Territorial potentials of and co-operation in rural regions – Case Eastern Europe

Identifying the potential of rural regions: the role of visible and hidden knowledge

Visvaldis Valtenbergs, Vidzeme University of Applied Sciences, Latvia TPG of PURR project “Potential of Rural Regions”

ESPON Open Seminar “European Territorial Evidence forEU Cohesion Policy and Programming,” Aalborg, Denmark, 13-14 June, 2012

NORBA NORDIC

Visible and hidden knowledge of rural areas

• Visible knowledge • Based on assumption that rural areas are associated with handicaps in old

and new economic paradigms• About loss of jobs, services, outmigration of young and skilled • Advantages: provides context, analysis and usable info for policy makers• Problems: can lead to generalizations

• Hidden knowledge• Based on: endogenous development potential • About different rural development narratives and agendas (small town vs.

rural development, making rural issues more visible etc.)• Advantages: examines actual recipes behind “better coordination / better

integration”?• Problems: difficult to incorporate into policy architectures

Latvia

GDP drop during crisis

Austerity effect 2009-12 -17% of GDP

GDP growth by +6,9% in first quarter (2011-2012)

Source: Life in Transition Survey (2011)

39%

22%

Taking a bus to school in rural Latvia

• Visible knowledge• More cost-effective service

delivery• Example of good territorial

cooperation between towns and remote rural areas

• Hidden knowledge• Daily commute to towns

undermines sense of belonging to a place for young people

• Schools important not only as places for education, but places for social gatherings

How can policy making support innovations in rural development in the

context of austerity ?

1. Focus more on NATIONAL level policy responses. Dimension of Power

– The role of public sector, market and development planners in policy

implementation

2. In-depth research of territorial potential – Shifting the weight. How

austerity actually empowers certain individuals and communities ?

– How can approaches of development despite the state be better realized in rural development?

Territorial potentials of and co-operation in rural regions – Case Eastern Europe

Identifying the potential of rural regions: the role of visible and hidden knowledge

Visvaldis Valtenbergs, Vidzeme University of Applied Sciences, Latvia TPG of PURR project “Potential of Rural Regions”

ESPON Open Seminar “European Territorial Evidence forEU Cohesion Policy and Programming,” Aalborg, Denmark, 13-14 June, 2012

NORBA NORDIC

7

What kind of knowledge?

Who has it? Advantages Disadvantages

Local knowledge

Endogenous. Tacit. Experiential. Deeply embedded in community. Often – aspatial. Mostly qualitative

Locals Place based, contextual, detailed depiction of local rural reality

Difficult to unlock. Loss of broader perspective

Scientific knowledge

Exogenous. Mostly quantitative. Based on accumulated data and/or existing theoretical generalizations

Scholars. Scientific and statistical databases

Standardized, quantifiable, can be reused and generalized

Cannot provide accurate in-depth description of local rural realities and context

External knowledge

Exogenous. Based on previous work experience

Experts, consultants

Perspective of involved outsider

Knowledge based on success stories from other instances that cannot always be transferred from place to place

Source: PURR Draft Final Report