Approfondimento

Governet Project - Work Package n. 4

Operational governance models of rural development
through co-operation/competition

Authors: Luca Ciresola, Oreste Del Re,
Enrico Perissinotto, Giuliano Zanon.


COSES - Consorzio per la Ricerca e la Formazione

June 2006

Introduction

This Work Package had two main steps, for each study area: the identification of possible development alternatives and the definition of governance models for rural development, undertaken in strong cooperation among actors and stakeholders.

For the periurban area of Mestre, the attention was focused on the municipalities of Campagna Lupia and Mirano, that are very different from each other but also well representative of some fundamental features of the sub-areas around Mestre.


Methodology

At the beginning was formed a Moderating Team (MT), composed by 3 representatives of the partner Province of Venice - COSES.
The MT established a list of 18 stakeholders relevant for the rural development process in the municipalities of Campagna Lupia and Mirano. The stakeholders were selected to cover as much as possible all the sectors of interest and in particular those allowing opportunities for future development.
The stakeholders formed a Governance Council (GC). It was composed by 4 decision makers, 3 delegates of land-reclamation syndicates, 5 opinion-influencing stakeholders, 3 significant company cases, 3 scientists.
The GC attended at the planned meetings, with the goal to define development alternatives (for the periurban area of Mestre), based on gradually building agreement process.


The first Governance Council meeting

At a first meeting, a specially designed free-response questionnaire was handed to the GC members. The questionnaire aimed to elicit knowledge regarding: After that, the MT analyzed the answers and identified 54 factors influencing the following 5 groups of objectives:

a) exploitation of the environmental, cultural and artistic patrimony;
b) integration between urbanization and agricultural activity;
c) quality promotion of agricultural produces;
d) marketing strategy;
e) quality of life.
The list of objectives and factors was the basis for a new questionnaire (Rating Sheet). It aimed to collect information on the importance (overall and relative importance) that respondents give to each of the factors found in the list.


The second Governance Council meeting

The Rating Sheet was submitted to the GC members during a second meeting. After that, a focus group was developed, with the following subjects order:


The main factors for rural development

In this phase, the median overall importance rating and the geometric mean, relative ranking over responses, was calculated. At the end of this process, the following 7 variables have been singled out:
  1. training and education;
  2. presence of pond areas, flora and fauna, landscape, traditional rural areas;
  3. town and territorial planning;
  4. multifunctional agriculture;
  5. generation turn over;
  6. information characters and modes among producers, traders and consumers;
  7. information.


The social cognitive map

The 7 singled out variables gave 42 different combinations. For each pair, another questionnaire (with Internet HTML form) asked how a first variable affects the second one (positive, negative or neutral effect). The responses were then aggregated, considering an arrow between two variables (with its sign), when the 60% of the GC members agree.
Following the described methodology, the evaluations from the GC singled out 26 positive correlations and 5 correlations of "negligible" impact. Therefore, the possible development paths were specified looking for those alternatives that involve all the interested factors.
The consequent cognitive map was somewhat complex, because many of the 7 examined factors showed mutual correlations among them. In this case, various develop paths were possible Suggesting preferred development paths was delicate and not easy.
If the minimum agreement level among the evaluations expressed by the GC member was increased up to 70%, the number of double-way relations was strongly reduced. In this case, only one development path seemed to be the optimum one.



More informations (factor 50) with respect to the content of agricultural products have a logical influence on modes and characteristics of the information exchange among producers, supply chain and consumers (factor 37).
This allows a product culture growth and at the same time allows the comprehension of the environment where the products comes up (factor 1).
Some largest competences and a broad sense environmental sensibility allow a better planning of territory use (factor 11), both as for the agriculture and as for the conflicts with other destinations.
In this context, the presence of traditional rural areas is surely better exploited and the role of the landscape (factor 2) is increased.
This attention to the different territory vocations is an incentive for a coming up of multifunctionality (factor 18) inside the farms, which may lead to a better enterprise profitability, i.e. an essential element to keep and attract young labour that allows a generation turn over (factor 25).
Such turn over re-feeds the cycle and contributes to an enlarged training and sensibility towards the territory resource, meant in its different contents and values.


Fondaco Venezia - Cap. 16 Governet Project


home