Transcript Visvaldis Valtenbergs, Associated Professor, Vidzeme

NORDIC
NORBA
Territorial potentials of and co-operation in rural regions
– Case Eastern Europe
Identifying the potential of rural regions:
the role of visible and hidden knowledge
Visvaldis Valtenbergs, Vidzeme University of Applied Sciences, Latvia
TPG of PURR project “Potential of Rural Regions”
ESPON Open Seminar “European Territorial Evidence for
EU Cohesion Policy and Programming,” Aalborg, Denmark, 13-14 June, 2012
Visible and hidden knowledge of rural areas
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Visible knowledge
Based on assumption that rural areas are associated with handicaps in old
and new economic paradigms
About loss of jobs, services, outmigration of young and skilled
Advantages: provides context, analysis and usable info for policy makers
Problems: can lead to generalizations
Hidden knowledge
Based on: endogenous development potential
About different rural development narratives and agendas (small town vs.
rural development, making rural issues more visible etc.)
Advantages: examines actual recipes behind “better coordination / better
integration”?
Problems: difficult to incorporate into policy architectures
Latvia
GDP drop during crisis
Austerity effect
2009-12 -17% of GDP
39%
GDP growth by +6,9%
in first quarter (20112012)
22%
Source: Life in Transition Survey (2011)
Taking a bus to school in rural Latvia
• Visible knowledge
• More cost-effective service
delivery
• Example of good territorial
cooperation between towns
and remote rural areas
• Hidden knowledge
• Daily commute to towns
undermines sense of belonging to
a place for young people
• Schools important not only as
places for education, but places
for social gatherings
How can policy making
support innovations in rural development in the
context of austerity ?
1. Focus more on NATIONAL
level policy responses.
Dimension of Power
– The role of public sector,
market and development
planners in policy
implementation
2. In-depth research of
territorial potential
– Shifting the weight. How
austerity actually
empowers certain
individuals and
communities ?
– How can approaches of
development despite the
state be better realized in
rural development?
NORDIC
NORBA
Territorial potentials of and co-operation in rural regions
– Case Eastern Europe
Identifying the potential of rural regions:
the role of visible and hidden knowledge
Visvaldis Valtenbergs, Vidzeme University of Applied Sciences, Latvia
TPG of PURR project “Potential of Rural Regions”
ESPON Open Seminar “European Territorial Evidence for
EU Cohesion Policy and Programming,” Aalborg, Denmark, 13-14 June, 2012
What kind of
knowledge?
Who has it?
Advantages
Disadvantages
Local
knowledge
Endogenous. Tacit.
Experiential. Deeply
embedded in
community. Often –
aspatial. Mostly
qualitative
Locals
Place based,
contextual, detailed
depiction of local
rural reality
Difficult to unlock.
Loss of broader
perspective
Scientific
knowledge
Exogenous. Mostly
quantitative. Based
on accumulated data
and/or existing
theoretical
generalizations
Scholars.
Scientific
and
statistical
databases
Standardized,
quantifiable, can be
reused and
generalized
Cannot provide
accurate in-depth
description of local
rural realities and
context
External
knowledge
Exogenous. Based on
previous work
experience
Experts,
consultants
Perspective of
involved outsider
Knowledge based
on success stories
from other
instances that
cannot always be
transferred from
place to place
7
Source: PURR Draft Final Report