999. The cantons also provide adequateadditional resources.

The impact of the infrastructural investments was examined as part of the nationalresearch programme “Regional Problems”. Despite the undisputed successes, the finalreport (Hanser et al. 1985) identified numerous inadequacies in the traditional supportstrategies. While the support of industry and commerce was shown to have been quitesuccessful, in other areas, e.g. tourism support, numerous instances of so-called“selective effects” (quality deficits) were identified. In the tourism sector, the dominance ofbudget accommodation had increased and few qualified jobs were supported which,moreover, still varied considerably on a seasonal basis. The environmental problemsarising from the quantitative development of tourist infrastructure were also uncovered.The development of tourism also represented a threat to the economy in the mountainregions (areal competition). The improvement in educational opportunities did not succeedin preventing migration as the corresponding employment opportunities were often lackingin the regions. Finally, the fact that the projects often lacked a regional or inter-regionaldimension and that the resources tended to be distributed indiscriminately also came in forcriticism. A current evaluation of the revised version of the IHG is not yet available.Environmentally questionable tourism projects continue to receive support (chair lifts inBosco Gurin, snow canons in Unterengadin, golf courses etc.). In the 1990s, the IHG didlittle to counteract the increasing de-ecologisation in tourism (Clivaz 2000). The IHG andnew Regio Plus programme were evaluated by the OECD in 1994 and the latter emergedin a particularly positive light (Bundesrat 1996).

Federal Resolution on the Support of Structural Change in Rural Areas (Regio Plus)of 21 March 1997 (SR 901.3)

The aim of this law was to provide support for structural change in rural areas (inaccordance with OECD criteria, i.e. not only mountain regions). Regio Plus does not

13

provide support for construction projects but for co-operative endeavours between naturaland legal private law and public law entities which fulfil the following criteria:

– model character for a region;

– creation of employment opportunities in a region;

– use of regional and local potential;

– compliance with the aims of the regional development concepts;

– observation of the aims of landscape and environment protection.

Finance

The state will finance a maximum of 50% of the project costs and this support is providedfor a maximum of five years. CHF 70 million has been made available for a period of 10years, of which CHF 5 million is reserved for evaluation and exchange of experience. Theloans available on an annual basis are not fully exhausted.

Federal Law Interreg III (2000-2006) of 8. October 1999 (SR 616.9)

Through the renewal of the Interreg II Programme (1994-99, CHF 24 million), Switzerlandsupports cross-border co-operation and the newly planned transnational co-operation.Five Swiss regions are involved in the former: Regio Basiliensis (Oberrhein Centre-South),North-East Switzerland (Alpine-Rhine-Lake Constance-Hochrhein), the Communauté detravail du Jura [Jura working community] (Franche-Comté/Switzerland), Vaud and Geneva(Rhône-Alpes) and Tessin, Graubünden and Valais (Switzerland/Italy). The projects areselected by the regions themselves, the state merely assumes co-ordination tasks. Theprinciple of subsidiarity is applied. The task of allocating loans is assigned to the cantons.The state is also represented in the Interreg III committees. Economic developmentprojects, cultural and environmental protection projects are entitled to support under thisprogramme. In the case of the transnational co-operation, the project involved wasdeveloped by the European Commission and is entitled “Alpenraum” [Alpine Region]. TheFederal Office for Regional Development (ARE) is in charge here.

Finance

Parliament authorised a framework credit for the Interreg III programme of CHF 39 million.Experience with Interreg II revealed excessive administrative emphasis and an(excessively) broad range of projects which, in some cases, were not compatible with theaims of sustainability.

Federal Law on the Awarding of Loan Guarantees and Interest Cost Contributionsin Mountain Regions (Bürgschaftsgesetz) of 25 June 1976 (SR 901.2)

The loan guarantee law aims to help small and medium-sized businesses in mountainregions (IHG regions) to obtain short and medium term loans. The Swiss Loan GuaranteeCo-operative (Schweizerische Bürgschaftsgenossenschaft) was created for this purpose.This organisation can guarantee loans of up to CHF 500,000 for individual small and

14

medium-sized businesses. It can also award interest cost contributions (40 % of standardbank interest rate on a maximum of CHF 500,000 for a maximum of six years). The staterefunds the interest contributions to the Loan Guarantee Co-operative and in the event ofloss will repay 90% of the guaranteed loan. Loan guarantees and interest costcontributions are only awarded if the project is part of a regional development concept inaccordance with the IHG.

Finance

Since 1977, the state has guaranteed CHF 0.35 thousand million. In 1999, 29 projects(small and medium-sized businesses) were allocated support in the form of guaranteestotalling CHF 10.9 million while 19 projects (small and medium-sized businesses) receivedsupport in the form of interest cost contributions. The effective subsidy provided by thestate totalled CHF 4 million (1999: CHF 3.5 million).

Federal Law on Loans for Hotels and Health Resorts (Hotelkreditgesetz) of 1 July1966 (SR 935.12)

The hotel loans law promotes the upgrading of hotels and health spas by means of loans.To this end, the state supports the Swiss Association for Hotel Loans (SGH) in Zurich.This law is applied in tourist areas, IHG regions whose development concepts includetourism projects, and in spas or health resorts. The law contains a list of all local authorityareas in which the law is applicable. The SGH guarantees loans and issues loans for theupgrading of existing hotels, the construction of replacement buildings, sales and sharedfacilities for the hotel sector. Loan guarantees are also provided for educational institutionsand hostels for foreign students. Interest contributions can be provided for health resortfacilities and projects in the development concepts.

Finance

The state provides interest-free capital to the SGH (up to 31.12.1997: CHF 135 million)and covers 75 % of any losses accrued on guarantees. In 1997, the loans allocatedamounted to CHF 21.7 million, guarantees amounted to CHF 12.2 million and the interestcontributions to CHF 2.35 million. In 1998, the federal contributions were frozen. The statewill decide on new measures to support the hotel sector in the Tourism Report of 2001.

Federal Resolution in Favour of Areas of Economic Renewal (BBWEG) of 6 October1995 (the first federal resolution of 1978 “Bonny Resolution” is currently beingrevised) (SR 951.93)

The state supports the creation of employment in areas of economic renewal. Areas ofeconomic renewal are groups of neighbouring local authority areas with high rates ofunemployment (significantly higher than the national average), or with previous or forecastheavy job losses. The state provides industrial companies and production-oriented servicecompanies located in areas of economic renewal support in the development of theirproducts, in adapting to market demands and in the creation of new products orproduction centres which are not already available in the region. The state guaranteesloans for up to one third of the total cost or investment to these companies for a maximumof eight years, interest contributions of up to 25% of standard bank interest rate for amaximum of one third of the total investment or relief in the payment of direct federal taxesif this is also provided by the canton. The state defines the physical boundaries of theareas of economic renewal (currently 28 areas in 15 cantons, including not only mountain

15

regions but also urban areas).

Finance

In 1999, 45 projects were supported which created 2035 new jobs based on a guaranteedsum of CHF 36 million; the direct cost to the state came to a total of CHF 2.5 million (CHF81 million for the period 1979-99). The state intends to renew this Federal Resolutionwhich expires in 2001 for a further 5 years with an additional credit sum of CHF 10 millionfor umbrella projects (it is intended to cease the interest contributions).

Federal Law on the Improvement of Living Conditions in Mountain Regions (WS) of20 March 1970 (9 December 1940) (SR 844)

The aim of this law is to create healthier living conditions for families with modest incomesin mountain regions. Support is provided for improvements to housing (extensions,installation of running water, electricity, bathrooms etc.), conversion of empty buildingsinto flats and houses, construction of new buildings to replace old flats and houses,construction of a second flat, acquisition of a flat/house. The state pays 10-30% of thecreditable costs if the canton (and the public-law bodies) makes a contribution whichtogether with the state aid covers 50-65% of the creditable costs. Only families with ataxable income (direct federal tax) of less than CHF 42,700 are eligible for this aid. Asupplement of CHF 2,200 is added per child.

Finance

In 1997, 504 projects/flats/houses were supported for a total state contribution of CHF15.5 million, cantonal contributions of CHF 7.9 million, local authority contributions of CHF1.8 million and third-party contributions (districts, corporations) CHF 1.2 million. The statecontributed CHF 6.6 million to such projects in 1999.

This law expires in 2000 and in December 2000 it has been renewed. It is intended totransfer full responsibility for this law to the cantons as part of the new fiscal equalisation.It is still unclear, however, whether the cantons are prepared to continue to support theupgrading of residential buildings in mountain regions at their own cost. The Law on HomeConstruction and Promotion of Home Ownership (WEG) also exists for the mountainregions. It is intended, however, to transfer responsibility for this law also to the cantons.

Federal Resolution on the Promotion of Outwork of 12 February 1949 (SR 822.32)

This support – provided it is deemed appropriate from a national policy and socialperspective – is granted as part of the effort to preserve the existence of the mountainpopulation.

Finance:

The state allocated CHF 377,000 in 1999.

Federal Resolution on the Promotion of Innovation and Co-operation in Tourism(Innotour) of 10 October 1997 (SR 935.22)

This legislation supports the development and introduction of new products, equipmentand sales channels for existing services, the creation of structures which enable increasedefficiency and the improvement of training and further training. The state may awardfinancial aid of up to 50% for such projects. Eligible recipients do not include individual

16

businesses but umbrella organisations (transport associations, organisations, researchinstitutes). SECO decides on the allocation of grants following co-ordination with otherfederal offices. The “Veloland Schweiz” [“Switzerland Bike Country”] project is regarded asa showpiece for the Innotour programme.

Finance

The programme will run until 2001 and funding of CHF 18 million has been allocated.Discussions as to whether it should be renewed and refinanced are currently under way.

Federal Resolution on Financial Aid for the Conservation and Maintenance of Near-Natural Agricultural Landscapes of 3 May 1991 (SR 451.51)

On the occasion of the 700th anniversary of the foundation of the Swiss Confederation,the state allocated finance for measures to conserve and maintain near natural agriculturallandscapes from the available budgetary resources. To this end, a special fund wasestablished which is managed by the Swiss Landscape Fund (FLS), the organisationfounded for this purpose. Projects for the conservation, maintenance, upkeep andrestoration of near-natural agricultural landscapes are supported by the fund inaccordance with the principle of subsidiarity (following exhaustion of regular state andcantonal subsidy resources). The cantons, local authorities, other public-law bodies,individuals and private agencies may qualify as recipients of this aid. Up to 1999, over 700projects throughout Switzerland had received support as part of this programme.

Finance

CHF 50 million was allocated to the fund for a ten-year period. In 1999, parliamentapproved a ten-year renewal of the fund and the allocation of a further CHF 50 million.

2.2.2. Federal agricultural policy

Agricultural Reform (Agricultural Policy 2002 “AP2002”), Federal Law onAgriculture of 29 April 1998 (SR 901.1)

The new constitutional mandate (based on the referendum of 9 June 1996), theGATT/WTO negotiations and market pressure resulted in the comprehensive reform ofagricultural policy by the Federal Council and parliament. The new AP2000 contains thefollowing agricultural policy instruments:

a) Sales promotion: the adaptation of production to sales potential is now the task of theagricultural organisations (previously the state). Should difficulties arise, i.e. the self-help measures are put into question, the federation may implement short-term marketintervention through the industrial organisations. The state (federation and cantons)can set quality standards and pay contributions to the industrial organisations for salespromotion. In the event of price collapses, which are not due to structural factors, thestate and organisations may implement measures to assist the market. Of particularimportance with respect to regional policy is the Sales Promotion Decree of 1999which provides ca. CHF 5-6 million for regional marketing (e.g. Tête de Moine cheese).

b) Direct payments: price policy is no longer linked with incomes policy. Direct paymentswith the following categories now constitute a new incomes element:

17

General direct payments (contributions to aid in the maintenance of farmingthroughout Switzerland) and ecological direct payments (promotion of particularlynature-oriented, environment-friendly and animal-friendly forms of production, such asorganic farming and controlled free-range/outdoor husbandry and the payment ofsummer grazing fees). In order to obtain direct payments, recipients must have anecological service certificate (minimum requirements: integrated production (IP)throughout the holding, regulated crop rotation, suitable soil protection index, targetedselection and application of plant treatment agents, observation of the animalprotection decree and the allocation of 7% ecological compensation areas within theagricultural land). This meant that the general direct payments, which from 1993 to1997 were defined exclusively as farm and land contributions (with the additionalcondition of 5% (7% from 1997) ecological compensation area) are now linked with aminimum organic requirement (IP standard).

c) Attendant social measures: the farm aid described in this chapter is allocated in theform of interest-free loans which are granted for a maximum period of 20 years. Theyare intended to reduce families’ interest payments (debt restructuring) or provide reliefin times of financial difficulty.

d) Structural improvements: the aims of these measures include the improvement ofliving and economic conditions in rural areas, the protection of agricultural land andbuildings against natural hazards, the improvement of operating basics to reduceproduction cost and the fulfilment of ecological and regional development aims.Support is provided for agricultural buildings, (Alpine buildings, co-operativeprocessing and storage buildings in mountain regions and civil engineering structures,land reform). One-off contributions for agricultural buildings are only allocated inmountain regions while they are available for land improvements in both mountain andvalley regions. The one-off grants are complemented by investment loans (interest-free or low-interest). Both investment loans and grants for structural improvementstake the form of one-off payments (i.e. the farmer knows how many grants and loanswill be paid before construction begins).

e) Support for training, consultancy and agricultural research.

Finance

The framework for the funding allocated to agriculture by the Federal Council is dividedinto four three-year phases. The first phase, 2000-2003, requires CHF 14 thousand million(CHF 3.5 thousand million per year, of which ca. CHF 2.4 thousand million is for directpayments), with CHF 3.49 thousand million allocated for production and sales and CHF9.5 thousand million for direct payments. The effective market support measures must bereduced by CHF 400 million within five years. Initial preparation for the budget frameworkfor 2004-2007 are under way. The proportion of direct payments from the overall farmers'income (average 1999: CHF 53'789.- per farm) was in 1999 50% (plain), 23% (foothills ofthe Alps) and 39% mountainous areas) (Bundesamt für Landwirtschaft 2000a)

2.2.3. Other federal laws and policies with implications for rural areas

(Description in Annex 2)

Reorganisation of Post (postal service), SBB (railways) and Swisscom(telecommunications)

Army reform

18

Energy policy/Electricity Market Law (Elektrizitätsmarktgesetz)

The New Fiscal Equalisation (Neue Finanzausgleich - NFA)

Engine-Power-Based Heavy Vehicle Levy

Licensing policy for public transport and cable railways

Federal and cantonal subsidy and tax policy

Tourism policy

Federal Law on the Use of Hydroelectric Power (WRG) of 22 December 1916 (SR 721.80)

Federal Law on Regional Planning (RPG) of 22 June 1979 (revision of 20 March 1998)(SR 700)

Federal Law on Nature Conservation and Habitat Protection of 1965 (NHG) (SR 451)

Federal Law on Environmental Protection of 1983 (USG) (SR 814.01)

Federal Law on Water Protection of 1991 (GSchG) (SR 814.20)

Federal Law on Forests (WaG) of 4 October 1991 (1902) (SR 921.0)

2.2.4. The inter-policy problems

The above-listed federal laws form the basis for the corresponding federal policies whoseofficial actors at federal, cantonal and (where applicable) local authority level had fewsystematic exchange and consensual relationships until well into the 1990s. Hence, atproject level, conflicts regularly emerged between the major infrastructure policies (roadconstruction, energy production and electricity transport, railway construction, river works,tourism installations etc.), between agricultural structural and incomes policies and allkinds of protection and conservation policies, particularly in peri-urban rural areas.Although the environmental impact assessment introduced under the environmentalprotection legislation of 1983 (1985) contributed significantly to the exposure of thesecontradictions - at least at project level - and their resolution, in part, selectively and in thecontext of the audited projects. With a large number of smaller projects (which are notsubject to an environmental impact assessment) and at the planning level of the globalsystems, of which such projects are constituent, these contradictions continue to exist dueto the continuing isolation of actor networks and action philosophies even if co-operationand co-ordination are prescribed under the legislation.

This absence of inter-policy co-operation and co-ordination was particularly noticeable inthose areas in which movement was triggered by a new economic dynamism. This isparticularly true of the peri-urban (still) rural central region and in some tourist centres inmountain regions (which are still growing). The (regionally relevant) federal and cantonalpolicies which are still rattling around in these “policy-empty” areas today are notsufficiently integrated, either on the level of their conceptualisation or on the level of theaction plans for their implementation, to prevent contradictory state action at output level.The responsibility here lies with the cantonal and regional direction planning which mayhave recorded possible conflicts between various land use types in its “co-ordinationnotes” but was unable to find the strength to eliminate the contradictions arising from thewide-ranging aims of the relevant policies. These first-generation cantonal direction plans,

19

which with few exceptions remain in force in most cantons, make little contribution toactive inter-policy co-ordination between the various regionally relevant policies. They failto go beyond the recording of contradictions and to include a positive formulation oftargets with respect to the desired future regional development to be achieved jointlythrough the implementation of these policies (cf. Knoepfel, Varone 2000). Efforts toformulate positive aims in the spirit of “sustainable development” undertaken as part of thesecond generation of cantonal direction planning (which would actually influence thedesign of all public policies affecting these areas) appear to have failed up to now whenfaced with the difficulty of finding a sufficiently concrete formulation for the model ofsustainable development (particularly also in the peri-urban rural areas) for all regionally-relevant sectoral policies.

It should however be noted that a decree governing the co-ordination of federal tasks inthe area of regional development policy has existed at federal level for some years now(Federal Decree of 22 October 1997). This defines the tasks of the Council for RegionalDevelopment (Rat für Raumordnung), which is supposed, firstly, to ensure the co-ordination between authorities in the area of regional policy and, secondly, to promotesustainable regional development. A federal regional development committee also exists.Despite the fact that greater attention has been paid to co-ordination principles in recentyears, these committees have achieved little in terms of concrete results in the area ofsustainable development. Tellingly, there is no general sustainability assessment oflegislation or the activities of the federal authorities. A sustainability strategy, which is alsobased on the principle of co-ordination, has at least been produced in the year 2000 bythe Swiss Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communication.

21

3. Overview of the Actors and their Relationships in Rural Areas

Swisseconomy (Vorort), Swiss tradeand business organization(Gewerbeverband), tourism, energyprocedures, agro-alimentary sector

Economic processes(liberalization, concentration)

Public (federal) enterprises(partially privatized)

Swisscom, Post,Swiss rail (SBB)

Governmental actors

Federal offices of• agriculture (BLW) •landuse planning andregional development(ARE) •environment,landscape and forests

Environmental protection and regionaldevelopment

Communal and sectorial interests

Economic developmentorganizations•mountain areas (SAB)•agriculture(UPS, SBV, VKMB)•regionaldevelopment (SEREC)•SwissAlpine Club (SAC)

Environmental protectionorganizations•WWF, Pro Natura•CIPRA(international Alps protectionassociation), Swiss Alps initiative•landscape protection (FSL, FLS)

Local government•public authorities

•public landowners

Local economy

•(e.g.building industry)

Localpopulation

Interests of bigcities and urbanagglomerations

22

4. Analysis of the Current Situation in Rural Areas

This chapter presents a comprehensive view of the current situation in rural Switzerlandbased on the opinions and perceptions of the 19 interviewees (listed in Annex 3), researchand personal experience. The information presented encompasses both the currentproblems and the prevailing influences.

4.1. Methods and approach

The data was mainly collected from the literature (listed in Annex 4) and the Internet whilethe actor opinions, perceptions and options were mainly obtained by means of qualitativecontrolled interviews based on the topics prescribed by the Institute for EuropeanEnvironmental Policy (IEEP, London) and the Centre for Rural Economy (CRE;Newcastle-o-T.). The questions concerned the understanding of the term “rural areas”, therole and contribution of the relevant actor, the institutional framework for regionaldevelopment, the estimation of actors’ influence, the challenges facing rural areas and theneed for political action, the analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of current regionalpolicy, effects on the environment, the links between sustainable development and ruraldevelopment and cultural influences.

The interviewees were selected on the basis of the actor analysis (Chapter 2); all 19persons were interviewed as part of a direct discussion lasting one to two hours whichwas recorded electronically or manually in the form of minutes.

4.2. Rural areas - more than a question of definition

The term “rural areas” conjures up a popular image of a lifestyle that is based on farmingand still physically dominated by a predominantly agricultural traditional landscape. Inmany places, this view is now almost mythical because, on the one hand, the traditionallandscape which was formed by centuries of farming activity is now dominated by non-agricultural structures (motorways, urban settlements, electricity cables, tourism structuresetc.), while, on the other hand, the lifestyle of a large section of the population in ruralareas differs very little from that of the urban population. There has been a sharp declinein traditional local employment activities (agriculture and forestry) as well as regionaltrades, commerce and industry. Thus, the number of agricultural and industrialcommunities in mountain regions (communities whose economic activities are dominatedby the primary or secondary sectors) has decreased by 75% and 82% respectively. Incontrast, a significant growth has been observed in the service and commutercommunities (Bätzing et al. 1995). Thus, for example, in the IHG region Vallée de Joux inthe canton of Vaud, only 3% of employees are still involved in primary production. Thismeans that it is impossible to fully understand the socio-economic structural change inrural areas without also considering developments in urban and agglomeration areas. Therural world is not, therefore, a hermetically sealed agricultural realm, it is significantlyinfluenced by near or distant urban economic centres. Nevertheless, it emerges that it is infact useful to make a spatial distinction between rural and urban areas insofar as, on theone hand, a completely related set of problems (disparities in the economic sector, publicservice, equal opportunities, international competitiveness, quality of life and landscape)and, on the other, global constitutionally-based targets exist which place a specific focuson rural areas. Thus, in the opinion of some of our interviewees, the rural regions asdefined in Switzerland today (80% of the area of the country) should be defined morenarrowly. Due to the internal diversity of rural areas it seems to be necessary to review the

23

different typologies for these areas.

The myth that rural areas provide a farming existence which contrasts with urban lifestylesmust also be critically examined. Thus, our attention must focus on the values andfunctions associated with these sparsely populated traditional agricultural landscapes,which (must) pursue a diverging path of familiarity, relative smallness and the forging ofsocio-cultural identity in the midst of a globalised homogenising world characterised byprocesses of growth.

4.3. The difficulties facing rural areas and actor constellations

The relatively advanced level of Swiss regional policy reflects the population’s high level ofsensitivity for the concerns of decentrally located areas. These aspects of federalismreflect the history of the federal state of Switzerland which grew together from individualregions. Regional policy has always been acknowledged within Swiss domestic policy asan important national policy task of decentralisation (Lendi 1983). This relates not only tothe allocation of competencies and the subsidiarity requirement but also to the aims of theelimination of welfare disparities. Hence, aid for mountain regions was developed as earlyas the 1930s. The corresponding regional economic policy instruments were created inthe 1970s and remain, for the most part, in use today. This long tradition of support for theregions is evidenced in the rather positive situation to be found in Switzerland’s ruralregions as compared, for example, with Italy and France where the migration rates fromperipheral mountain areas are significantly higher. Nonetheless, certain striking featuresemerge from the socio-economic data from the mountain regions (IHG communities) forthe period 1980-1990 (Table 4).

Table 4: Structural Change within IHG Communities (a) and IHG Regions (b) between1980 and 1990 (based on Bätzing et al. 1995)

(a) Population trends within thecommunities

Number of communities % of all IHGcommunities

Decline 313 (every second one isa small community (<300inhabitants)

25%

Stagnation or increase 919 75%

(b) Structure of developmenttypes

Number of regions 1990(change)

Change (in %)

Non-centre-dominated regions 22 (-10) -31%

Centre-dominated regions 20 (+5) +25%

Commuter regions 12 (+5) +42%

Deindustrialisation and depopulation (many small communities are losing inhabitants) arethe main causes behind the decline in population. The decline in agriculture started at amuch earlier stage and is evidenced by the fact that in Switzerland very few communitiescould still be described as agricultural communities (i.e. communities in which the primarysector is dominant). However, a physical withdrawal from the area has not occurred in

24

agriculture. Between 1980 and 1990, the rate of population increase in Swiss mountainregions was higher than the national average (8.4% as opposed to 8%). The same appliesfor the rural MS regions (10.1% as opposed to 8%). This can mainly be observed withinthe agglomerisation process, i.e. predominantly in the semi-rural regions and thehinterlands of the major centres (Bundesrat 1996). The external economic orientation ofthe mountain regions also intensified in the 1980s with an increasing number of regionsproviding homes for people working etc. in the urban centres. This increase in the numberof commuters not only had a negative impact on the environment (soil and air pollution,settlement activity) but also on the functioning of the mountain regions as a part of a multi-functional living area. The economic costs of this agglomerisation are primarily carried bythe mountain regions. The key regional development processes involved the increasingdecline in agriculture, increasing urbanisation (particularly in the context of monostructuraltourism development) and in an increase in the number of commuter regions. In contrastto other European mountain areas, the Swiss mountain regions do not include any areasof regional economic relevance which are threatened by a complete decline in use anddepopulation. Depopulation mainly affects small areas (e.g. in Tessin). More recent datafrom the Federal Statistics Office for the 1990-95 period show an annual increase inpopulation of over 1% in Swiss mountain regions.

With respect to the economic structure of the IHG regions, approximately 1/3 of them canbe classified as good, average or weak (Bätzing et al. 1995). The regions with below-average development account for 37% of the area but only 22% of the population. Thefact that the absence of a dominant centre or proximity to a centre does not necessarilyresult in negative development (e.g. some regions in the canton of Graubünden) shouldbe stressed. On the other hand, the traditional nucleated settlement areas which do nothave dominant centres are often structurally weak due to their settlement structure.

It can be assumed that another major transformation took place in rural areas between1990 and 2000 (Table 5). With respect to the current influences on rural areas, there wasa (surprising) consensus among the surveyed actors to the effect that, on the one hand,the representatives of conservation-oriented associations acknowledged the importance ofeconomic factors while, on the other, the economy-oriented or state actors alsoemphasised the environmental sensitivity of rural areas.

Table 5: Influences on rural areas in the period from 1990 to 2000 based on the analysisfor the New Direction in Regional Policy (Bundesrat 1996) and the opinions of theinterviewees (list of all comments)

Some socio-economically relevant trends withimplications for rural areas

Effect on the economic, ecological andsocio-cultural structure of rural areas

25

Agricultural policy reform, elimination of trade barriers andopening of markets (EU/WTO)

Increasing

Further decline in agriculture (estimated fall of ca. 30%-40% innumber of operations over the next few years)

Increasing

Privatisation and liberalisation of the public service, electricitymarket etc.

Increasing

Concentration processes in the economy and shift to highervalue-added sectors in the centres

Increasing

Productivity problems in the construction industry, retail trade,trades, textiles industry etc.

Increasing

Concentration and squeezing processes in the classicaltourism sector (e.g. skiing tourism)

Increasing

Increasing political pressure on the protective regulations(deregulation) and federal regional policy

Increasing

Climate change Increasing

Extended construction and use options in agricultural zones(revision of the RPG)

Increasing, as this triggers furtheruncontrolled development, is a threat to thevalue of the traditional agriculturallandscape and increases economic costs

Increasing influence of foreign investors Increasing, as it is more difficult to involvethem in regional policy aims

Promotion of decentralised third-level institutions and trainingfacilities

Decreasing

Doubling of the IHG fund to CHF 1.6 thousand million (up to2003), of which CHF 70 million is intended for Regio Plus

Decreasing

Agricultural policy reform: shift from market support policy todirect payments system, budget of CHF 4 thousand million(approximately 1/12 of federal expenditure)

Decreasing

Regional marketing/direct marketing Decreasing

Development of rural tourism with increasing added value(“Holidays on the farm”, “Switzerland Bike Country” etc.)

Decreasing

Introduction of the Swiss Landscape Fund (FLS), extension ofmountain-aid activities, “discovery” of traditional agriculturallandscape as added value

Decreasing

The significance of the listed trends not only varies in the individual regions, other specificfactors are also decisive. Thus, some interviewees (from both business-oriented, official,conservation and structure-oriented camps, see Chapter 3) referred to cultural and socialissues. The traditional population in rural areas often has problems with the integration ofnewcomers and acceptance of ideas from outsiders. Many political popular slogans, suchas “Engadin den Engadinern” [“Engading for the people of Engadin”] do little to promoteinter-regional and cross-sectoral co-operation. On the other hand, the newcomers oftenhave a quite different attachment to the area than the original inhabitants. Cultural debateis rare. Ultimately the ability to motivate people to work on a district council ordevelopment agency is crucial to the success of the establishment of regional identity andresponsibility. The study “Skitourismus – Von der Vergangenheit zum Potential der

26

Zukunft” [“Skiing tourism - from the past to the potential of the future] (Brandner et al.1995) reveals deficits in the distribution of decision-making powers and a simultaneousloss of trust on the part of the population in eight out of ten of the tourism areas surveyed.The question of the quality of the training available to the population in the regions alsolies behind the call for increased innovation. The fact that it is the structurally weak areaswhich are most affected by the migration of young persons in search of education andfurther training is proof of the need for a proper educational offensive in rural areas.

The effect of the trends outlined above on the ecological sector should not beunderestimated (Table 6). An astonishing degree of consensus exists among thesurveyed actors with respect to these effects and the analysis of influences. However, theextent of the dissent that exists with respect to the estimation of the ecologicalconsequences of infrastructure policy (which actors from the subsidy authority andrecipients “naturally” believe to be less negative) and the consequences of the decline inagriculture should not be underestimated. The farming representatives see the decline inwidespread agriculture as a primarily or exclusively negative development and theecologically positive aspects of this trend, for example the promotion of wilderness areas,are mostly only mentioned by conservation-oriented actors.

Table 6: Influences on rural areas with ecological implications (based on the reports“Auswirkungen von Infrastrukturinvestitionen” (Hanser et. al. 1985) [“Effects ofinfrastructure investments”] and “Neuorientierung der Regionalpolitik” (Bundesrat 1996)[“New Direction in Regional Policy”] and the opinions of the interviewees (C = consensuswith respect to the estimation of ecological consequences, D = dissent among theinterviewees)

Current and future influences on rural areas Ecological effects (C = consensus and D =dissent among interviewees)

Concentration processes in the economy,metropolisation, peri-urbanisation

Increase in freight traffic, expansion of settlements(C)

General political developments (generalderegulation, privatisation and liberalisation), inparticular in transport and energy policy

Ambivalent developments (C)

Increased competition in tourism sector,concentration processes

Ambivalent, possible relief for areas which havebecome non-viable, increased pollution in tourismregions arising from development plans (C)

Population increase in rural areas close to urbancentres (agglomerisation)

Pressure on land which has not yet been built on,uncontrolled development, traffic problems,impairment of location image (C)

Increased leisure traffic Increase in traffic, road-building, air, noise and soilpollution (C)

Decline in agriculture Negative for valuable cultivation landscape areas,positive for the protection of wilderness areas (D)

Expansion and rationalisation of agricultural holdings Large new barns/stables required, new Alpine roads,but more efficient landscape maintenance possible.Reckoning abandon and destruction of the traditionalbuildings (D)

27

Regional marketing, direct marketing Positive (C), particularly in association with an eco-label

Regional policy with efficiency as priority Ambivalent, but structurally weak areas could besubject to depopulation and landscape maintenancebe neglected (regional responsibility) (C)

IHG infrastructure support, improvement ofagricultural and forest structures (subsidy system)

Subsidy policy can contradict environmental aims,particularly in the area of road-building, reclamationprojects, agricultural construction and promotion ofsnow canons, chairlifts (D)

Opening of agricultural zones for new buildingprojects and conversion of disused barns and stables(revision of the RPG)

Threat of uncontrolled settlement and loss of valuethrough the predominance of holiday houses (D)

Regional policy based on sustainability andlandscape conservation (FLS, in part Regio Plus etc.)

New finance instruments for landscape-conservationprojects (C)

Trend in direction of nature-oriented tourism:“Veloland Schweiz” [“Switzerland Bike Country”],“Ferien auf dem Bauernhof” [“Holidays on the farm”],“Endlich Ferien. Ihre Landschaft” [“Holidays at last.Your Landscape”], “Netzwerk ländlicher Tourismus”[“Rural Tourism Network”]

Increases the added value of qualitative tourism (C)

Climate change Extensive changes to the Alpine ecosystem, increasein the number and severity of natural disasters (C)

New sustainability-oriented regional planning such asbiosphere reserves and nature parks

Ecological opportunities (C)

Surprisingly, widespread consensus exists in some major areas of influence. The resultsfor the influences are now grouped in terms of consensus and dissent with respect to theirecological effects (actor constellation, Table 7).

Table 7: Matrix of areas of consensus and dissent among the surveyed experts withrespect to the factors that give rise to ecological effects in rural areas (actor constellationsbased on results from Table 6).

Nature of influence Area for which consensus exists withrespect to ecological effects

Area for which there isdissent with respect toecological effects

Regional marketing, direct marketing Decline in agriculture

Sustainability and landscape- conservation-oriented regional policy

Trend for nature-oriented tourism

Internalisation of transport costs, energytaxes

Positive environmental effect

New sustainability-oriented regionalplanning (biosphere reserves and natureparks)

28

Economic concentration processes Expansion and rationalisationof agricultural holdings

Competition in tourist areas Opening of agricultural zones

Increase in population in rural areas closeto urban centres

Increased leisure traffic

Negative environmental effects

Climate change

General political development, particularlytransport and energy policy

Infrastructure supportAmbivalent environmentaleffect

Efficiency-oriented regional policy

The consensus/dissent matrix (Table 7) enables us to identify the areas with positiveecological effects (e.g. direct marketing and environment-friendly, sustainable tourism), inwhich it would be possible to achieve a political consensus. Moreover, it should bepossible to prevent or influence those developments about which consensus exists withrespect to negative ecological consequences, for example competition in tourism. Similarconsensus-generating actor constellations were behind the development of today’sagricultural policy, the new water philosophy (whereby flowing water bodies are givenmore space instead of being encroached upon), the NEAT (new Alpine rail system), theengine-power-based heavy vehicle levy, the CO2 and energy control levies and ecologicaltax reform. This kind of rapprochement between actors is not yet evident in other areas:road-building policy, tourism policy, local authority and cantonal construction zone policy,construction outside of designated construction zones (revised RPG).

4.4. Who decides what happens in rural areas?

The endogenous and exogenous influences on rural areas originate, on the one hand,from diffuse social and economic changes (changes in values, globalisation) and, on theother hand, from very concrete institutions (including the WWF, which critically evaluatesregional and agricultural policy at international and national level from a sustainabilityperspective and makes concrete suggestions (Cornish & Bryden 1999)).

It is possible to observe a predominant social trend in the direction of increasedagglomerisation throughout the world. Approximately two thirds of the Swiss populationlives in towns, cities and agglomerations. Within the urban areas, the town and citycentres have been losing inhabitants on a continuing basis since the 1980s. Movementwas in the direction of the accessible hinterland which subsequently becameagglomerated. Hence, in the 1980s, semi-rural areas in Switzerland experienced thestrongest population growth. However, the urban centres appear to have been staging acomeback in recent times.

The global economy can also be described as a diffuse influence. Its laws of liberalisation,privatisation of state tasks, concentration of economic activities and increasing dominanceof the tertiary sector are being adopted by the economic associations, many stateauthorities and economically liberal political parties. The question of on-site humanresources is also seen as a diffuse influence, i.e. the extent of innovative powers,motivation, identity and people’s attachment to the areas in which they live. The generalmobilisation of persons and goods is leading to the “fluidization” of moral concepts and theelements considered as creating identity. Thus, the concrete location has assumed a new

29

value within today’s “off-land” society, which is characterised by high levels of mobility,flexibility and relative unrootedness of professions and work.

The following table (Table 8) contains a list of diffuse and institutional influences inaccordance with their perceived intensity. The hierarchical order is based on the opinionsof the interviewees. The “perceived intensity” is derived, firstly, from the number ofmentions with a uniform estimation of the strength (e.g. 15 of the 19 intervieweesconsidered the federal subsidy policy as a factor that exerts a very strong influence) and,secondly, on the basis of the frequency of equal estimations (e.g. four intervieweesconsidered the influence of the environmental associations as weak to average and theothers did not mention them at all). Here too, a relatively broad consensus exists withregard to the most important influences; there was no major divergence in opinions(strong/weak).

30

Table 8: Institutional influences in rural areas classified in accordance with their perceivedimportance (based on interviewees’ opinions, the number of references is given inbrackets, maximum 19)

Institutional influences (classified according to positive ornegative effects on the ecological, economical and socio-culturalstructure of rural areas)

Perceived intensity (in bracketsthe number of mentions,maximum 19)

Agricultural policy Strong, but declining (17)

Federal cohesion policy (federalism, fiscalequalisation, SECO regional policy)

Strong (19)

Federal subsidy policy Strong (15)

SAB, committee of mountain canton governments Strong (18)

Regional planning bodies, SEREC, regionaldevelopment agencies (in accordance with IHG)

Average (12)

SBV Average (15)

FLS, Sponsorship for Mountain Communities,Mountain Aid

Average (5)

BUWAL, conservation bodies Weak to average (4)

Democratic support/participation Weak to average (3)

Positive Effect

Federal regional planning Weak but increasing (8)

Globalised economic policy (WTO, EU)/ generalsocial processes

Very strong (19)

International transport and energy policy Strong (13)

Privatised companies in public service area Strong (14)

Negative Effect

Tourist economies (“hard” areas) Average but increasing (6)

Local and cantonal policy, motivation and innovativeforce of the population

Strong but varies significantlyfrom region to region (3)

Ambivalent Effect

Local enterprises Strong (5)

This table demonstrates that agricultural policy remains an influential actor which,however, is also being joined by players from other policy areas. Overall, the number ofactors in rural areas is increasing and this has something to do with the wave ofprivatisation in the area of basic infrastructure (regional transport, post office,telecommunications, electricity). These new actors, who are assuming state tasks, are atleast as motivated by the interests of profitability and shareholders as they are by thegeneral economic interests of providing comprehensive basic services. Political powerstructures at regional and local areas remain very influential. This strong role can have apositive or negative outcome with respect to sustainable regional development. Forexample, the regional secretaries often find themselves in a weaker position than thelocal-authority officials and this is reflected in the quality of (at least the first-generation)the development concepts and planning which are sometimes a more accurate reflectionof economic desires than an integrative perspective. Many regional secretaries do nothave the resources and capacities (and, in some instances also, the necessary motivationand creativity) to assume with conviction the role of organisers. Moreover, the inter-regional and international exchange of ideas and concepts is not practised widely enough.

31

The strong role of the local authority officials is directly linked with the rather weakinvolvement of the general population in questions of rural development. Some of theregional development agencies, such as local-authority associations or regional forums,which draw up the development concepts for the use of IHG loans through their regionalsecretaries, are almost exclusively composed of representatives of the local authorities.Third parties are sometimes even denied access. Official involvement is not a suitableinstrument with which to improve the participation of the population. However, the secondgeneration development concepts have been significantly improved with respect to thesetting of priorities and participation.

BUWAL and the conservation bodies may be defined as strong actors in certain sectors inrural areas (e.g. Alpine Protection Initiative, Alpine Convention, associations’ right ofcomplaint, selected projects), yet their role was deemed weak. This was explained interms of the lack of a global sustainability-based concept for rural development.

According to our interviewees, federal regional planning is currently in a weak position.The restructuring of the authority may enhance in its influence. Political demands for aclear intensification of federal regional planning policy also exist. Only three of theinterviewees saw the current political constellation in the local and cantonal parliamentsand authorities as exercising strong influence. This is surprising in that the party-politicalmajorities in many rural areas have been dominated by the bourgeois-conservative partiesand this situation has been further reinforced by the results of recent elections (advance ofthe right-wing Schweizerische Volkspartei (SVP) [Swiss Peoples Party] since the mid-1990s to the cost of the liberal-bourgeois circles of the CVP and FDP). In the opinion ofthree of the interviewees, the representatives of the conservative centre-right parties haveadopted a policy which is often incompatible with the regional-policy aims of eliminatingdisparity and boosting town-country solidarity, and could even be described as “explosive”(quote from one interview). These parties aim to reduce the influence of the central state(for example, in the area of public services, environmental protection, subsidy policy) andin this they run the danger of provoking the breakdown of political consensus for regional-political equalisation. At the same time, they tend to support the reduction ofenvironmental standards and the dilution of regional planning and have even succeededin achieving this in some areas (e.g. opening up of the agricultural zone under the revisedRPG, restructuring of deforestation competencies, a general weakening of protection andconservation authorities (BUWAL, cantonal authorities). On the other hand, charges ofweakness in the area of regional policy and a stronger interest in urban policy (demand forcompensation of the burdens on centres) could also be levelled at the left-wing parties.Thus, in the opinion of three of the interviewees, there is a real threat of (undesirable)competition between urban and regional policy.

The actual or potential difficulties in rural areas are summarised once again in Table 9.

Table 9: Summary of difficulties in rural areas from an economic, ecological, social/culturaland political perspective on the basis of the information provided in the interviews

Dimension Difficulty

Economic Concentration trends

Shift of economic activity to agglomeration areas

32

Decline in agriculture

Freezing and market saturation in the “hard” tourism sector

Ecological Agglomerisation

Land use

Traffic pollution

Loss of traditional landscape values

Socio-cultural Loss of attachment to the regions, identity

Treat to basic infrastructure supplies

Lack of training and employment opportunities/migration

Deficits in the area of participation, active involvement, integration capacity

Political Threatened softening of cohesion policy

Deregulation, particularly in the areas of environmental protection and regional planning

Gap between liberal economic policy and environmental policy

Privatisation of state enterprises and threat to maintenance of basic infrastructuresupply

Environmental economists have long believed that the lack of clearly-defined propertyrights to resources can lead to the over-use of resources. However, it is only recently thatthe focus has shifted to the relationship between property rights, resource regimes andsustainable landscape development (e.g. Kissling-Naef et al. 2000, Lenhard & Rodewald2000). New mixed forms of property ownership by individuals and the community and therediscovery of old forms (e.g. the common property regime) will prove both suitable andnecessary to the conservation of the “common good” of the landscape. These mixedinstitutional resource regimes depend on new partnerships and responsibilities for thelandscape. This also necessitates a mixed form of bottom-up and top-down processes.

33

5. The Challenges Facing Sustainable Rural Development

This chapter describes the economic, ecological and social/cultural challenges facing ruralareas and the way in which the concept of sustainability could contribute to this process.The information presented here is again based on the literature and the opinions of the 19experts interviewed.

5.1. The main challenges facing rural areas in the present and future

The interviewees identified the following central challenges for rural areas:

a) How can the politically elevated status of rural areas in Switzerland be maintained?

The increasingly popular liberalisation philosophy and strong policy emphasis on theproblems of urban centres is threatening to sideline regional policy. The liberalisedstate companies, and to some extent also the milk-processing plants, tend todistribute costs on the basis of distance from their operating centres. The threatenedincrease of negative externalities arising from the economic urban-rural imbalancemust be counteracted in future by both state equalisation and market corrections(internalised economic costs, energy control levies, traffic levies etc.).

b) How can the attractiveness of locations and the capacity to adapt to structural changebe improved to prevent the exodus from rural areas which is taking place in certainareas?

With respect to the concentration processes which favour urban centres andagglomerations over rural areas, the question arises as to how the latter can assertthemselves in global economic context and how competitive ability can be created forindigenous developments tailored to rural locations. The keywords here are innovationsupport and functional integration in urban areas. In the agricultural sector, the focusmust be placed on the product range, export opportunities and price policy.

c) How can quality of life and, in particular, environmental quality be preserved?

In terms of quality of life, rural areas enjoy a distinc t advantage over urban areas.Better quality of life is often the main reason people give for living in the country. Thestrong growth in the rural population has, however, resulted in overcrowding and theextension of settlements which in turn has resulted in losses with respect to quality oflife (landscape pollution, negative features of agglomerations, increases in traffic).While the traffic in the towns and cities is being calmed, traffic levels in rural areas areincreasing without restrictions. The extremely high level of environmental pollutionalong the Alpine transport routes (Uri, Leventina, San Bernardino, Grosser St. Bern-hard) and access routes to the tourist destinations (Prättigau, Surselva, Bergell,Goms, Kandertal, Simmental, Chablais Vaud/Valais) threatens to undermine theadvantages associated with rural locations. Quality of life also includes access toeducation and training facilities, new jobs, the media and communications world. Thekeywords here are: increased integration of the landscape into regional planningpolicy, prevention of settlement expansion, elimination of fiscal law disparity withinSwitzerland, involvement of the local authorities in the regional development plans.

d) Which disparities can still be tolerated?

Hitherto, regional policy aimed to eliminate disparities based on the disadvantagesposed by the distance between urban centres and remote regions. It is necessary, on

34

the one hand, to reduce economic, social and cultural disparities to a minimum while,on the other hand, promoting the compensations offered by a high quality livingenvironment which includes environmental quality, nature and landscape.

e) How can landscape conservation and maintenance be guaranteed and who shallresume responsibility for it?

The progressive decline in agriculture raises questions about widespread farming,particularly in large sparsely-populated mountain communities, and hence also theopening up of the landscape and the care and conservation of valuable features(steep slopes, mountain pastures, lowland moors, chestnut tree cultivation, old vineterraces etc.). The question also arises as to how ties between the non-farmingcommunity and the land can be strengthened and how the members of thiscommunity (e.g. owners of holiday homes) can be made to assume greaterresponsibility for their regions. The keywords here include: property discussion, town-country actor alliances, voluntary work, establishment of local and regional agencies,introduction of “land-related” school subjects to promote the development of thecorresponding skills among non-farmers (mestieri di terra).

f) How can the rural population be made to develop an attachment to their areas?

The traditional activities on which the identity of rural areas is based are disappearing(farming, small-scale commercial activities, industry). For their part, newcomers mustdevelop a psychological and physical link with their adopted location. In view of thework needed to maintain structures (landscape conservation and care, maintenanceof paths, water channels, social, political and cultural involvement), a sense ofregional responsibility in the form of a conscious activity not aimed at material gainmust be maintained against the background of the changing population structure.

g) How can the excessive ageing of the population in rural communities be prevented?

In the demographic structure of the mountain regions, the number of over-65 year-olds is increasing faster than in urban regions. This may give rise to problems in thesocial and cultural structure of village communities and with respect to the necessaryintegration of newcomers and successor establishment. The keywords here include:targeted creation of employment in rural centres, support for cultural facilities, socialamenities and initiatives.

h) How can rural areas be liberated from the myth of a the “intact happy agriculturalworld?

Rural areas no longer embody the enviable contrast to urban life that exists in theminds of urban dwellers. Urbanisation is spreading. The perpetuation of such mythsgive rise to the danger that the true processes and problems will fail to be identifiedand will not be taken seriously enough. Keywords include: greater urban/ruralexchange, urban-rural actor alliances.

i) How can interregional co-operation be intensified and the conscious of the concernedpopulation about ongoing processes in rural areas be reinforced?

The IHG regions (with their powerful community presidents) are today seen asseparate “petits royaumes" [“small kingdoms”]. This small-scale organisation mayhinder a more flexible adaptation to the new market challenges. Inter-regional co-operation and co-ordination is essential, not only from an economic perspective butalso from an ecological one. To achieve this, a cultural dynamism must emerge which

35

will break down the barriers erected by the rather backward-looking, politicallyconservative attitudes in rural regions. This applies also to the central Swiss regions.

This dynamic will also improve the acceptance of the population of projects leadingtowards sustainable development.

k) How can the traditional areas with dispersed settlement be reinforced withoutdestroying their rich landscape image?

The attraction of the traditional agricultural landscapes in the Swiss mountain regionslies not least in the highly varied regional settlement pattern. Due to the progressiveconversion of the thousands of agricultural outbuildings and barns dispersedthroughout the fields and meadows (that existed under the old decentralised systemof agricultural) into non-agricultural residences (e.g. for second homes and holidaychalets), the northern and inner Alpine areas risk losing the charm and attraction oftheir traditional agricultural landscape and declining into landscapes blighted by aplague of holiday houses. This trend could be counteracted with conversion optionsbeing restricted to those persons who are capable of and willing to make an active,i.e. agricultural-type contribution to the care and maintenance of this traditionalagricultural landscape. The public must also be given the right to be heard in relationto this redesign of the landscape. The principle which is valid today, i.e. “if the barn isa characteristic element of the landscape, it can be converted” is not only untenable interms of logic, it also leads to the private appropriation of a traditional landscapewhich is in fact a key public amenity. In Central Switzerland, significant value shouldbe attached to the presence of an “open” and freely accessible landscape as arecreational amenity. Here, in particular, the area of construction outside ofdesignated construction zones is a key factor in the separation of settlement and non-settlement areas.

5.2. The concept and aims of sustainable rural development

Rural development can be described as the process which improves the population’sbasic living conditions while also taking the environment, cultural identity and inter-regional solidarity into account (Stucki 1991). However, the concept of “sustainable ruraldevelopment” is not as easy to define. Thierstein & Lambrecht (1998) mention thefollowing aspects:

– sustainable development is an anthropocentric concept;

– the global aim of sustainability (in accordance with the UN World Conference in Rio in1992) must be “translated” at the level of individual states and regions;

– the three target and action dimensions - economy, ecology, social/cultural - must beconsidered simultaneously and in an integrated manner: for the economy this meansthe optimum use of scarce resources (allocation efficiency), for ecology it means inter-generation responsibility and the definition of global limits for the use of resources andfor the social dimension it means cohesion and elimination of disparities;

– sustainability is concretised in the following ways: (a) with a general model and a listof sectoral aims, (b) as a basic social right which should override private rights, e.g.the right to use one’s own land (Lenhard & Rodewald 2000), (c) as a social contract,whose content would, however, have little consensual force and (d) as a compromiseformula which suggests a resolution between the conflicts between preservation anddevelopment and often used in advertising slogans (sustainable Olympic Games,

36

sustainable mobile telephones etc.); the real problems do not arise until concreteprojects are implemented at local and regional level.

In terms of rural areas, the sustainability aim should be associated with the following basicquestions:

(a) Which spatial unit is defined as a basis for the evaluation of sustainability (the village,the region, Switzerland, Central Europe)?

(b) Should sustainability aims be described in a "top down" or "bottom up" process?

(c) Hence, is it true to say that in the case of Switzerland different sustainabilities arevalid as opposed to just one?

(d) Should rural areas not be primarily understood as areas that complement urbancentres which need the hinterland to compensate their lack of sustainability?

It is currently impossible to find clear answers to these questions or the criteria/indicatorsystems which would facilitate an evaluation of sustainability in Switzerland. The relevantstudies are now being carried out, at least on a sectoral basis. For this reason, we limitourselves here to policies and programmes that are sectoral, avoid or reduce deficits.These are summarised in Table 10.

Table 10: Sectors of the economic, social and ecological environment in rural areas, themeasures for their promotion in federal policies and programmes and their estimatedeffectiveness with respect to the degree of sustainability achieved (Data: Bundesamt fürStatistik, BUWAL 1997, OECD 1998, E = evaluation of effectiveness based on interviewswith experts)

Sector Counter-measures in the form offederal policies and programmes

Effectiveness with respect to thedegree of sustainability achieved (E =evaluation based on interviews withexperts)

Biodiversity Nature conservation and habitatprotection law: habitat inventories,preservation and maintenancegrants, ecological balance

Low (high number of endangered species,ongoing loss of habitats)

Water and soil Water protection law, Swiss soilprotection concept

Average (high level of access to treatmentplants but problems with ground anddrinking water)

Air Clean air legislation Low to average (problem pollutants,ozone, fine dust, NOX - bad, SO2 - good)

Noise Noise protection decree Low to average (noise protectionmeasures are expensive, hence alleviationtends to be sporadic; increase in noisefrom traffic)

Landscape Swiss landscape concept, regionalplanning law, nature conservationand habitat protection law

Low (loss of land through settlementactivity, ongoing “banalisation” of thelandscape)

37

Agriculture Agricultural policy 2002 (ecologicaldirect payments, ecological servicecertificate)

Average to high (implementation ofintegrated production successful (now ca.80% of holdings), organic farming lesssuccessful: percentage of organic farms inSwitzerland covering 95% of the Swissagricultural services; 7.3%, in mountainregions 15% of usable area) E

Forestry Forests law, international certification(FSC), forest reserves concept

Average (6% of usable area will becertified in 2002, forest reserves) E

Domestic tourism There is no federal law governingtourism

Low (high-impact tourism still dominant,trend towards low-impact tourismincreasing; high levels of traffic generated)E

Industry Environmental protection act,economic support, regional planning

Average (given decreasing prominence ofindustry in Switzerland) E

Non-tourism servicesector

Economic support, regional planning Could not be evaluated E

Energy consumption Energy law, Energy 2000 Pro-gramme, stabilisation targets

Low (modest targets not fulfilled; increase,particularly for traffic) E

Cultural diversity andidentity and socialintegration

Cultural promotion programmes,social policy

Could not be evaluated E

It is difficult to track the trends for the above-listed sectors. Positive developments arevisible in agriculture and forestry policy and in the area of low-impact tourism, whoseeffectiveness in terms of sustainability which must be considered in integral termsdepends, however, on the two other sectors of economy and society. The integration ofsectoral policies is, therefore, a key imperative for the question of sustainable ruraldevelopment.

38

6. On the Road to Sustainable Rural Development

In this chapter, it is intended to present the preconditions (in the opinion of theinterviewees) necessary for a policy of consistency and sustainability in rural developmentand explore how the current controversies and competition between conservation andconsumption interests can at least be reduced.

6.1. Summary of the strengths and weaknesses of Swiss regional policy

For many years, Swiss regional policy was mainly a regional economic policy whoseinstruments in the 1970s were derived from the discussions surrounding the disparitiesthat existed between the mountain regions and central areas at the time. In some cases,these instruments received extensive federal (and cantonal) financial support right up toaround the mid-1990s. The ten federal laws on regional policy in the strict sense (cf.Chapter 2) together with agricultural policy (CHF 4 thousand million), forest policy (CHF115 million) and the BUWAL nature and habitats conservation credit (CHF 45 million), givea total federal subsidy of approximately CHF 4.285 thousand millions in 1999. Thiscorresponds to approximately 9% of total federal spending. To this is added, considerablecantonal grants, some of which also originate from the federal fiscal equalisation andcontributions from private funds (ca. CHF 40 million from Swiss Mountain Aid andSponsorship for Mountain Communities). Remember that agriculture never was the onlyagent of rural economy in Switzerland.

The following points were singled out as the predominant strengths and weaknesses ofcurrent regional and agriculture policy and its programmes (in accordance with Chapters2.2.1-2.2.2). (The assignment to the three sectors reflects a weighting and is notexclusive.):

a) Strengths

Ecological sector:

– The Swiss Landscape Fund has become an important regional developmentinstrument.

– The cantons have made progress in issues surrounding awareness of landscapeconservation (e.g. new generation of direction plans).

– The direct payments regime of the new agricultural policy has hitherto facilitated +/-global management which takes ecological concerns into account.

– The IHG instrument was positively evaluated by the state and the New Direction inRegional Policy was positively evaluated by the OECD (Bundesrat 1996).

Economic sector:

– Successes in the establishment of businesses, in the promotion of small and medium-sized businesses and in the improvement of living conditions in mountain areas.

– A (predominantly individual) regional spillover effect through the promotion ofinfrastructure.

– The new (1997) but not yet evaluated instruments Region Plus and Innotour were

39

generally positively viewed (a “pull” as opposed to “push” approach as in the IHG).

– Subsidiarity approach with a pledge to assume residual costs (e.g. of 50% in the caseof Regio Plus).

– Innovative foreign trade projects are also supported.

Socio-political sector:

– Broader political and public consensus in regional policy.

– The solidarity has boosted the self-confidence of mountain populations.

– Motivation and co-operation were fostered by the IHG.

b) Weaknesses

Ecological sector:

– Negative selective effects from some of the infrastructure support, above allcontradictions in tourism support (transport systems, artificial snow equipment), andreclamation/restoration projects.

– With the exception of the IHG, the Interreg III programme and Regio Plus, there is nomonitoring system with effect control.

– The synergies between nature conservation and tourism, tourism and landscape arenot exploited innovatively enough (e.g. nature parks, biosphere reserves, landscapedevelopment concepts).

– No sustainability assessment (exception: agricultural policy).

– The federal regional concept is only partly implementable due to a lack ofcompetencies at federal level.

– Targets for stemming land use and landscape losses have not been fulfilled.

Economic sector:

– Economic interests are often too prominent.

– The regional spillover from the IHG projects is insufficient; private interests oftendominate (jealousies exist), difficulties exist in concentrating activities and settingpriorities.

– High level of subsidy dependency in mountain areas hinders individual initiative.

– Innovation-oriented support policy aimed at professions and activities outsideagriculture and tourism is not sufficiently developed.

– Landscape policy is primarily aimed at individual holdings and there is insufficientfocus on regional interests.

– The internalised regional policy, which was established as early as the 1980s, was notsupported, i.e. regional policy must continue to promote a policy of the equalisation of

40

growing economic externalities instead of setting the lever to market control.

Socio-political sector:

– In some regions, the positive aspects of development projects are too dependent on afew people.

– The number innovative ideas and projects originating in the regions remains too low.

– There is insufficient exchange of information between the mountain regions withinSwitzerland and abroad.

– Regional policy remains sectoral and insufficiently integral in its organisation.

– Despite the New Direction in Regional Policy, no significant turning point is visible withrespect to sustainability.

In summary, the interviewees confirmed that responsibility for regional policy falls withinthe remit of the state. Individual interviewees also saw the need for a basic revision ofcertain instruments, in particular the IHG, and believe that, as part of a move towardsincreased autonomy, some tasks should be transferred to the cantons as part of clearlyformulated and controlled service contracts. Under the constitution, however, the state is,also obliged fulfil the aims of sustainability in regional policy and must, therefore, continueto assume an important role. It is also obliged under the terms of various internationalenvironmental agreements to pursue a policy of the preservation and renewal of naturaland cultural resources. Hence, many inter-regional interests can only observed andimplemented by the state.

6.2. Regional policy in Switzerland today and potential improvements withrespect to sustainability

Switzerland has a well developed set of regional policy instruments. Cohesion is a veryimportant aim of the Federal Council and features in the legislature planning for 1999-2003. Nevertheless, various developments show that rural regions in Switzerland arefacing tougher conditions. Precisely because of their close functional links with the highecological and cultural values in these areas, the economic and social changes deservemaximum attention. The concept of sustainability provides an opportunity to link ruralareas with urban centres, not in terms of progressive urbanisation and devaluation of thelandscape but through a complementary development which combines the high quality ofnatural areas with high quality of living conditions for people, the basis of which is anecologically and culturally aware economy based on local resources. Thus, instead ofimplementing a policy which disconnect towns/cities and the country, a policy ofboundaries, i.e. a kind of “policy of peripheries”, should be developed, which is based onthe close links between urban and rural areas while also being aware of their borders andperipheries. Thus, towns/cities should no longer be exclusively defined from the town/cityperspective and the mountain regions from the mountain perspective. In concrete terms,this hitherto non-existent linking of the concept of sustainability with an economicallyoriented regional policy could be implemented as follows (proposals made byinterviewees):

Actors at political-administrative level

• Basic corrections and adjustments must be implemented in other policy areas.

41

The current distortions between market prices and real costs arise from an energy policywhich has led to a significantly increase in the global transportation of goods. Energyprices must be increased significantly.

• The state is responsible for sustainable development and hence also for regionalpolicy.

The state must not withdraw from regional policy. Stronger emphasis must instead beplaced on the realisation of sustainability. Criteria/indicator systems must be developed toenable the introduction of a sustainability assessment. In addition, a monitoring processshould also be introduced into regional policy.

• Federal policy in general must become more cohesive.

The state’s various aims must be more strongly integrated to do justice to the cross-section task of sustainable regional development (cf. Landschaftskonzept Schweiz,BUWAL 1998). This means in addition to the (political and instrumental) reinforcement ofthe environment sector, in particular, the environmental impact assessment must be morestrongly integrated into other policy sectors and planning (cf. Knoepfel 1997).

• Greater differentiation of the concept of “rural areas” and more tailored regional policyinstruments.

The concept of rural areas should be more differentiated to facilitate the identification oftheir difficulties (c.f. Thierstein und Lambrecht 1998). The concept of “regionaldevelopment types” (“regionale Entwicklungstypen”) (Bätzing et al. 1995) offers a possibleapproach here. Target values and measures based on the – participatory – socio-economic analysis of these areas would have to be defined. The range of regional policyinstruments should then be tailored to these differentiated regional qualities. The IHGsector should, in particular, be reconsidered. The state should implement an impulse-oriented regional policy and leave the task of small-scale regional policy based on servicecontracts incorporating sustainability to the cantons and/or major regions.

• The new agricultural policy should be expanded.

The development of agricultural policy is heading in the direction of the further removal ofmarket support (and possibly also of direct payments). Meanwhile, the Federal Office forAgriculture’s plans (Horizont 2010, BLW 2000) include the idea that the resourcesbecoming available should not be used to increase direct payments but to financeancillary social measures to accompany structural change (e.g. early retirement rule,grants for retraining and further training). As opposed to this, representatives of thefarming associations are demanding that direct payment levels be at least maintained atcurrent levels and that new motivation incentives be provided. It has also been proposedthat resources being made available from the withdrawal of market support would bebetter used to support of non-agricultural activities as additional sources of income forfarmers, expand the range of products provided in agricultural, improve regional marketingand in the general reinforcement of regional structures. This means that agricultural policywould become a stronger regional policy instrument. This proposal would bring about a“regionalisation” of agricultural policy (instead of an exclusive focus on the individual farm)and could facilitate an improved integration of the aims of sustainable rural development.Incentives for conversion to organic farming should also be significantly increased as thecurrent percentage of organic holdings remains very low (approximately 8%).

• Environment policy and regional planning should be intensified.

42

The clear deficits in the area of quantitative soil protection and nature and landscapeconservation in general require: (a) an improvement in the implementation of existinginstruments, (b) increased state competency in regional policy and (c) new instruments torestrict the use of resources and protect land that is not yet built on ("quantitative regionalpreservation" similar to "quantitative forest preservation", internalisation of externalities,use of economic instruments (monetarisation), national concept of settlementdevelopment, new planning concepts for the area of construction outside the designatedconstruction zones, regional use planning as opposed to local authority use planning inrural areas, corrective programme for unsuitable buildings, harmonisation of cantonal taxand construction laws).

• The conservation/protection bodies should become more involved in regionaldevelopment questions

In the past, little impression was made by the involvement of the environmentalassociations and Federal Office for the Environment, Forests and Landscape (BUWAL)in regional policy. However, rural areas are the best places for the implementation of theconcept of sustainability. Given that a clear emphasis in regional policy was placed oneconomic issues, the development of a separate comprehensive environment-basedconcept is particularly important. At present, there are no regional policy instrumentsaimed at environmental protection.

Actors at economic level

• Policies to promote economic development should also promote integration and shouldnot encourage urban-rural rivalry.

Economic support for rural Switzerland should not trigger futile competition betweentowns/cities and the country (c.f. Messerli 1999) but should instead serve the purpose ofintegration. In terms of business establishment policy, in cases involving equal locationconditions and ecological balance, rural centres should be given an advantage (e.g.through tax law) over large agglomerations. The federal authorities could exercisecorresponding control through the loan guarantee legislation. On the other hand, themarket also necessitates the establishment of a national economic body which would takethe interests of rural areas into account.

• Economic support should be based on regional location qualities.

Economic support should be increasingly dictated by the capital embodied in the locationand it should support innovation in location-based economic sectors. The centre for herbalmedicine in Olivone in the canton of Ticino, which is providing exciting new employmentopportunities as a research centre while benefiting from the cultivation of medicinal herbsin the region, is a good example of this phenomenon. As a rule, combined employmentopportunities arise in the context of the processing of raw materials from primaryproduction (e.g. carpentry workshops, furniture industry, perfume manufacture, crafts). Tothis end, the mountain regions must shake off their kitsch image as the home of outwork inSwitzerland. The necessary financial instruments, such as Regio Plus, are available. Inmany cases, however, suitable projects are lacking.

• Regional marketing must be promoted more strongly.

A number of examples exist to demonstrate the successful marking of regional products(Napfmilch, Emmentaler Ruschtig BE, Emmer/Einkorn-Projekt im Klettgau SH, "GranAlpin", Stockalperweg am Simplon VS, etc.). Other projects are struggling with logistical

43

problems ("LaNaTour", "NAT"). What is needed here is a national regional marketingnetwork which would provided the necessary structures. The cantons must become moreinvolved in regional marketing, particularly in view of the fact that the national instrumentsalready exist (sales promotion decree).

• The landscape should also be “marketed”.

Traditional landscapes are very popular and have an increasingly important role to play inthe range of tourism products available. Hence, projects to improve the landscape shouldalso be viewed in terms of increased value added for tourism or agricultural products. Newlabels need to be created here, e.g. national park, biosphere reserve, regional natureparks. In international terms, Switzerland has some catching up to do. The landscapedevelopment concepts (Landschaftsentwicklungskonzepte - LEK), which are not yet verycommon, provide an opportunity for progress in this area.

Actors at social and cultural level

• Interaction between the regional development agencies must be supported.

The federal authorities should provide special programmes for the regional developmentagencies, including international ones, to motivate training and further training. Suchprogrammes exist at national level but they are insufficiently exploited. We suggested thatseveral federal offices acting in the field of agriculture, landuse planning and environment(BLW, ARE, BUWAL) initiate a real strategy to promote that exchanges.

• Regional Agenda 21 instead of Local Agenda 21

Local Agenda 21 is based on the participation of the population in the development oftargets for a narrowly defined lebensraum. To strengthen regional identity, theseprocesses should be implemented at regional level. With the help of such sustainabilityforums, the population can formulate targets and responsibilities which integrate andobligate private and public land ownership equally (common property principle). Thus, acommon denominator and balance can be achieved between those persons who havepolitical influence and property rights but lack motivation and those who are motivated butlack the necessary property rights and political influence.

• Bottom-up processes should be promoted in tune with general and global aims

The concept of sustainability only assumes a clear form when becomes part of a concreteregional development debate. The regional development concepts developed inaccordance with the IHG provide an important opportunity here but they need bedeveloped in a far more participatory way than hitherto. The regional support agenciesshould be opened up to the entire population to create overlap and intersection betweencost unit groups, beneficiaries, those affected by possible problems and decision makers.Exclusively bottom-up processes risk losing sight of the global aims (e.g. preservation of anational valuable natural and cultural legacy). The slow-moving conflicts surrounding theAletsch-Bietschhorn UNESCO natural world legacy area, the extension of the NationalPark and the Entlebuch biosphere reserve show that the desired outcome can only beachieved through a combination of top-down and bottom-up processes.

• Strengthen cultural identity

The innovative spirit is strong in rural areas and is strongly dependent on the motivationand participation of the population. This, in turn, is based on cultural self-image andidentity. Identity is founded on the “inner (socialising) structure” of an area, on familiarity

44

and the sense of well-being in the interaction with the environment (responsiveenvironment). Attachment to a place is particularly important in a highly mobile off-landsociety.

6.3. From the mountain regions policy to a comprehensive regional policy

For a long time, Swiss regional policy was dominated by the mountain regions policy. Thecrises in the clock-making and textile industries in the 1970s necessitated its expansion toother semi-urban regions, for example in Jura, upper Leventina and in east Switzerland. In1996, in addition to the mountain regions, other rural areas were included in the remit ofthe Regio Plus program. Since the 1970s, agglomerisation has continued to progress andin addition to large parts of central Switzerland (west-east axis Berne-Olten-Aarau-Zurich-Winterthur-Frauenfeld, north-south axis Schaffhausen-Bülach-Zurich-Zug-Lucerne) nowalso includes the major agglomerations of Basle, "Léman-Ville" (Montreux-Vevey-Lausanne-Nyon-Geneva) and Lugano-Mendrisiotto-Chiasso-Como (I)-Varese (I) andvarious isolated towns in the Alpine belt, such as Chur, Brig, Belli nzona and Sitten. Thisdevelopment of the agglomerations is infringing on the traditional institutional territorialborders of local authorities, canton and the state.

On the other hand, there has been something of a shift in former problems: rural areas areno longer primarily afflicted by migration and enjoyed the highest rates of populationgrowth in the period between 1980 and 1990. According to the statistics published by theBundesamt für Statistik, the urban centres have recently shown a slightly higher rate ofpopulation growth. The perception of the problems facing the urban centres has alreadymade a political impact in that the new Federal Swiss Constitution of 1998 includes a“towns/cities article” (Article 50) which stipulates that equal consideration be given to thesituation in mountain regions, towns, cities and agglomerations.

This development is no longer about eliminating all of the differences that exist betweenurban and rural areas. As Minister Moriz Leuenberger stated the intention is not to havecities everywhere or the country everywhere but to create an alliance of the two. This inturn means that economic and regional development in rural areas must differ to that intowns and cities. The differences between life in a pulsating urban centre and a sparsely-populated rural area, which are manifest in the varying social, ecological, cultural andeconomic conditions, should not be perceived as disadvantages. For this reason, life in anon-urban context must not be associated with social, cultural and economic conditionswhich have a negative impact on the quality of life. The regional policy of the future mustnot, therefore, aim to level out the various regional qualities but to promote cultural,ecological and economic differences between the individual regions. Hence, the aims ofcurrent regional policy to strengthen the (often already strong) peripheral centres are tooone-sided. What is needed are incentives to facilitate (the often conscious choice of) lifeoutside the centres, in remote mountain villages or small communities in CentralSwitzerland which contrast with urban life. How this contrast should look is ultimatelysubject to a socio-cultural process of identification which can only be developed on thebasis of a broad participatory process (e.g. as part of a Local Agenda 21). The regionalpolicy programmes of the future should, therefore, be based on the promotion of thevariety of the different regional qualities in Switzerland. Thus, sustainability in thedevelopment of rural areas should be sought in the space-economy-culture triangle. Thevariety of spatial-cultural characteristics will ultimately become a cultural commodity forSwiss and European society. The opportunities for rural areas do not lie, therefore, in theimitation of urban centres (by copying facilities, for example in tourism – a golf course for

45

each region, snow canons for each region etc. – as is often the case today) or in a policyof stubborn isolation ("we know best what is right for us!" as an example of politicalpolemic in defence of privileged legal treatment) but instead in the integration of a nationallebensraum whose varied cultural and landscape forms our individual and general socialidentity.

46

7. Results of the Workshop of 19 September 2000

There were 23 participants in the half-day workshop held on 19 September in Berne.Participants included both the interviewees and other interested parties, i.e. from WWFSwitzerland.

An introductory debate was held following a presentation of the study. The participantswere then divided into two working groups, the topic of the first being “Landscape andRural Development (kick-off speech by Jörg Wyder, Director SAB) and the second“Regional Planning and Rural Development” (kick-off speech by Dr Daniel Wachter, ARE).

During the introductory debate, the study overview was welcomed and approved by therepresentative of the Federal Office for Agriculture and the State Secretariat forEconomics (SECO). Some of the results were, however, disputed, i.e. thestrengths/weaknesses analysis. According to both representatives, the instruments wereevaluated too negatively and it was emphasised that the New Direction in Regional Policyof 1997 placed a strong emphasis on the participation of the people, co-ordination andecology. For her part, the SEREC representative stressed that it had, in general beenpossible to support co-operation in the regions (institution building) thanks to the IHG. Asopposed to this, the FLS and WWF representatives stated that there were still too manynegative effects on the land and environment. The reality of the progressive“Californisation” of the landscape speaks for itself. Attention was also drawn to the factthat regional marketing was generally well evaluated in the study, although it is causingincreases in traffic. Mr Wyder clearly demonstrated the extent to which the situation inSwiss rural areas contrasts with that in developing countries. Whereas the latter faceserious problems in the areas of nutrition and quality of life, the situation in Switzerlandwith respect to nutrition is one of excess and there is little evidence of quality-of-lifedeficits.

The following points were raised in the course of the discussions:

• An effect model could make it easier to identify the hierarchy of influence factors.

• A concept, criteria/indicator system and the corresponding target values are neededfor the definition and measurement of sustainability in rural areas.

• The number of actors to be taken into account is much higher when those from areassuch as freight transport, telecommunications and European and global institutions areincluded. This will make it more difficult to establish a hierarchy.

• Greater co-operation between agricultural policy and regional policy could give rise touseful synergies.

• Agricultural policy should replace the existing classification in production zones (valleyarea, mountain zones) with a zoning based on typical regional agricultural zones.

• With respect to agricultural policy changes, the job of the farmer and the image of thefamily farm holdings must be revised; it could also make sense to compensate non-farmers for services provided in the area of landscape maintenance.

Basically, it was confirmed that rural areas in Switzerland are in no way equivalent toagricultural areas. It is important to dispel the myths here. Thus, agricultural policy cannotsolve all of the problems surrounding rural development or guarantee the decentralised

47

settlement of the country. In future, it would also make sense to implement a regionaldifferentiation in agricultural policy. Concrete umbrella agricultural service contracts shouldbe developed in the regions, on which the direct payments policy would be based.

Ultimately the questions as to what actually constitutes “rural areas” and the ecological,economic and social targets to be attained in the individual regions remained unanswered.

48

References

Bätzing, W., Messerli, P. and Perlik, M. 1995. Regionale Entwicklungstypen, Analyse undGliederung des schweizerischen Berggebietes, Beiträge zur Regionalpolitik,BIGA (now: SECO), Bern.

Brandner, B., Hirsch, M., Meier-Dallach, H.-P., Sauvain, P. and Stalder, U. 1995. Skitou-rismus, Von der Vergangenheit zum Potential der Zukunft, NFP "Wirksamkeitstaatlicher Massnahmen", Verlag Rüegger AG, Chur/Zürich.

Bundesamt für Landestopographie, 2000. Atlas der Schweiz, CD-ROM, Bern.

Bundesamt für Landwirtschaft. 2000. Horizont 2010, Strategiepapier zur Weiterent-wicklung der Agrarpolitik, Bern.

Bundesamt für Landwirtschaft 2000a. Agrarbericht 2000, EDMZ, Bern

Bundesamt für Raumplanung, 1996. Grundzüge der Raumordnung Schweiz, Bern.

Bundesamt für Raumplanung, 2000. Neue Zahlen zur Veränderung der Bodennutzung,Die Siedlungsfläche der Schweiz wächst weiterhin um einen Quadratmeter proSekunde, dossier BRP 1/00, Bern.

Bundesamt für Statistik, 1992ff. Arealstatistik Schweiz, Bodennutzung in den Kantonen,BFS, Bern.

Bundesamt für Statistik, BUWAL. 1997. Umwelt in der Schweiz, EDMZ, Bern.

Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft (BUWAL), 1998. LandschaftskonzeptSchweiz, EDMZ, Bern.

Bundesrat, 1996. Botschaft über die Neuorientierung der Regionalpolitik, EDMZ, Bern.

Clivaz, Christophe, 2000. Ecologisation du tourism alpin en Suisse et dans le canton duValais, Influence des réseaux d'action publique sur le changement politique,idheap/université de Lausanne.

Cornish, J. and Bryden, J. 1999. WWF Rural development projects review, The ArkletonCentre, University of Aberdeen.

Eidgenössisches Finanzdepartement, EFD, 2000. Voranschlag 2000, Botschaft, Bern

Hanser, C., Bühler-Conrad, E. and Keller, T. 1985. Auswirkungen von Infrastrukturin-vestitionen, Empirischer Beitrag zur Erfolgskontrolle der Regionalpolitik desBundes, Thema-Heft der Programmleitung NFP "Regionalprobleme, VerlagRüegger, Grüsch.

Kissling-Naef, I., Varone, F., Mauch, C. (Eds.) 2000. Institutionelle Ressourcenregime inder Schweiz am Beispiel der Ressourcen Boden und Luft, Verlag Rüegger,Grüsch.

Knoepfel Peter, 1997. Switzerland, in: National Environmental Policies, a comparativestudy of capacity-building (M. Jänicke, H. Weidner, Eds.), S. 175-197, SpringerBerlin.

Lenhard, V. C. and Rodewald, R. 2000. Die Allmende als Chance, Gaia 9/1, 50-57.

Lendi, M. 1983. Schweizerische Regionalpolitik, Schweiz. Zbl. Staats- und Gemeinde-verwaltung, 84/6, 241-270.

LID - Landwirtschaftlicher Informationsdienst, 2000. Statistiken, homepage www.lid.ch.

49

Messerli, P. 1999. Zukünftige Perspektiven für die Regionalpolitik, in: 25 Jahre Investi-tionshilfe für Berggebiete, S. 12-23, Bundesamt für Wirtschaft und Arbeit (now:SECO), Bern.

OECD, 1998. Examens des performances environnementales, Suisse, Paris.

Rodewald, R. 1999. Sehnsucht Landschaft, Landschaftsgestaltung unter ästhetischemGesichtspunkt, Chronos Verlag, Zürich.

Stucki E. W. 1991. Le développement équilibré du monde rural en Europe occidentale /Balanced development of the countryside in Western Europe, Conseil del'Europe, Strasbourg (Sauvegarde de la nature no 58).

Thierstein, A. and Lambrecht M. 1998. Raumordnung und nachhaltige Entwicklung:Handlungsansätze für eine nachhaltige Raumentwicklung in der Schweiz,Bundesamt für Raumplanung, EDMZ, Bern.

50

Annex 1: The Main Actors and their Roles in Rural Areas

Federal Authorities

Federal Office for Regional Development (ARE) (up to 1.7.2000 known as FederalOffice for Regional Planning (BRP). The Sustainability and Alpine Conventiongroup, previously BUWAL, and the Service for General Transport Issues wereintegrated into the new department)

Swiss Federal Ministry of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communication(UVEK)

Action level

• European, cross-border national (cantonal)

Budget and offices

• 6,007,550 / 7,500 (Expenses/Revenue in CHF, preliminary budget 2000); 29 offices

Comment

ARE has few competencies and, in particular, no effective instruments of support. Theoffice passes framework laws and regional policy principles and carries out co-ordinationtasks (e.g. verification of the legality of cantonal direction plans, passing of sectoraldirection plans, responsible for the co-ordination of the transnational Interreg IIIb pro-gramme "Alpine Area", international co-operation, legal supervision in particular in mattersconcerning non-zone-conforming construction outside of construction zones). Inaccordance with the federal constitution, responsibility for regional planning is assigned tothe cantons.

Internet

• www.raumentwicklung.admin.ch

Federal Office for Agriculture (BLW)

• Swiss Federal Ministry of Economics (EVD)

Action level

• International, national, regional, Einzelbetrieb

Budget and Offices

• 3,605,825,300 / 31,304,000 (expenses/revenue in CHF, preliminary budget 2000);240 offices

CommentIn accordance with the constitution, the BLW is responsible for agricultural policy. It isinvolved in the development of strategies for agricultural policy which, in accordance withthe constitution, aim to achieve sustainable and market-oriented production and multi-functional agriculture and concentrates support on farms involved in tillage and cultivation.

51

The BLW is also involved in agricultural trade policy and the development of rural areas(e.g. reclamation projects, direct payments).

Internet

• www.blw.admin.ch

State Secretariat for Economics (SECO), Department of Location Support

Swiss Federal Ministry of Economics (EVD)

1st Department

• Department for Regional Development Policy (RESF)

Action Level

• International, cross-border, national, regional

Budget and Offices

• 18,013,200 (expenses in CHF, preliminary budget 2000); 10 employees)

Comment

The RESF is concerned with policy conception, co-ordination with other federaldepartments and the implementation of federal regional development policy. It implementsthe various regional-policy instruments (IHG, Interreg, Regio Plus, BG through theallocation of loan guarantees and interest contributions in mountain regions) and is alsoinvolved in European regional planning policy. In 1997, a New Direction in Regional Policywas passed with the revision of the IHG of 1974 and the introduction of the Regio Plusprogramme. Under the new legislation, the responsibility for the definition andguaranteeing of investment aid loans was reassigned to the cantons. The failure toincorporate the RESF into the new Federal Office for Regional Development could beseen as a missed opportunity.

2nd Department

• Department for Switzerland as a Business Location (WSSF)

Action Level

• International, national, regional

Budget

• 6,820,800 (Expenses in CHF, preliminary budget 2000)

CommentThe job of the WSSF is to provide economic support in structurally weak areas inaccordance with the federal resolution on the promotion of areas of economic renewal(currently under revision).

3rd Department

52

• Tourism (TOSF)

Action Level

• National, international, regional

Budget

• 39,416,600 (Expenses in CHF, preliminary budget 2000)

Comment

The Tourism Department is mainly involved in the definition of tourism policy aims. Itheads the tourism and transport parliamentary group and provides support for the tourismpromotion activities of "Schweiz Tourismus" and the Swiss Association for Hotel Loans(SGH). This public law body guarantees loans for the upgrading of hotels and spas. Itimplements the Federal Law for the Promotion of Hotel and Health Spa Credits(Bundesgesetz über die Förderung des Hotel- und Kurortskredites). The “Innotour” federalresolution on innovation in tourism exists since 1998. The TOSF is currently working on areport on the improvement of the structure and quality of Swiss tourism which is due to becompleted by the end of 2001.

Internet

• www.seco-admin.ch

Federal Office for Housing (BWO), Federal Office for Emergency Supplies (BWL)

• Swiss Federal Ministry of Economics (EVD)

Action Level

• National, regional

Budget and Offices

• 405,808,700 / 3,830,000 (Expenses/revenue in CHF, preliminary budget 2000); 53offices (BWO), ca. 40 offices (BWL)

CommentThe BWO supports the construction of homes and home ownership throughoutSwitzerland (based on the law on the home construction and the promotion of homeownership) and living conditions in mountain regions (based on the VWEG). The secondof these is only valid until late 2000. The office for emergency supplies ensures the supplyof essential goods, e.g. food, petrol, heating oil, medicines and industrial goods inSwitzerland during crises and emergencies. It is also involved in the preparation of othermeasures, for example, the storage of supplies (mandatory storage) measures to controlavailability (nutrition guarantee), consumption control (distribution, rationing) andmeasures to guarantee services (e.g. transport and insurance).

Internet

• www.evd.admin.ch

53

Swiss Federal Ministry for Financial Administration (EFV)

Department of Financial Planning, Budget, Accounting, Fiscal Equalisation, Swiss FederalMinistry of Finance (EFD)

Action Level

• National, cantonal

Budget and Offices

• 3,939,407,107/1,936,257,840 (Expenses/revenue in CHF, preliminary budget 2000);183 offices

Comment

This is the home of fiscal equalisation, a central instrument of Swiss federalism. Apackage of reforms for a new fiscal equalisation is currently being prepared and is due tocome into force in 2004/5. Numerous overlaps exist with respect to the federation andcantons and it is intended to apply load and resource levelling between the state and thecantons to eliminate disparities between the cantons. The funding for fiscal equalisation isnow taken from direct federal taxation.

Internet

• www.efd.admin.ch

Swiss Federal Ministry for Tax Administration (ESV), Federal Office for Buildingsand Logistics (BBL) and others

• Swiss Federal Ministry of Finance (EFD)

Action Level

• National

Comment

The direct federal taxation, general consumption taxes, control levies (e.g. Engine-Power-Based Heavy Vehicle Levy - LSVA) and value added tax have an indirect but stronginfluence on rural regional development. The federal authorities have no control over fiscalharmonisation (tax scales etc.) between the cantons and the local authorities. Theresponsibilities of the new Federal Office for Buildings and Logistics (BBL) include theproperty management of the civil federal administration.

Internet

• www.efd.admin.ch

Federal Office for the Environment, Forests and Landscape (BUWAL)

• Swiss Federal Ministry of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communication(UVEK)

Action Level

54

• International, national, cantonal, regional, local

Budget and Offices

• 523,774,400/3,628,000 (Expenses/revenue in CHF, preliminary budget 2000); 266offices

Comment

Under the constitution, the protection and conservation of nature and habitats is theresponsibility of the cantons. The development of protective inventories is, however, ajoint state/cantonal task and the same applies for the financing of maintenance andimplementation measures. The cantons are responsible for the protection of habitats alsoat local level. The federation has significant powers in the area of defining limit values andthe relevant measures (e.g. mandatory environmental impact assessment). BUWAL hassupervisory control of forests (forest conservation, deforestation policy). BUWAL has notpreviously had much involvement in actual regional policy.

Internet

• www.buwal.ch

Federal Office for Roads (ASTRA), Federal Office for Transport (BAV), FederalOffice for Civil Aviation (BAZL), Federal Office for Energy (BFE), Federal Office forWater and Geology (BWG), Federal Office for Communication (BAKOM), SwissFederal Ministry of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communication (UVEK)

Action Level

• National, cantonal, regional

Budget and Offices

• ASTRA: 2,861,186,500/4,975,000; BAV: 3,659,327,220/6,976,000; BAZL:70,046,625/ 27,740,000; BFE: 115,629,300/26,272,000 (Expenses/revenue in CHF,preliminary budget 2000); 141 offices (ASTRA), 150 offices (BAV), 154 offices(BAZL), 162 offices (BFE)

CommentThe infrastructure authorities are for the most part responsible for national road building,Alpine transit (NEAT), Bahn 2000 (railways), the awarding of planning authorisation forelectric power lines, licences for cable cars, cable lifts, power stations and air fields. Thestate no longer has influence in the definition of train timetables.

Internet

• www.uvek.admin.ch

Federal Ministry of Defence, Protection of the Population and Sport (VBS)

Action Level

• National

55

Budget and Offices

• 4,653,696,805/69,438,600 (Expenses/revenue in CHF, preliminary budget 2000);123,13 offices

Comment

The VBS is responsible for the implementation army reform which will have a significanteconomic effect on some rural regions. Similarly, the conversion of military facilities willmake it possible to open up former military buildings and facilities (air fields) for civilianuses.

Internet

• www.vbs.admin.ch

Federal Swiss Federal Council and Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (EDA)

Action Level

• International, national

Comment

The bilateral agreements with the EU which were ratified by the Swiss people in the year2000 make provisions for regulations in the areas of land, air and passenger travel and inagriculture which should prove both positive and negative for rural areas.

Internet

• www.parlament.ch

Federal Office for Culture (BAK)

Federal Ministry of the Interior (EDI)

Action Level

• International, national, regional

CommentIn addition to the promotion of culture, the Federal Office for Culture is also responsible forprotection, care and maintenance of monuments.

Internet

• www.bak.admin.ch

National Public-Law Institutions

Swiss Landscape Fund (FLS)

Action Level

56

• National, cantonal, regional, local

Offices

• 3.85 offices

Comment

The FLS was founded by the Federal Assembly in 1991 (700th anniversary of the SwissConfederation) and allocated CHF 50 million for a period of ten years. Funding for afurther ten years up to 2011 was authorised by parliament in 1991. The FLS providesfinancial incentives for voluntary measures for the preservation and restoration oflandscapes, natural and cultural monuments. This principle promotes the willingness ofregional and local agencies to engage in self-help. It also gives rise to synergy effects inthe areas of landscape, tourism, construction industry and native and traditional crafts.Through its grants, the FLS provides effective regional economic aid, i.e. in structurallyweak regions. The financial aid has multiple and “snowball” effect. In many cases, ittriggers multiple investments. The FLS is also active in the media.

Internet

• www.fls-fsp.ch

Independent State Companies and Federal Public Limited Companies

Name

• Swisscom AG, Post, SBB AG [Swiss Railways]

Action Level

• International, national, cantonal, regional, local

Offices

• 22,000 (Swisscom), 55,000 (Post), 30,000 (SBB AG) employees

Comment

These three former state companies have been partly privatised since 1.1. 1998 (Post,Swisscom) and 1.1 1999 (SBB AG). As a result of this process, the companies which arefully or partly owned by the state become legally independent. The state sets frameworkconditions (e.g. provision of basic postal services throughout the country), but alsodemands profitability. Many jobs have already been lost as part of the privatisationprocess (10,000 in SBB over the past eight years, 7000 in Swisscom up to 2003). Therural cantons of Uri, Tessin and Wallis and the arc of the Jura have been particularly badlyaffected by the job cuts. Plans exist for the sale by the state of its shares in Post, SBB andSwisscom which would mean an even greater threat to basic services. The “order andpayment” principle was introduced in the SBB regional traffic and seen as positive. This isnow also being proposed for the Post. The creation of a cohesion fund, established fromthe accumulated profits of the Post, SBB and Swisscom and used for the support ofinnovation and conversion projects in the affected regions, is also being discussed.

Internet

57

• www.swisscom.ch, www.post.ch, www.sbb.ch

National Private-Law Institutions

Swiss Working Group for the Mountain Regions (SAB)

Action Levels

• International, national, cantonal, regional

Income and Membership

• CHF 2,510,000 (Annual Report, 1998-1999); 1655 members

CommentThe SAB is an association which was founded in 1943. Its members include all of themountain cantons, mountain local authorities and self-help organisations, the mountainregions (IHG Regions) and other bodies in mountain areas as well as numerousindividuals. It is SAB’s aim to maintain mountain regions as living and economically viableareas, to promote the sustainable use of existing resources in mountain areas, to achieveequal opportunities for the inhabitants of mountain regions, to promote the independence,autonomy and self-determination of mountain populations and preserve a balance inmountain areas between society, economics and the environment. SAB is a politicallyinfluential body (e.g. through the governments of the mountain cantons and mountainpopulation parliamentary groups). It was mainly responsible for triggering the AlpineConvention debate in Switzerland.

Internet

• www.sab.ch

Swiss Farmers’ Association (SBV), Union of Swiss Producers (UPS), Association ofSmall and Medium Farmers (VKMB), Bio-Suisse

Action Level

• National, cantonal, individual companies

Income and Offices/Membership

• SBV CHF 12,110,575. (Annual Report, 1998); 75 employees (SBV), 2500 members(UPS), 35,000 members (VKMB), 22 employees (Bio-Suisse)

Comment

These associations are seen as representing the interests of agriculture despite someobvious differences in their aims and politics. Their attention is focused on agriculturallegislation, foreign trade policy and farm incomes. The VKMB mainly concentrates onmulti-funtionality and employee policy in agriculture. Bio-Suisse is the main distributor oflabels ("Knospe", i.e. bud) in the area of organic production. The Swiss Farmers’Association enjoys the most political influence of the four (e.g. via the parliamentaryagricultural club)

58

Internet

• www.bauernverband.ch, www.bioline.ch, www.bio-suisse.ch

WWF Switzerland, Pro Natura Schweiz, Swiss Foundation for the Protection of theLandscape (SL), CIPRA Schweiz, Alpine Initiative, Transport Club of Switzerland(VCS)

Action Level

• National, cantonal, regional, local

Income and Membership

• WWF Switzerland: CHF 33,415,000 (Annual Report, 1999); Pro Natura: CHF12,650,000 (Annual Report, 1999); SL CHF 1,023,370 (Annual Report, 1999); VCSCHF 12,274,000 (Annual Report, 1997). Membership: 222,000 (WWF), 92,500 (ProNatura), 750 (SL), 137,000 (VCS)

CommentThese associations are all active in areas of environmental protection and conservation.They are mainly involved in the political environment, publicity and to varying extents alsoin implementation projects. CIPRA is responsible for the establishment and co-ordinationthe Alpine local authority network Allianze.

Internet

• www.wwf.ch, www.pronatura.ch, www.sl-fp.ch, www.alpeninitiative.ch,www.cipra.org, www.vcs-ate.ch

LITRA - Public Transport Information Service

Action Level

• National

CommentLITRA is possibly the most powerful political group in the area of transport. Its maininterests lie in the area of public transport and regional transport services. LITRA issponsored by all of Switzerland’s public transport companies, i.e. SBB AG [railways], thelicensed transport companies in the regions and agglomerations and Postauto Schweiz.The cantons, research institutes, all important industrial and service companies, theconstruction industry, trade and commercial companies, planning and insurance are allrepresented in LITRA.

Internet

• www.litra.ch

Swiss Sponsorship for Mountain Communities

Action Level

59

• National, cantonal, regional, local

Comment

The aim of this association is to inspire solidarity with the mountain population among thepopulation as a whole. Thanks to donations from local authorities and other sources, thesponsors provide support to financially weak communities in the IHG regions and also toprivate co-operatives (Alpine co-operatives etc.). In concrete terms it assumes the residualcosts of infrastructure projects. Of ca. 300 applications received annually, some 15% arepure agricultural projects (reclamation of Alpine meadows and pastures etc.). TheSponsorship has invested approximately CHF 257 million since 1940 and this investmentin turn triggered multiple subsidies. In 1999, over CHF 20 million was paid for projects.

Address

• Patenschaft für Berggemeinden, Asylstrasse 74, 8030 Zürich

Swiss Mountain Aid (SBH)

Action Level

• National, cantonal, regional, local

CommentThe SBH (founded in 1943) is a non-profit-making organisation and aims to improve theessential economic basis for gaining a livelihood and the living conditions in mountainareas throughout the country. It’s main aim is to support mountain agriculture and providesupport to mountain farmers for self-help projects and to village and valley communities inmountain regions. The aid is intended to improve the essential basis for companies, helpfarming families in their work, guarantee the maintenance and care of the traditionallandscape and counteract migration. SBH aims to achieve this inter alia through theprocurement of financial resources (donations and legacies), through financial grants, inparticular for investments made by mountain farms and investments which otherwisecontribute to settlement in mountain areas, through financial grants for communityprojects, corporations, co-operatives etc. in mountain areas. SBH processes a total of1000 applications per year and provides over CHF 20 million for projects.

Internet

• www.berghilfe.ch

Swiss Chamber of Industry and Commerce (local), Touring Club of Switzerland(TCS), Swiss Commercial Association

Action Level

• National, cantonal

Comment

These associations embody a large section of political economic interests at national andcantonal level. Their demands are very significant in terms of regional policy.

Internet

60

• www.vorort.ch, www.tcs.ch, www.sgv-usam.ch

Swiss Tourism Association (STV), Swiss Alpine Club (SAC)

Action Level

• National, cantonal, regional

Membership

• 650 (STV), 93,000 (SAC)

Comment

The STV and SAC represent interests in the tourism sector. SAC is also involved inprotective issues through the Commission for the Protection of the Mountains(Kommission zum Schutz der Gebirgswelt). STV is the country’s tourism policy umbrellaorganisation and aims to promote and support the Swiss tourist economy. It represents allof the Swiss tourism agencies and protects their interests. Unlike the marketingorganisation Schweiz Tourismus, which is responsible for the conception and realisationof advertising for the country by the state, STV represents the needs of tourism on allpolitical levels, informs the public about its importance and works towards theimprovement of the range of holidays on offer in Switzerland - particularly in terms ofconsultancy and product design. For many years, STV has supported the qualitativedevelopment of tourism in Switzerland. The projects Veloland Schweiz (“SwitzerlandBiking Country”), Netzwerk ländlicher Tourismus (“Rural tourism Network”) (with SBV) andEndlich Ferien. Ihre Landschaft (“Holidays at last. Your landscape”) (with FLS) are mainlysupported by STV. STV is also active at political level.

Internet

• www.swisstourfed.ch, www.sac.ch

Swiss Consultancy Group for the Regions and Local Authorities (SEREC/BEREG)

Action Level

• Regional, local

Membership

• 164

Comment

This non-profit-making organisation aims to support the development and administrationof local authorities and regions. It provides training and consultancy activities andcompiles studies (e.g. development concepts). With the help of the state, some cantons,the ETH technical university in Zurich, the local authorities in Pays-d'Enhaut, it establisheda Swiss centre for exchange and further training in regional development (CH-REGIO).The centre aims to promote rural development, in particular through information and co-ordination. A similar consultancy and research institute can be found at the ETH technicaluniversity in Lausanne (Antenne romande at the institute for agriculture).

Internet

61

• www.ch-regio.ch

Cantonal and Local-Authority Bodies and Institutions

This level involves the cantonal and local-authority bodies, the Committees of the Headsof the Cantonal Governments, the Committees of Planners and Regional Secretaries, thecantonal economic support bodies, the Association of Swiss Towns from the Swiss LocalAuthorities Association, the Emissions Centre of the Swiss Local authorities and thesections and membership associations of the above-mentioned national institutions.

62

Annex 2: Other Federal Laws with Implications for Rural Areas(from Chapter 2)

Reorganisation of Post, SBB and Swisscom (telecommunications)

The partial privatisation of these three federal state companies was implemented underthe condition that regional transport and comprehensive basic supply of services would beguaranteed as long as a demand for these services exists. The PTT reform, in particular,succeeded in creating an excellent legal basis for the public postal service. However, theemphasis on profitability has had significant effects on structure. Thus, it would appearthat it will only be possible to provide comprehensive basic services in the future inconjunction with significant price increases. Over 1000 post offices face the threat ofclosure with a resulting loss of basic services in sparsely populated areas. The situation intelecommunications is similar.

The railway reform also makes provision for future competition between railwaycompanies. Total liberalisation of all rail services is not, however, planned; freight trafficand international passenger traffic will be fully liberalised whereas the finely-tuned nationalpassenger traffic services will not. The railway companies must make their infrastructureavailable to third parties for a fee without discrimination. To facilitate authorisation and faircompetition, in addition to reciprocity, technical, financial and labour law requirementsmust be observed. In the area of regional transport, since1.1.1996, all services,irrespective of provider (SBB, Post, etc.) have been jointly financed by the state andcantons on the same basis. The cantons are largely responsible for the ordering andplanning of services within the prescribed financial framework. The competition principle isapplied. The state requires that the SBB (railway company) separate the infrastructureand transport sectors, not only in accounting terms but also in organisational terms. Eachof these should be operated separately with individual profit and balance sheets andhence as an actual profit centre. The principle, in accordance with which each service iseither provided on a break-even basis or must be clearly commissioned (and financed) isbeing consolidated. Consequently, this means that the providers of transport services (thepassenger and freight transport division) must achieve positive results. The retrospectivecovering of deficits is not admissable.

Army Reform

The reform of the army (since 1995) and conversionof military equipment and facilities, i.e.the rededication of military facilities for civilian uses (e.g. air fields) have significant effectswith respect to the economy and regional development in rural areas due to the extensiveland holdings (the military is Switzerland’s biggest land owner) and the number ofemployees (significant reduction as a result of army reform: 1990 20,000, 1999approximately 12,000 employees) and trainees involved.

Energy Policy/Electricity Market Law

The liberalisation of the electricity market means that each provider in the Europeanelectricity alliance should be able to provide its electricity at its own “market price” andeach consumer should (at least theoretically) be able to obtain electricity from thecheapest supplier. This means that access is guaranteed to all networks but use ofnetworks must be paid for. Large-scale consumers will be able to decide which supplier touse, smaller consumers (households, companies etc.) will at most be able to do so

63

through an intermediary supplier. In a completely liberalised market, renewable energysources such as timber, solar energy and hydro-electric power will be the most expensiveand those forms of energy which pollute the environment cheapest. For this reason,parliament has drawn up a constitutional article for an energy control levy (to reduceincidental wage costs) and as a complement, a support levy for renewable energy (solarenergy, timber, biomass, hydro-electric power). The planned levy is for 0.3 Swisscentimes per kWh on all non-renewable energy sources. This would yield approximatelyCHF 440 million per year and it is intended to use the revenue for ecologically basedefficiency improvements and for the preservation and renewal of existing hydro-electricpower stations. The mountain regions viewed the control levy as a key accompanyingmeasure for the liberalisation of the electricity market. The question of the cost ofsupplying power to sparsely populated areas will arise increasingly in the future.

The New Fiscal Equalisation (NFA)

The reorganisation of the fiscal equalisation between the federation and cantonsrepresents a major project and is a key instrument of Swiss federalism. The followingindicators were hitherto used to determine the financial strength of the cantons: nationalincome per inhabitant, total tax yield from cantonal and local authority taxation perinhabitant, total burden of cantonal and local authority taxation per inhabitant and theproportion of the canton in the mountain region measured in terms of proportion ofinhabitants and proportion of cultivated land. Three groups of financial strength weredefined from the total scale. All of the financially weak cantons lie completely or partly inthe mountain belt. The fiscal equalisation was hence defined via the following instruments:the cantons receive a proportion of direct federal taxes and, in addition, federal subsidiesare available for many cantonal measures/investments (road building, railways etc.). Thedisadvantage of the previous system of fiscal equalisation lay in its complexity and lack oftransparency. For this reason, a new system of fiscal equalisation was submitted forexamination in 1999. The aim was to differentiate tasks that were formerly joint state andcantonal responsibility and re-assign them to just one instance. Load and resourcelevelling will also be re-regulated.

The new fiscal equalisation and increasing cantonalisation of public tasks will have adecisive influence on the structure of rural areas.

Engine-Power-Based Heavy Vehicle Levy (LSVA)

It is planned to introduce the new engine-power-based heavy vehicle levy (LSVA,referendum1998) in early 2001. This law contains provision for a levy of CHF 0.6-0.3 pertonne (heavy goods vehicles) and kilometre driven by vehicles of this class. The LSVA isan important example of the implementation of the internalisation of external transportcosts. It promotes rail traffic and will be used to contribute to the development of NEAT.As it increases the transport costs of heavy goods vehicles, it also promotes economicactivity centred on shorter transport routes. Thus, in terms of the regional economy, theLSVA represents a positive development.

Licensing Policy for Public Transport and Cable Railways

In addition to the restructuring of the SBB ,which is important in regional policy terms,(order and pay principle), the state’s licensing policy in the area of cable railways is alsorelevant in this context. Since the early 1980s, no new access routes to skiing areas havebeen authorised and increasing emphasis is being placed on ecological considerations.

64

However, the licensing of combined skiing areas repeatedly gives rise to conflicts with theenvironmental protection sector.

Federal and Cantonal Subsidy and Tax Policy

Direct and indirect federal subsidy for regionally-relevant areas, such as road building,forestry and agricultural access, tourism projects etc. are often at odds with protection-oriented legislation. There is often a lack of consistency here. Cantonal tax policy is alsoimportant in terms of settlement development as it can give rise to questionablecompetition between cantons and local authorities concerning the favouring of certainlocations and hence promote unsuitable settlement developments.

Tourism Policy

There is no actual tourism promotion policy at national level in Switzerland. However,demands for support are often voiced, for example, by the economically weak hotelsector. The hotel sector has already been rewarded with lower rates of sales/value addedtax. Individual cantons and, above all, local authorities support concrete tourism projectswith public money. Instances of misguided allocation, as was the case under the oldagricultural policy, still exist, in particular, in the area of mountain railways.

Federal Law on the Use of Hydro-Electric Power (Wasserrechtsgesetz WRG) of 22December 1916

When the WRG was created in 1916, the aim was to establish standards for the licensingof water use and to limit license charges (water tax) in order to promote the electrificationof the country. The water tax was, therefore, held at an artificially low level to supportindustrialisation through low electricity prices. In the course of the decades, the water taxwas gradually increased. The most recent revision of 1996 sets the maximum water tax atCHF 80 per kWh of installed power, whereby small hydro-electric power stations (up to IMW) are exempt from payment. Following the lapse of the license (maximum 80 years),the wet components of the plant (retaining structure, delivery pipes, buildings, turbines)are assigned free of cost to the issuer of the license (canton, local authority), while theelectrical components (generators, cables) can be acquired at a “cheap” (i.e. fair) price. Itis also possible to renew the licenses. Water taxes are an important source of income formountain cantons and local authorities (ca. CHF 250 million/year). From the water taxrevenue, one franc is donated to the fund for the compensation of communities whichrefrain from the implementation of hydroelectric power projects which would be located inlandscapes of national importance. A total of nine communities have received in excess ofCHF 100 million over 40 years.

Federal Law on Regional Planning (RPG) of 22 June 1979 (Revision of 20 March1998)

The RPG promotes the economic use of land and preservation of the landscape. Itprovides the implementing cantons with instruments (direction planning, use planning).The area of construction outside of designated construction zones was liberalised underthe latest revision with the authorisation of new construction options for forms ofagricultural production which are not land-dependent (greenhouses and fattening houses)and new uses for existing buildings. Conservation bodies opposed this development inview of the fact that over 540,000 buildings already exist outside of settlements inSwitzerland (corresponds to every 4th building, increase of several hundred per year up to

65

2000). However, the measure was ratified by the people in the referendum of 7 February1999.

Federal Law on Nature Conservation and Habitat Protection of Habitats of 1965(NHG), Federal Law on Environmental Protection of 1983 (USG), Federal Law on theProtection of Water of 1991 (GSchG)

These three protective laws were created for the purpose of defending the landscape,protecting the animal and plant worlds, preserving soil fertility, protecting man, animalsand plants against damaging effects, early limitation of damaging effects and theprotecting water bodies against negative impacts. The implementation of the conservationaims is the joint task of the federal and cantonal authorities. Compensation andmaintenance grants are paid in accordance with the NHG if a cantonal contribution is alsopledged. The polluter-pays principle was recently enshrined in the water protectionlegislation. In 1995, CHF 45 million was paid out in nature and landscape conservationloans.

Federal Law on Forests (WaG) of 4 October 1991 (1902)

Federal forest policy is based on the multi-functionality of the forest and places a highpriority on quantitative forest preservation. The WaG aims to:

– preserve the forest in terms of its area and spatial distribution,

– protect the forest as a near-nature biotic community,

– maintain the protection, use and welfare functions of the forests,

– promote forest economy.

The law outlaws deforestation and clear-cutting for timber use and regulates permissibleexceptions. It commissions the cantons to do everything in their power to preserve andpromote the forest as protection against avalanches, erosion, landslides and rock fall. Theprinciple of sustainability must be observed in the use of forests. The state providesfinancial support to the cantons for the preservation of the forests. The state can assume70% of the costs for the preservation of protective forest in mountain region and provides50% of the cost of eliminating damage to forests (fire, disease, damage, storms, pollutantsetc.). The state also provides interest free or low interest investment loans (machinery,access etc.). In Switzerland, approximately 4.5 million m3 of timber is felled each year andgrowth is approximately 10 million m3. In 1999, a total of CHF 115 million was used for themaintenance of forests, management measures and access facilities. Under the newregulation of the deforestation authorisation process, as part of new legal package for thesimplification and co-ordination of the federal decision-making processes in 1000, thecompetencies of the federal authority (BUWAL) to authorise deforestation were reducedfor areas in excess of 5000 m2 and the cantons are now obliged to consult the federaldepartment. The state may only authorise deforestation in areas under its ownresponsibility.

66

Annex 3: List of interviewees

State

- Rudolf Schiess, Director of Regional Policy, Seco

- Hans Allemann, Programme Director of Regio Plus, Seco

- Dr. Daniel Wachter, ARE, Director of the Regional Economy Service

- Manfred Bötsch, Director of BLW

Regional Planning/Regional Secretariat

- François Parvex, Serec, Sierre

- Daniele Ryser, Regional Secretary, Association of Local Authorities, Regione Malcan-tone, Secretary of the Association of Rural and Mountain Local Authorities of Ticino,Agno

- Kurt Rohner, Regional Planner and Architect, co-initiator of "RegenerationsparkSeeland", Biel

Academic Institutions

- Ueli Stalder Geographical Institute, University of Bern

- Willy Zimmermann, ETHZ Forest Policy Professor, Vice President ENHK

- Erwin Stucki, Institut d'économie rurale, Antenne romande, GR-Ecublens, 1015Lausanne

Associations

- Gottfried Künzi, Director STV

- Jörg Wyder, Director SAB

- Luca Vetterli, WWF

- Frau Barbla Krämer, Director of Sponsorship for Mountain Communities

- NR Melchior Ehrler, Director SBV

- Herbert Karch, Chief Executive VKMB

- Hans Weiss, FLS

Others

- Professor Ernst A. Brugger, Brugger, Hanser And Partners Ltd., Lagerstrasse 33, Post-fach 3977, 8021 Zürich

- Ruedi Meier, Transport Expert, Transport Directorate Canton of Berne

67

Annex 4: Questionnaire

Aim of the interviews

To obtain information from key actors in the area of regional development.

Interview structure

a. Role and responsibilities of the interviewee (IV).

b. Understanding

— What is understood by rural development (sectors, interest representatives, targets)?

— How does the IV’s perspective (i.e. his/her institution) differ from that of therepresentatives of other institutions?

— What are the IV’s (institution) specific role and contribution to rural development?

c. Institutional Framework

— What does the institutional framework of rural regional development consist of andwhat is the position of the IV (i.e. his/her institution) within this framework?

— Which contacts exist with other organisations/institutions?

d. Influences and Effects

— Which organisations/associations/authorities etc. are most influential and effective inthe area of rural development?

e. Challenges

— What are the most important challenges facing rural development?

— What are the options available for financial policy?

— How could the existing support policies for rural areas be improved?

f. Rural Development Policies and Programmes

— Which policies and programmes exist and how is the IV involved(development of programmes or/and implementation)?

— How do these programmes/policies support the work of the IV (‘sinstitution)?

— What are the key topics and contents of these programmes?

— What are the main measures (finance and innovations) of theseprogrammes?

— Who develops these programmes?

— What are their strengths and weaknesses?

— What are their main effects on the environment?

68

g. Sustainability and Rural Development

— How exactly is sustainable development connected with ruraldevelopment and what are the contradictions? (The following areas should be considered:biodiversity, landscape, air, soil, water, climate change, cultural and historical legacy,economic and social factors.)

— Do the programmes/policies for rural areas support theimplementation of environmental aims? Where are the contradictions?

— Do rural development programmes exist which were speciallyconceived for the environmental concerns in rural areas? What are the correspondingfinancial aids?

— Does success monitoring exist for the evaluation of the effects ofrural development programmes on the environment?

h. Cultural Factors

— How is the population involved?

— What are the cultural consequences?

— Are traditional participatory forms observed/respected?

— What are the effects on training (e.g. quality of jobs)?

i. Miscellaneous

69

Annex 5: Translations of the Names of the Authorities, Organisations, Laws andAcronyms referred to in the Text

ARE - Bundesamt für Raumentwicklung Federal Office for Regional Development

ASTRA - Bundesamt für Strassen Federal Office for Roads

BAK - Bundesamt für Kultur Federal Office for Culture

BAZL - Bundesamt für Zivilluftfahrt Federal Office for Civil Aviation

BBL - Bundesamt für Bauten und Logistik Federal Office for Buildings and Logistics

BBWEG - Bundesbeschluss zugunstenwirtschaftlicher Erneuerungsgebiete, “BonnyBeschluss”

Federal Resolution on Support for Areas ofEconomic Renewal, Bonny Resolution

BFE - Bundesamt für Energie Federal Office for Energy

BLW - Bundesamt für Landwirtschaft Federal Office for Agriculture

Bundesamt für Kommunikation Federal Office for Communication

Bundesamt für Landestopographie Federal Office for Topography

Bundesamt für Raumplanung Federal Office for Regional Planning

Bundesamt für Statistik Federal Office for Statistics

Bundesamt für Wohnungswesen Federal Office for Housing

Bundesgesetz über die Landwirtschaft Federal Law on Agriculture

Bundesrat Federal Council (i.e. Swiss government)

BUWAL - Bundesamt für Umwalt, Wald undLandschaft

Federal Office for the Environment, Forestsand Landscape

BWG - Bundesamt für Wasser und Geologie Federal Office for Water and Geology

BWL - Bundesamt für wirtschaftlicheLandesversorgung

Federal Office for Emergency Supplies

EDI - Eidg. Departement des Innern Federal Ministry of the Interior

EFD - Eidg. Finanzdepartement Federal Ministry of Finance

EFV - Eidg. Finanzverwaltung Federal Ministry for Financial Administration

ESV - Eidg. Steuerverwaltung Federal Ministry for Tax Administration

EVD - Eidg. Volkswirtschaftsdepartment Federal Ministry of Economics

FinÖV Public Transport Finance

FLS - Fonds Landschaft Schweiz Swiss Landscape Fund

GSchG - Bundesgesetz über denGewässerschutz

Federal Law on the Protection of Water

70

IHG - Bundesgesetz über Investitionshilfefür Berggebiete

Federal Law on Investment Aid for MountainRegions

INNOTOUR - Bundesbeschluss über dieFörderung von Innovation undZusammenarbeit im Tourismus

Federal Resolution on the Promotion ofInnovation and Co-operation in Tourism

NEAT New Alpine Rail System

NHG - Bundesgesetz über den Natur- undHeimatschutz

Federal Law on Nature Conservation andHabitat Protection

LITRA - Informationsdienst für denöffentlichen Verkehr

Information Service for Public Transport

LSVA - LeistungsabhängigeSchwerverkehrsabgabe

Engine-Power-Based Heavy Vehicle Levy

Patenschaft für Berggemeinden Sponsorship for Mountain Communities

RESF - Ressort Regional- undRaumordnungspolitik

Department for Regional DevelopmentPolicy

RPG - Bundesgesetz über dieRaumplanung

Federal Law on Regional Planning

SAB - Schweizerische Arbeitsgemeinschaftfür die Berggebiete

Swiss Working Group for the MountainRegions

SAC - Schweizer Alpen-Club Swiss Alpine Club

SBB - Schweizerische Bundesbahn Swiss Federal Railway

SBH - Schweizerischer Berghilfe Swiss Mountain Aid

SBV - Schweizerischer Bauernverband Swiss Farmers’ Association

Schweizerische Bürgschaftsgenossenschaft Swiss Loan Guarantee Co-operative

Schweizerische Patenschaft fürBerggemeinden

Swiss Sponsorship for MountainCommunities

SECO - Staatssekretariat für Wirtschaft State Secretariat for Economics

SEREC/BEREG SchweizerischeBeratungsgruppe für Regionen undGemeinden

Swiss Consultancy Group for the Regionsand Local Authorities

SGH - Schweizerische Gesellschaft fürHotelkredite

Swiss Association for Hotel Loans

SL - Stiftung Landschaftsschutz Schweiz Swiss Foundation for the Protection of theLandscape

STV - Schweizer Tourismus-Verband Swiss Tourism Association

TCS - Touring Club Schweiz Touring Club of Switzerland

TOSF - Ressort Tourismus Tourism Department

71

UPS - Union des Producteurs Suisses Union of Swiss Producers

USG - Bundesgesetz über denUmweltschutz

Federal Law on Environmental Protection

UVEK - Eidg. Departement für Umwelt,Verkehr, Energie und Kommunikation

Federal Ministry of the Environment,Transport, Energy and Communication

VBS - Eidg. Departement für Verteidigung,Bevölkerungsschutz und Sport (VBS)

Federal Ministry of Defence, Protection ofthe Population and Sport (VBS)

VCS - Verkehrsclub der Schweiz Transport Club of Switzerland

VWEG Decree on the implementation of theFederal Law on Housing and the Promotionof Home Ownership

VKMB - Vereinigung der kleinen undmittleren Bauern

Association of Small and Medium Farmers

WaG - Bundesgesetz über den Wald Federal Law on Forests

WEG - Wohnbau undEigentumsförderungsgesetz

Federal Law on Housing and the Promotionof Home Ownership

WRG - Bundesgesetz über dieNutzbarmachung der Wasserkräfte(Wasserrechtgesetz)

Federal Law on the Use of HydroelectricPower

WSSF - Ressort WirtschaftsstandortSchweiz

Department of Switzerland as a BusinessLocation

WS - Bundesgesetz über die Verbesserungder Wohnverhältnisse in Bergebieten

Federal Law on the Improvement of LivingConditions in Mountain Regions