Can Rural Development Be Measured? Design and Application of a Synthetic Index to Portuguese Municipalities

Abstract

Starting the discussion about the framework 2021–2027, and regarding the increasing importance given to rural areas by the European Union, multifunctionality of agriculture and its positive externalities can be the leverage factor to a sustainable rural development. It is therefore crucial to identify the success issues in these territories where public investment can more effectively influence the private sector. Despite the existence of many indices of development, none of them is specifically designed for the evaluation of rural areas. This lack of rural development measures hampers the process of assessing the impact of public policies applied in a particular territory, or, in an ex-ante perspective, the identification of the areas where the use of public funds would be more effective. This work hence proposes the design of a Rural Development Index which would cover the defining characteristics of each region’s development. The index has been constructed based on four dimensions: population, social, economic and environmental, with each of them being composed of different indicators. The index is finally applied it to 15 municipalities in a Portuguese NUT III region (North Alentejo) using the most recent data available from the 2011 Portuguese Census. The use of the index has allowed a comparative analysis of values of each territorial unit in different years, producing some conclusions on the effectiveness of the implementation of public policies. It was also possible to identify the dimensions in which the public development policies can improve their results, and how these dimensions contribute to different development levels of the territories.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Source: own elaboration

Fig. 2

Source: own elaboration

Fig. 3

Source: own elaboration

Fig. 4

Source: own elaboration

Fig. 5

Source: own elaboration

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/statistics/indicators/rd-2013/c2_en.pdf.

  2. 2.

    Regions are classified as Predominantly Rural if the share of population living in rural local units (with population density below 150 inhabitants per square kilometre) is higher than 50% (OECD 2010).

  3. 3.

    Where necessary, the variables were standardized.

  4. 4.

    Corresponding to the former LAU 2.

  5. 5.

    LEADER (Liaison Entre Actions de Développement Rural) was a Community Initiative launched in 1991, based on the idea that rural development strategies are more effective and efficient when designed and implemented by local actors at a local level (a bottom-up approach). Its success led LEADER to be “mainstreamed” in national rural development programmes since 2007.

References

  1. Abreu, I. (2014). Construção de um índice de desenvolvimento rural e sua aplicação ao Alto Alentejo. Instituto Politécnico de Portalegre.

  2. Bagstad, K. J., & Shammin, M. R. (2012). Can the genuine progress indicator better inform sustainable regional progress? A case study for Northeast Ohio. Ecological Indicators,18, 330–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.11.026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Berger-schmitt, R., & Noll, H. (2000). Conceptual framework and structure of a European system of social indicators. Mannheim: Centre for Survey Research and Methodology.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Black, D., & Henderson, J. V. (1999). A theory of urban growth. The Journal of Political Economy,107(2), 252–284. https://doi.org/10.1086/250060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bryden, J. M. (2002). Rural development indicators and diversity in the European union. In: Conference on "Measuring Rural Diversity", Washington, DC. http://srdc.msstate.edu/trainings/presentations_archive/2002/2002_bryden.pdf. Accessed 6 May 2018.

  6. Caruso, D., Contò, F., & Skulskis, V. (2016). The implementation of measure 121 of the rural development program: Comparative analysis between Italy and Lithuania. Intellectual Economics,9, 102–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intele.2016.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Christopherson, S., Michie, J., & Tyler, P. (2010). Regional resilience: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society,3(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsq004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Davis, G. (2004). A history of the social development network in the World Bank, 1973–2002. Washington, DC: Social Development.

    Google Scholar 

  9. DEFRA. (2004). Regional quality of life counts-2003. Regional versions of the headline indicators of sustainable development (4th ed.). London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  10. European Commission. (2017). The future of food and farming. Brussels. https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/sites/agriculture/files/future-of-cap/future_of_food_and_farming_communication_en.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2018.

  11. EUROSTAT. (2017). Statistics in rural areas in the EU. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Statistics_on_rural_areas_in_the_EU%0D. Accessed 31 Jan 2019.

  12. Gottero, E., & Cassatella, C. (2017). Landscape indicators for rural development policies. Application of a core set in the case study of Piedmont Region. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,65, 75–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.04.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Haag, A. (2009). Performance of the national program for strengthening family agriculture in the State of Rio Grande do Sul. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul.

  14. Hashemi, N., & Ghaffary, G. (2017). A Proposed Sustainable Rural Development Index (SRDI): Lessons from Hajij village, Iran. Tourism Management,59, 130–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Horsley, J., Prout, S., Tonts, M., & Ali, S. H. (2015). Sustainable livelihoods and indicators for regional development in mining economies. Extractive Industries and Society,2(2), 368–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2014.12.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Instituto Nacional de Estatística de Portugal. (2012). Censos 2011. Resultados Definitivos. censos.ine.pt/xportal/xmain?xpgid=censos2011_apresentacao&xpid=CENSOS%0D. Accessed June 1 2018.

  17. Instituto Nacional de Estatística de Portugal. (2018). Base de dados. https://www.ine.pt/xportal/xmain?xpid=INE&xpgid=ine_base_dados. Accessed 6 Jan 2018.

  18. Jones, G. A., & Corbridge, S. (2010). The continuing debate about urban bias: The thesis, its critics, its influence, and implications for poverty reduction. Progress in Development Studies,10(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/146499340901000101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kageyama, A. (2008). Desenvolvimento rural: Conceitos e aplicação ao caso brasileiro. Porto Alegre: UFRGS Editora.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kaufmann, P., Stagl, S., Zawalinska, K., & Michalek, J. (2007). Measuring quality of life in rural Europe—A review of conceptual foundations. Eastern European Countryside,13(2017), 5–27.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lebel, L., Anderies, J. M., Campbell, B., Folke, C., Hatfield-Dodds, S., Hughes, T. P., et al. (2006). Governance and the capacity to manage resilience in regional social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society,11(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mccann, P., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2015). Smart specialisation, regional growth and applications to Eu Cohesion Policy. Regional Studies,49(8), 1291–1302. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.799769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Michalek, J., & Zarnekow, N. (2012a). Construction and application of the Rural Development Index to analysis of rural regions. Luxembourg: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Michalek, J., & Zarnekow, N. (2012b). Application of the Rural Development Index to analysis of rural regions in Poland and Slovakia. Social Indicators Research,105(1), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9765-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mitrică, B., Mocanu, I., Dumitraşcu, M., & Grigorescu, I. (2017). Socio-economic disparities in the development of the Romania’s border areas. Social Indicators Research,134(3), 899–916. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1462-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Naldi, L., Nilsson, P., Westlund, H., & Wixe, S. (2015). What is smart rural development? Journal of Rural Studies,40, 90–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.06.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Nuñez, J. (2008). The evolution and impact of the EU regional and rural policy. https://www.ceps.eu/publications/evolution-and-impact-eu-regional-and-rural-policy. Accessed 15 June 2018.

  28. OECD. (2010). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) regional typology. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/region-data-en. Accessed 15 June 2018.

  29. Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative. (2010). Multidimensional Poverty Index. https://ophi.org.uk/mpi-2010-one-page-summary/. Accessed 31 Jan 2019.

  30. Sánchez-Zamora, P., Gallardo-Cobos, R., & Ceña-Delgado, F. (2014). Rural areas face the economic crisis: Analyzing the determinants of successful territorial dynamics. Journal of Rural Studies,35, 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.03.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schouten, M. A. H., van der Heide, C. M., Heijman, W. J. M., & Opdam, P. F. M. (2012). A resilience-based policy evaluation framework: Application to European rural development policies. Ecological Economics,81, 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.07.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. UNDP. (2010). Human development report 2010. United Nations Development Programme.

  33. UNDP. (2016). Human development report 2016. United Nations Development Programme. eISBN: 978-92-1-060036-1.

  34. Uthes, S., Li, F., & Kelly, E. (2017). Does EU rural expenditure correspond to regional development needs? Land Use Policy,60, 267–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.10.016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. World Bank. (1997). Expanding the measure of wealth. Indicators of environmentally sustainable development. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. J. Mesias.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abreu, I., Nunes, J.M. & Mesias, F.J. Can Rural Development Be Measured? Design and Application of a Synthetic Index to Portuguese Municipalities. Soc Indic Res 145, 1107–1123 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-019-02124-w

Download citation

Keywords

  • Rural development
  • Index
  • Public funds
  • Effectiveness
  • Alentejo
  • Portugal