Category Archives: Regional Development

Conference on leadership, 23-24th of November 2010, Birmingham.

Posted on by

This conference was organised by the Regional Studies international research network on leadershp, at the University of Birmingham. This is an overview of the highlights. For more information, please contact lummina.horlings@wur.nl.

Prof. Joyce Liddle of the University of Nottingam described the recent policy shift in the UK. The New Coalition advocates ‘The Big Society and social enterprise’. The Regional Architecture has completely changed, which resulted in the demise of Regional Development Agencies. The Coalition’s vision is expressed in three values: freedom (frameworks with support social responsibility and civil liberties), fairness (those we cannot we always help) and responsibility (those we can, do). The means are e.g. Public Service Reform and A Smaller State. This is expressed in the slogan ‘A Big Society matched by Big Citizens’. New Local Enterpreneurs Partnerships (LEP’s) have now been launched. Prof. Liddle analyses the role of leadership in these LEP’s, based on the concept of auxiliary leadership. Liddle argues that only by having a clearer understanding of the role of auxiliary leadership in the dynamics of local and regional governance, we can better understand how collaborating state and non-state articulate and foster the necessary change processes.

Andrew Johnston of the University of Sheffield talked about Public Sector Entrepreneurship and leadership of the urban and regional development process in the UK. He distinguishes two notions of public entrepreneurship 1) Occupational role of leadership 2) Behavioural role of entrepreneurship.

Conditions for public sector entrepreneurship are according to Boyett: a  devaluation of power to a lower level; a re-allocation of resources to a lower level and an uncertain environment. Characteristics of Public sector entrepreneurship are: a) innovation b) Promoting change c) making decisions d) taking responsibility e) identify opportunities f) influencing stakeholders g) shifting resources h) influencing localities, form and use of goods, resources and institutes. Several conflicts between public entrepreneurship & democracy can be identified: 1) Autonomy versus accountability 2) Vision versus participation 3) Secrecy versus openness 4) Risk taking versus public stewardship.

Prof. Andrew Beer, University of Adelaide in Australia described the case of Waikerie District. The scale of policy arrangements in Australia is much smaller than those evident in the UK and Europe. Compared to Europe leadership is small scale, community based (community building); has a private sector orientation (short term success possible, but long term?), independent of government processes, a characteristic of individuals instead of an achievement of groups, and has a weak relationship with politics and governance. The case of Waikerie showed that: 1) formal government/governance processes can impede leadership in Australia’s regions 2) leadership carries costs that may not be paid easily by communities that have neither large scale institutions (eg universities) or large businesses 3) leadership roles can have adverse impacts on the lives of leaders 5) lack of knowledge on regional development processes and governance processes make it difficult to establish a ‘leadership relay’. 6) sustaining leadership is the most significant hurdle, not the identification or formation of leadership 7) failure in leadership may have compounding impacts.

Dr. Basilio Verduzco from Mexico uses game theory to analyse coalitions in urban development. He sees leadership as negotiating.  Interesting is his description of tensions in leadership which leads to three roles: being a partner, promotional leader and mediator. He uses Sharpf’s strategies from altruism till hostillity. Traditional roles of leadership in Mexico are 1) corporatism 2) caudillism and corrupt clientism. Based on the case in Mexico he distinguishes three types of leadership: solid, hollow and contested/ustable.

Juha Kostainen from the University of Tampere in Finland described the Tampere knowledge society program which object was to make Tampere the spearhead city of information society development. Kostainen described Radical Development Initiatives, not included in the official strategies. In the design stage there are various challenges such as established organizations which tend to be less radical. He identifies a new ‘Leadership-Community (Mintzberg, 2009): 1)  between leadership and citizenship 2) not a heroic type of leadership 3) engaged and distributed management 4) neither micromanaging nor ‘macroleading’ 5) “a community leader is personally engaged in order to engage others, so that anyone and everyone can exercise initiative”.

Prof. John Goddard from the New Castle University, presented about the role of the civic university and the leadership of place. He looked at this theme based on policy and academic discourses. The argument is that universities can create the divide between these discourses, this is a leadership challenge. He models universities and leadership of place as overlapping circles: political, managerial and community leadership, with in the middle intellectual leadership.

Prof. Markku Satorauta, University of Tampere in Finland, described why and how to study institutional entrepreneurship, see also his website.  How to create change? An important role can be played by institutional entrepreneurship. Institutional entrepreneurship is a relay in time, multi-scalar and multi-actor. Institutions are more often than not seen as sources of stability and not as sources of change and innovation (Scott). But there is a need for change. Leadership is about creating a way for people to contribute to making something different happen. The champions of regional development are however constrained by the very same institutions they aim to change (embedded agency). The case study of stem cell research shows how breakthrough treatments developed and that leadership is about connecting interpretive power, network power and institutional & resource power in the different phases of the process. You need different types of knowledge as well: substance knowledge, policy knowledge, process knowledge. The case shows that institutional entrepreneurship is a multi-scalar and multi-actor process. It is a relay in time. Different actors surface in different phases of development. It is a constellation of different skills, competences, knowledge and power.

PUREFOOD – 12 vacancies for ESRs are open

Posted on by

As mentioned in an earlier post on this weblog, the Rural Sociology Group has been granted the the coordination of a Marie Curie Initial Training Network  entitled ‘Urban, peri-urban and regional food dynamics: toward an integrated and territorial approach to food (PUREFOOD)’ funded by the European Commission’s Seventh Framework PEOPLE program. The objective of PUREFOOD is to train a pool of 12 early-stage researchers (ESRs) in the socio-economic and socio-spatial dynamics of the (peri-)urban and regional foodscape. The PUREFOOD network is centred around food as an integrated and territorial mode of governance and studies the emergence of the (peri-)urban foodscape as an alternative (as opposed to a globalised) geography of food, including the ways in which, and the extent to which, sustainability aspects generally considered to be intrinsic to the alternative food geography are incorporated by the more conventional food companies.

As of now all 12 PUREFOOD research vacancies have been published (or soon will be) by the host universities. For information about the ESR vacancies and application guidelines, you can download the PUREFOOD vacancies leaflet. For more information about the objectives, training and research approach and training program of PUREFOOD you can download the PUREFOOD information pack for prospective ESRs. The deadline for application is 3 January 2011.

Eligibility criteria

The enhancement of transnational mobility to improve career perspectives of early stage researchers is the main goal of the Marie Curie Initial Training funding. To achieve this objective the following eligibility criteria for prospective ESRs have been formulated:

  • You are eligible as an ESR if you are, at the time of recruitment (i) in possession of a university degree, and (ii) have a maximum of four years of full-time research experience, including any period of research training. This is measured from the date when you obtained the degree which formally entitles you to embark on a doctorate, either in the country in which the degree was obtained or in the country in which the research training is provided. Please not that ESRs cannot be PhD holders.
  • You are eligible to the position if, at the time of the selection by the host university, you did not reside or carry out your main activity (work, studies, etc) in the country of the host university for more than 12 months in the 3 years immediately prior to your recruitment.

If you have any questions about a vacancy please contact the contact person mentioned in the vacancy announcement. For general question about PUREFOOD please contact me (han.wiskerke@wur.nl).

Rural regional learning in Alytus County, Lithuania

Posted on by

Last week (October 21-22, 2010), I was given the opportunity to visit our DERREG project partner Emilija Kairyte (Institute NeVork) in her case study area of Alytus County in the South of Lithuania. In this blog, Emilija and I would like to share our experiences.

Like the Dutch DERREG case study region Westerkwartier in the province of Groningen, Alytus County comprises four rural municipalities. In terms of demography and economy, both areas are very different from each other. For example, the Westerkwartier has a population density of 173.4 inhabitants/ km², whereas the population density of Alytus County is estimated as 32.6 inhabitants/ km². While the Westerkwartier has witnessed an increase in citizens over the last years, amongst them a large number of young families, rural development in Alytus County is strongly affected by an increasing out-migration and an aging population. Living standards differ considerably. In the Westerkwartier, the GDP per capita was estimated as 55.400 Euro in 2006 while the GDP in Alytus County was estimated as 19.100 Litai in 2007 (equals 5.531,74 Euro, October 2010). Also in geographical terms the two regions are very different. The Westerkwartier is characterized by open grasslands in the North and small fields with framing hedgerows in the South. Alytus County is renowned for its vast forests and lakes.

During my visit to Alytus County, I accompanied Emilija to two workshops, one for the LAG and other public administration authorities on the 21st of October and one for rural initators and actors on the 22nd of October, which she organized in order to evaluate existing arrangements for support and facilitation of joint learning-by-doing activities within rural development initiatives. At these workshops, I presented supportive arrangements and benefiting rural development initiatives that we found during our investigations in the Westerkwartier and which we evaluated together with local stakeholders at a workshop organized by the Rural Sociology Group in the Westerkwartier on the 18th of October.

Meeting with rural development initiative supporters in Alytus District LAG office, Alytus

To my surprise, both regional learning supporters (including the LAG) and rural initiators did not see striking differences between the existing arrangements and support given to rural development initiatives in Alytus County and the Westerkwartier. Emilija and I however learned that there are some basic differences in the foundation and operation of the Countryside House (Plattelandshuis) in Westerkwartier and Seniūnija (NUTS5) in Alytus County. Continue reading →

Rural regional learning in the Westerkwartier (NL)

Posted on by

The Westerkwartier is a predominantly rural area in the province of Groningen (NL), situated between the cities of Leeuwarden and Groningen. The Westerkwartier is one of the case-study areas in the research project DERREG funded by the European Commission (see www.DERREG.eu for more info). Capacity building and governance of regional learning and innovation is one the four research task (see also previous posts on DERREG).

Last Monday, October 18, Rural Sociology Group facilitated a group discussion in the Westerkwartier. The discussion focussed on: a) how the support rural regional learning and innovation is actually arranged in the area and b) how beneficiaries evaluate the quality of the support.

DERREG Group discussion at the Hayema Heerd

17 representatives from collective (grassroot) development initiatives in the area, from local and regional government and from knowledge institutes participated in the discussion.

Sleeping in straw beds at Hayema Heerd

The workshop was organised at an inspiring location: the barn of the former farm Hayema Heerd in Oldehove (see www.hayemaheerd.nl), now offering citizens the special countryside experiences to sleep on straw beds. In addition Hayema Heerd also offers to learn more about real-life farming at nearby farms. this has been set up jointly with local farmers and is called In-Boeren, what refers to learning about being a farmer.

Mapping the governance of rural regional learning and innovation (Source: Wellbrock and Roep, 2010)

Other collective initiatives represented in the workshop were Wichterwest, a group of women entrepreneurs setting up their own business, and the regional Agricultural Nature Association. The collaboration and joint learning-by-doing in these networks is supported by several arrangements. These arrangements can be mapped as operational interfaces between grassroot development activities in the region, supporting public policies and learning and innovation supporting facilities in the framework of what we call a learning region (see the figure), reflecting thus a map of how the support of joint rural regional learning is actually arranged (see picture).

Mapping the arrangements and personal roles of the participants

Examples of arrangements operational in the Westerkwartier are:

  • The Local Action Group (Leader);
  • The Countryside House (Plattelandshuis) serving amongst others as a window for entrepreneurs and citizens with new ideas and development initiatives;
  • An Atelier, which is under construction building on previous experiences with the aim to get public funded education and research engaged on a structural base in the support of development activities in the region;
  • Three Touristic catalysts, supporting indivudual and collective initiatives of recreational entrepreneurs in the area.

The discussion made clear that these arrangements are important to channel the various types of support to individual and collective development activities: information, financial suport, expertise, feedback, maneuvring within (public) regulations, etc. Especially the Countryside House serves well as an entry to support as it lowers the threshold for initiators, a place were people from the area can meet and find themselves someone who coaches them and get them known in the unknown, complex world of numerous subsidies, regulations and networks. Continue reading →

The role of social capital, leadership and policy arrangements in rural regional development

Posted on by

Social capital and the role of leadership therein can play an important role in rural regional development and can be stimulated by specific policy arrangements. This conclusion was drawn from an analysis of in-depth case studies of 12 European regions. The empirical material was gathered in the context of a large European research project on regional development, ETUDE, carried out by RSO and other research groups in six European countries.

Leadership is the heart of social capital and -like a stone in the water- it creates rings of waves. Social capital is a segment of a wider circle of what is called ‘the rural web’. The rural web captures the interrelations between different domains of rural development: endogeneity, novelty, production, social capital, market governance, new institutional arrangements and sustainability Social capital and nested forms of leadership can play a role as initiator, lubricant and outcome in rural development.

Leadership helps to raise awareness, to mobilize actors, to generate innovations, and to bridge and bond public and private actors. Leaders bridge the distance between their own innovative network and the existing institutions, and constantly switch between networks and related cultures, logics and languages.

Regional competitiveness and quality of life are enhanced in those situations where there is an effective interplay between leadership, social capital and policy arrangements. Policy arrangements can play a constraining role towards social capital but also function as a lubricant. In order to play this last role under the following conditions: a) purposive local government; b) the use of European funds and programmes; c) cooperation, cohesion and coordination at the regional level (public-public as well as public-private). Factors such as ‘localism’ and lack of social capital can seriously undermine regional cooperation. An underlying shared regional storyline can foster regional coherence.

The cases show that the way to achieve sustainable development is highly context-dependant – however, this should not discourage us from developing a more robust theory of social capital and leadership, in its central and dynamic role as a motor for rural regional development. For more information the full paper can be downloaded: http://www.brass.cf.ac.uk/uploads/WP58.pdf, or send a mail to lummina.horlings@wur.nl.