Skip to main content

Between Individual Autonomy and Centralized Control: Outlining an Evolutionary Model of Neo-endogenous Rural Development

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Evolutionary Governance Theory
  • 1981 Accesses

Abstract

The chapter takes concepts of evolutionary governance theory to the understanding of neo-endogenous rural development in a European context. It does this from the perspective of evolutionary game theory. Rural development is modelled as the increasing realisation over time of gains from interaction by rural stakeholders. The model exhibits two dynamically stable equilibria, which depict declining and prospering regions. An external government authority stimulates neo-endogenous rural development by helping decentralised actors to coordinate on the superior of the two equilibria. This intervention may be possible and desirable without giving up the autonomy of local decision makers. The approach thus pursues a middle way between “spontaneous order” and centralized control that avoids the disadvantages of top-down policies traditionally dominating in rural and agricultural policy. Moreover, it illustrates the path, inter-, and goal dependencies of evolutionary governance. Because initial conditions matter, outcomes cannot be planned or engineered from the outside.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    An expanded and more technical version of this chapter appeared as Petrick (2013). I am grateful to Stefan Ewert and Kristof Van Assche for helpful comments.

  2. 2.

    Rural start-up firms commonly are constrained to rely on the ‘3F’ of funding sources: the founder, family and friends. Equity capital is typically not available and fixed transaction costs for small loans to rural entrepreneurs are high (OECD 2006, p. 75).

  3. 3.

    Even signed labour or apprenticeship contracts are hard to enforce by rural companies should their young staff members decide to leave the area.

  4. 4.

    An alternative interpretation is that it is only played once for the entire period the governance mechanism is present.

References

  • Böcher M (2008) Regional governance and rural development in Germany: the implementation of LEADER+. Sociol Rural 48:372–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowles S (2004) Microeconomics: behavior, institutions, and evolution. Russell Sage, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixit AK, Skeath S (2004) Games of strategy, 2nd edn. Norton, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2006) The leader approach–a basic guide: fact sheet. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2007) A selection of Leader + best practices 2007/1. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2009) A selection of Leader + best practices 2009/4. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2011) Rural development in the EU: statistical and economic information. Report 2011. European Commission, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • European Network for Rural Development (ENRD) (2011) Rural development programmes 2007–2013 progress snapshot 2007–2010: leader axis–implementing local development strategies. Retrieved from http://enrd.ec.europa.eu

  • Furmankiewicz M, Thompson N, Zielinska M (2010) Area-based partnerships in rural Poland: the post-accession experience. J Rural Stud 26:52–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves Heap SP, Varoufakis Y (2004) Game theory: a critical text, Revth edn. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Laschewski L, Neu C, Fock T (2008) Aktive Bürgerschaft in der ländlichen Entwicklung: Fünf Gemeinden in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Berichte über Landwirtschaft 86:385–409

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier G (2001) History, spatial structure, and regional growth: lessons for policy making. In: Karlsson C, Stough RR, Johansson B (eds) Theories of endogenous regional growth. Lessons for regional policies. Springer, Berlin, pp 111–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Naidu S, Hwang S-H, Bowles S (2010) Evolutionary bargaining with intentional idiosyncratic play. Econ Lett 109:31–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2006) The new rural paradigm: policies and governance. OECD, Paris

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2011) Regions at a glance 2011. OECD, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrick M (2008) The co-evolution of semantics and policy paradigms: 50 years of Europe’s common agricultural policy. Intereconomics 43:246–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrick M (2013) Reversing the rural race to the bottom: an evolutionary model of neo-endogenous rural development. Eur Rev Agric Econ 40:707–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrick M, Pies I (2007) In search for rules that secure gains from cooperation: the heuristic value of social dilemmas for normative institutional economics. Eur J Law Econ 23:251–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ray C (2000) The EU LEADER programme: rural development laboratory. Sociol Rural 40:163–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ray C (2006) Neo-endogenous rural development in the EU. In: Cloke PJ, Marsden T, Mooney PH (eds) Handbook of rural studies. Sage, London, pp 278–291

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Reichert-Schick A (2008) Siedlungsregression und Schrumpfungsprozesse ländlicher Gemeinden in Vorpommern. Europa Regional 16:36–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrader H, Hachmöller G, Koch B, Masurek L (2004) Germany. In: Bryden J, Hart K (eds) A new approach to rural development in Europe, Germany, Greece, Scotland, and Sweden, vol 9, Mellen studies in geography. Edwin Mellen, Lewiston, pp 93–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Shucksmith M (2000) Endogenous development, social capital and social inclusion: perspectives from LEADER in the UK. Sociol Rural 40:208–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shucksmith M (2009) Disintegrated rural development? Neo-endogenous rural development, planning and place-shaping in diffused power contexts. Sociol Rural 50:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solow RM (2000) Growth theory: an exposition, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Assche K, Beunen R, Duineveld M (2014) Evolutionary governance theory. An introduction. Springer, Cham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weibull JW (1995) Evolutionary game theory. MIT, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Petrick .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Petrick, M. (2015). Between Individual Autonomy and Centralized Control: Outlining an Evolutionary Model of Neo-endogenous Rural Development. In: Beunen, R., Van Assche, K., Duineveld, M. (eds) Evolutionary Governance Theory. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12274-8_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics