CHANGES IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND RUSSIA

Author(s):  
O.I. Panteleeva ◽  
N.V. Vorontsova
2019 ◽  
pp. 5-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Volodymyr Ivanyshyn ◽  
Anton Stelmashchuk

Purpose. The aim of the article is identification and critical analysis of problems and substantiation on their basis of perspectives, instruments and mechanisms of rural development of Ukraine on the basis of improvement of institutional and innovative policy of the state, with achievement of economic security and sustainable multifunctional development of rural areas, regions, territorial communities and subjects of business activity in the context of European integration and convergence to the standards of the European Union. Methodology of research. The methodological basis of the study is the theoretical development of domestic and foreign scientists on the problem, legislative and regulatory materials of Ukraine and the EU. In the course of the research, general scientific and special methods are used, namely: monographic, analytical, abstract and logical and other methods – to summarize the results of the literary review on the problem under study, to substantiate the directions of rural development research, and to write programs for promoting rural development. Findings. It is substantiated that rural territory is a complex and multifunctional natural, social and economic, production and economic structure, characterized by a set of peculiarities inherent in it, namely: the area of land; landscape features; the number of people living and their type of employment; the number, species diversity of flora and fauna; volumes and structure of production; development of social and industrial infrastructure and other features. It is found that the format of the approach to the definition of the concept of “rural area” has changed significantly, in which it is not only the concept of space, where agriculture and forestry occupied a major share, but also the understanding that it is a place that has had considerable human, natural, cultural and social capital. It is determined that the territorial model of rural development, unlike other models, provides two parallel variants of development: the focus on the development of agrarian and agro-industrial sectors as drivers. This model recognizes the importance of local institutions (private and public) both in developing the directions of development and in the management and implementation of development programs. It is substantiated that, it is advisable to create appropriate regional development agencies to ensure the planned regulation of this process in order to make effective use of the territorial-resource potential of the rural territories of the region. It is proved that the activation of rural development is provided mainly on the basis of the implementation of the applied principles of agricultural policy related to institutional and innovative, sectoral and territorial stimulation, which facilitates the transition to sustainable development. Originality. The priority methodology for the study of rural development is defined, which includes the construction of a logarithm when writing a program for rural restoration and development. The structure of the regional public agency for rural development of Podillia is substantiated, which envisages the following functional departments: strategic management of rural development; formation of competent population; transfer of innovative technologies (products); design, which develops different types of innovation and investment projects for the sectoral and territorial economy. Practical value. It is determined that the common agricultural policy of the European Union is aimed at: balanced development of economic, social and environmental spheres; multifunctional development of rural areas; transition to principles of rational use of nature; protection of interests of rural population and formation of economic mechanism of development of rural territories in the system of social and economic security of the state. It is established that within the territorial development model, the importance of local institutions has been found to be complemented by the need for effective coordination between the different levels of governance of this policy, starting with EU policy, which is manifested through financial support and establishing a system of rules and guidelines, and further to national, regional and local levels. This combination contributes to the success of rural development policy, which has made multi-level governance one of the key features of rural development policy. Key words: rural areas; communities; strategy; institutional and innovation development; economic security; EU standards.


2008 ◽  
Vol 47 (4II) ◽  
pp. 565-580
Author(s):  
Laura Giurca Vasilescu

Globalisation of world trade, consumer-led quality requirements and EU enlargement are the new realities and challenges facing European agriculture today. The changes will affect not only agricultural markets, but also local economies in rural areas. The future of the agricultural sector is closely linked to a balanced development of rural areas. The Community dimension in this relationship is therefore clear: agricultural and rural policy have an important role to play in the cohesion of EU territorial, economic and social policy. With over 56 percent of the population in the 27 Member States of the European Union (EU) living in rural areas, which cover 91 percent of the territory, rural development is a vitally important policy area. Farming and forestry remain crucial for land use and the management of natural resources in the EU’s rural areas, and as a platform for economic diversification in rural communities. The strengthening of EU rural development policy is, therefore, an overall EU priority. The European Union has an active rural development policy because this helps to achieve valuable goals for the country sides and for the people who live and work there. The policy is funded partly from the central EU budget and partly from individual Member States' national or regional budgets. Theoretically, individual EU Member States could decide and operate completely independent rural development policies. However, this approach would work poorly in practice. Not all countries in the EU would be able to afford the policy which they needed and many of the issues addressed through rural development policy do not divide up neatly at national or regional boundaries. Also, rural development policy has links to a number of other policies set at EU level. Therefore, the EU has a common rural development policy, which nonetheless places considerable control in the hands of individual Member States and regions. The EU’s rural development policy is all about meeting the challenges faced by our rural areas, and unlocking their potential.


2012 ◽  
pp. 175-177
Author(s):  
Szilárd Ágoston Jávor

LEADER was one of the most important and diverse initiations in the rural development policy of the recent years that made it possible in the Member States of the European Union to carry out the needs of the lowest level, directly coming from the citizens. Decentralisation and the assignment of certain authorities furthered this opportunity, whereas it was greatly restricted by the strong centralisation and regulation of the program in Hungary. This was the reason why the Hungarian LEADER program did not achieve any measureable success in terms of the standards in the rest of the EU Member States. There is a need to change this practice that can be done by the complete Hungarian reform of the program.


2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
FRIEDERIKE MIKULCAK ◽  
JENS NEWIG ◽  
ANDRA I. MILCU ◽  
TIBOR HARTEL ◽  
JOERN FISCHER

SUMMARYUnlike most parts of the European Union (EU), Southern Transylvania (Central Romania) is characterized by an exceptionally high level of farmland biodiversity. This results from traditional small-scale farming methods that have maintained extensive areas of high nature value farmland. Following the post-socialist transition, Southern Transylvania faces serious challenges such as under-employment and rural population decline, which put traditional farming at risk. With Romania's accession to the EU in 2007, Southern Transylvania became part of a complex multi-level governance system that in principle provides mechanisms to balance biodiversity conservation and rural development. To this end, the most important instruments are the ‘Natura 2000’ network of protected areas and EU rural development policy. Structured questionnaires and semi-structured interviews with town hall representatives from 30 villages in Southern Transylvania and local EU experts revealed that EU policies are often poorly aligned with local conditions. To date, the implementation of EU rural development policy is strongly focused on economic development, with biodiversity conservation being of little concern. Moreover, relevant EU funding opportunities are poorly communicated. Bridging organizations should be strengthened to foster the implementation of a rural development strategy that integrates local needs and biodiversity conservation.


2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-76
Author(s):  
Puspi Eko Wiranthi

Germany as one of the largest agricultural producers in the European Union has faced several problems in the rural areas. Therefore, the government has set out a rural development policy in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) which covers four axes, namely improving the competitiveness of the agricultural and forestry sectors (axis 1), improving the environment and the countryside (axis 2), improving the quality of life in rural areas and encouraging diversification of the rural economy (axis 3), and building local capacity for employment and diversification (axis 4). Therefore, in this study, we give an overview of past and present reform of rural development policy, including the objectives, programmes, measures and fund allocations and analyze how governments determine different priorities on the axis among the regions. From the review, it is found that from the implementation of the rural development policy 2007-2013, Germanygives priority to the axis 2 with the greatest percentage of 42.71 percent (improving the environment and countryside), followed by the axis 1 with a percentage of 26.60 percent (improving the competitiveness of the agricultural and forestry sectors), then axis 3 with the percentage of 23.06 percent, and the last axis 4 with the percentage of 6.31 percent (building local capacity for employment and diversification - Leader).


Author(s):  
Serhiy Moroz

The paper describes the current state and tendencies in the development of rural heritage in Ukraine. Special attention is given to the nature reserve fund, forests, water resources, and historical-cultural objects. The preparatory steps for the implementation of rural heritage measures are presented, taking into account the necessity of the adaptation of the rural development policy of Ukraine to the requirements of the European Union. The aims, objects, and main directions of measures regarding the preservation of cultural and natural heritage in the rural regions of Ukraine are identified. The indicators for the evaluation of rural heritage measures are proposed.


2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 22-32
Author(s):  
Serhiy Moroz

The paper describes the current state and tendencies in the development of rural heritage in Ukraine. Special attention is given to the nature reserve fund, forests, water resources, and historical-cultural objects. The preparatory steps for the implementation of rural heritage measures are presented, taking into account the necessity of the adaptation of the rural development policy of Ukraine to the requirements of the European Union. The aims, objects, and main directions of measures regarding the preservation of cultural and natural heritage in the rural regions of Ukraine are identified. The indicators for the evaluation of rural heritage measures are proposed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document