hh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
LEADER and rural development policy - What's the problem represented to be?
University Of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Halmstad University.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8907-1256
2024 (English)In: Journal of Rural Studies, ISSN 0743-0167, E-ISSN 1873-1392, Vol. 108, p. 1-10Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This article problematizes the EU Programme LEADER as a policy to improve opportunities to live and thrive in rural areas. LEADER was initiated in 1991 as a Commission initiative and has, over time, expanded and become an institutionalized public policy in the EU. LEADER is based on a particular development method - the LEADER method - which sets out fundamental principles for conducting development work. The idea is that rural development should start with Local Action Groups at the grassroots level, emphasizing networking and entrepreneurship within a geographic context. Drawing on Bacchi's methodology, What's the problem represented to be, the article aims to examine the LEADER Programme and analyze problem representations and political rationalities. The analysis shows that actors working within LEADER have developed political rationalities that partly constitute obstacles to achieving long-term impacts. It concerns issues related to the bureaucratic framework of LEADER and representations on a fixation on producing added values, an internal logic of project administration, and an emphasis highlighting the role of the individual entrepreneur. The LEADER Programme has not only been institutionalized as part of the EU and member states' administrative systems. Still, it has also created its ideological superstructure consisting of a specific narrative, methodology, language, and common forms of organizing. This gives LEADER advantages but also risks associated with internal closedness that creates subjectification between ‘them and us' and produces lived effects that hinder structural changes promoting rural areas. © 2024 The Authors

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford: Elsevier, 2024. Vol. 108, p. 1-10
Keywords [en]
Impact evaluation, LEADER, Political rationalities, Problem representations, Rural development, WPR-Analysis
National Category
Political Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-53351DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103287Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85192190133OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hh-53351DiVA, id: diva2:1859008
Available from: 2024-05-20 Created: 2024-05-20 Last updated: 2024-06-26Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Holmquist, Mats

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Holmquist, Mats
By organisation
Halmstad University
In the same journal
Journal of Rural Studies
Political Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 38 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf