Suchergebnisse

Cet article rend compte de processus communs de territorialisation, déterritorialisation, reterritorialisation de l'action publique touchant des espaces ruraux à partir de deux politiques distinctes, l'une territoriale, le programme européen LEADER déployé à l'échelle locale, l'autre sectorielle, l'agriculture biologique. Ces processus succèdent à la mise à l'agenda dans les années 1970-1980 de mouvements sociaux localisés à l'origine de l'agriculture biologique et du développement local. Des évolutions récentes témoignent de la mise en place de nouveaux équilibres avec l'avènement d'une régulation multi-niveaux fondée sur l'encastrement asymétrique d'une régulation politique s'étendant de l'Union européenne au local et le renforcement du pouvoir de l'institution régionale sur les pouvoirs locaux, aussi bien dans le domaine agricole que dans celui du développement rural.

This report is the final deliverable of TRUSTEE task 3.3. It present the research protocol, the methodology used and most of results. LEADER is qualified as down-up approach combining EU policy framework and local strategy. The implementation is quite heterogeneous dependend on institutional factors and political choices at national level, structural characteristics and socio-political local factors. Our findings highlight the diversity of LEADER implementations in the three countries under study (France, Germany, Italy) and the influence of institutional factors. The design of the programs influence, for example, via the setting of funding conditions or demands on institutional settings at the local level, the extent to which local actors from different spheres get involved in local development via LEADER.

New governance structures, meant to empower local decision makers, are supported by some policies introduced by the European Commission. LEADER, from rural development policy, is among these approaches. Nevertheless, these new policies are implemented in very different multi-level governance contexts in the European nation states. We question in how far the institutional differences on the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER on the local level. We thereby hope to contribute to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of differences in the impacts and effectiveness of the LEADER approach as has been documented thus far by research analyses. In our TRUSTEE research project we concentrate on ten cases in France, Germany and Italy. We describe the three different administration systems and the different types of RDP-implementation. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we then analyze the possible relation of these institutional differences to the LEADER implementation at a local level.

New governance structures, meant to empower local decision makers, are supported by some policies introduced by the European Commission. LEADER, from rural development policy, is among these approaches. Nevertheless, these new policies are implemented in very different multi-level governance contexts in the European nation states. We question in how far the institutional differences on the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER on the local level. We thereby hope to contribute to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of differences in the impacts and effectiveness of the LEADER approach as has been documented thus far by research analyses. In our TRUSTEE research project we concentrate on ten cases in France, Germany and Italy. We describe the three different administration systems and the different types of RDP-implementation. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we then analyze the possible relation of these institutional differences to the LEADER implementation at a local level.

New governance structures, meant to empower local decision makers, are supported by some policies introduced by the European Commission. LEADER, from rural development policy, is among these approaches. Nevertheless, these new policies are implemented in very different multi-level governance contexts in the European nation states. We question in how far the institutional differences on the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER on the local level. We thereby hope to contribute to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of differences in the impacts and effectiveness of the LEADER approach as has been documented thus far by research analyses. In our TRUSTEE research project we concentrate on ten cases in France, Germany and Italy. We describe the three different administration systems and the different types of RDP-implementation. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we then analyze the possible relation of these institutional differences to the LEADER implementation at a local level.

New governance structures, meant to empower local decision makers, are supported by some policies introduced by the European Commission. LEADER, from rural development policy, is among these approaches. Nevertheless, these new policies are implemented in very different multi-level governance contexts in the European nation states. We question in how far the institutional differences on the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER on the local level. We thereby hope to contribute to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of differences in the impacts and effectiveness of the LEADER approach as has been documented thus far by research analyses. In our TRUSTEE research project we concentrate on ten cases in France, Germany and Italy. We describe the three different administration systems and the different types of RDP-implementation. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we then analyze the possible relation of these institutional differences to the LEADER implementation at a local level.

New governance structures, meant to empower local decision makers, are supported by some policies introduced by the European Commission. LEADER, from rural development policy, is among these approaches. Nevertheless, these new policies are implemented in very different multi-level governance contexts in the European nation states. We question in how far the institutional differences on the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER on the local level. We thereby hope to contribute to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of differences in the impacts and effectiveness of the LEADER approach as has been documented thus far by research analyses. In our TRUSTEE research project we concentrate on ten cases in France, Germany and Italy. We describe the three different administration systems and the different types of RDP-implementation. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we then analyze the possible relation of these institutional differences to the LEADER implementation at a local level.

New governance structures, meant to empower local decision makers, are supported by some policies introduced by the European Commission. LEADER, from rural development policy, is among these approaches. Nevertheless, these new policies are implemented in very different multi-level governance contexts in the European nation states. We question in how far the institutional differences on the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER on the local level. We thereby hope to contribute to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of differences in the impacts and effectiveness of the LEADER approach as has been documented thus far by research analyses. In our TRUSTEE research project we concentrate on ten cases in France, Germany and Italy. We describe the three different administration systems and the different types of RDP-implementation. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we then analyze the possible relation of these institutional differences to the LEADER implementation at a local level.

New governance structures, meant to empower local decision makers, are supported by some policies introduced by the European Commission. LEADER, from rural development policy, is among these approaches. Nevertheless, these new policies are implemented in very different multi-level governance contexts in the European nation states. We question in how far the institutional differences on the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER on the local level. We thereby hope to contribute to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of differences in the impacts and effectiveness of the LEADER approach as has been documented thus far by research analyses. In our TRUSTEE research project we concentrate on ten cases in France, Germany and Italy. We describe the three different administration systems and the different types of RDP-implementation. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we then analyze the possible relation of these institutional differences to the LEADER implementation at a local level.

New governance structures, meant to empower local decision makers, are supported by some policies introduced by the European Commission. LEADER, from rural development policy, is among these approaches. Nevertheless, these new policies are implemented in very different multi-level governance contexts in the European nation states. We question in how far the institutional differences on the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER on the local level. We thereby hope to contribute to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of differences in the impacts and effectiveness of the LEADER approach as has been documented thus far by research analyses. In our TRUSTEE research project we concentrate on ten cases in France, Germany and Italy. We describe the three different administration systems and the different types of RDP-implementation. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we then analyze the possible relation of these institutional differences to the LEADER implementation at a local level.

New governance structures, meant to empower local decision makers, are supported by some policies introduced by the European Commission. LEADER, from rural development policy, is among these approaches. Nevertheless, these new policies are implemented in very different multi-level governance contexts in the European nation states. We question in how far the institutional differences on the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER on the local level. We thereby hope to contribute to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of differences in the impacts and effectiveness of the LEADER approach as has been documented thus far by research analyses. In our TRUSTEE research project we concentrate on ten cases in France, Germany and Italy. We describe the three different administration systems and the different types of RDP-implementation. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we then analyze the possible relation of these institutional differences to the LEADER implementation at a local level. ; Revised version / erweiterte & überarbeitete Version

European public policies in field of regional and rural development and territorial cohesion have a large role in Europe. Regional and rural development policies are designed taking into account the principles of subsidiarity, partnership and additionality. According to these principles, the European Union defines general guidelines and the member states or their sub-regional levels develop their specific strategy and way of implementation in their RD program within this frame. In this logic, Leader program, established by the European Union in 1991, aims to support the development of strategies at a sub-regional level that meet specific challenges of the territory; therefore, a bottom-up approach is implemented that involves public and private stakeholders. The presentation will show results of the comparative analysis of the implementation modalities of the Leader program at the national, regional and local level in Germany, France and Italy. These three countries show significant national level differences in terms of political and administrative organization and the decentralization of power. The analysis is based on a literature review, the examination of program and guidance documents, and on first results of case studies. Our main approach is based on the theory of multi-level governance (Bache & Flinders 2004; Pollermann et al. 2014) - understood as a mode of coordination - involving different spheres of actors and forms of regulation of various kinds (Jessop 2002). According to the expectations of some of the proponents of a new governance, the state in the multi-level governance setting has given up some of its control functions in favor of a more co-ordination role (Bache and Flinders, 2004 ; Buller, 2000 ; Mantino, 2009) or 'gouvernance à distance' (Epstein, 2005). Our findings highlight the diversity of LEADER implementations in the three countries under study and the central role of the decentralization of the member states structure for the performance of LEADER

International audience ; Parts of European rural development policies are meant to empower local decision makers. These policies are implemented in very different multilevel governance contexts in the member states. We question the extent to which the institutional differences at the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER (an approach for Community -led Local Development). This contributes to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of different types of LEADER implementation. The research is based on ten case studies in France, Germany and Italy. First, there is an examination of the three different administration systems and the variations of Rural Development Programmes. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we analysed institutional differences in the LEADER implementation at local level.

International audience ; Parts of European rural development policies are meant to empower local decision makers. These policies are implemented in very different multilevel governance contexts in the member states. We question the extent to which the institutional differences at the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER (an approach for Community -led Local Development). This contributes to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of different types of LEADER implementation. The research is based on ten case studies in France, Germany and Italy. First, there is an examination of the three different administration systems and the variations of Rural Development Programmes. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we analysed institutional differences in the LEADER implementation at local level.

International audience ; Parts of European rural development policies are meant to empower local decision makers. These policies are implemented in very different multilevel governance contexts in the member states. We question the extent to which the institutional differences at the different levels affect the implementation of LEADER (an approach for Community -led Local Development). This contributes to a better understanding of the causes and consequences of different types of LEADER implementation. The research is based on ten case studies in France, Germany and Italy. First, there is an examination of the three different administration systems and the variations of Rural Development Programmes. Based on analyses of documents and interviews with stakeholders, we analysed institutional differences in the LEADER implementation at local level.