This paper analyses territorial resilience in rural Andalusia, Spain, after the impact of the recent economic crisis and identifies the factors associated with the highest recovery rates in different contexts and territories. To this end, we developed a methodology that incorporates the heterogeneity and diversity of rural territories and uses composite indices calculated using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) in order to measure levels of resilience and identify the factors that impact recovery in rural counties. The results reveal how different aspects of economic, social, human, and natural capital promote resilient territorial dynamics in rural Andalusia. These results provide useful information for political decision-makers in the design of public policies, especially at a time like the present when the EU is immersed in debate on the reform of rural development policies for the next programming period beyond 2020.
The objective of this article is to deepen the knowledge of collective action in irrigation organizations in Colombia, by identifying the limitations of the members for their organizational work and the variables of context that determine collective behavior. Human and environmental factors have not been sufficiently considered in public irrigation policies, since, in the case of Colombia, these have focused almost exclusively on the physical infrastructure. The methodology develops a qualitative approach based on an ethnographic and quantitative study of the socioeconomic characteristics of irrigation users. The results allow us to affirm that the collective awareness of water is a common good. The vision of the associates about the associative work, the conformation and structuring of the organizations, the nature of the established agreements, and the socio-economic, environmental, and political environment of the organizations studied, are determining factors of their collective action and, therefore, should be taken into account in public policies of associative irrigation.
The purpose of this report is to identify, map, and evaluate the most relevant European policies seen to influence permanent grassland (PG) management. To accomplish this, an interdisciplinary, crossnational team from the UK, Switzerland, Spain, Czech Republic, and Sweden reviewed over 50 in-depth policy frameworks. With direction from expert stakeholders and a review of the policy landscape, we identified the most relevant policy instruments influencing PGs across five different biogeographic regions in Europe (Alpine, Atlantic, Boreal, Continental, and Mediterranean). The mapping of each country's policy mix was guided inter-alia by a 'cascade framework' to illustrate the entry points, intermediary actors, mechanisms and pathways through which policies deliver their intended effects on PGs. This entailed an in-depth analysis of publicly available government sources documenting the aims, objectives, targets, monitoring systems, outputs and outcomes of each policy instrument. In total, 24 policies were mapped using 50 different criteria, with 15 of the policies unique to the case study countries. This resulted in an extensive excel database of over 3400 unique cells containing rich qualitative data. The excel data were coded in a consistent manner across the country teams so that they could be compared, synthesized, and used to identify patterns in the policy mix and logic of intervention. We show, for instance, that across Europe, the dominant policy logic uses regulations and incentives to influence farmer adoption of desired landscape compositions. This directly influences, but does not guarantee, the range of ecosystem services (ES) that are possible from the landscape. At the same time, we discovered a lack of policies targeting consumer demand for PG ecosystem services and only a few designed to drive sustainable PG management by directly promoting the value of PGs with beneficiaries. To complement the policy mapping, stakeholders' assessed the perceived effectiveness of the policy mix in each country. This evaluation included over 50 interviews with key stakeholders across Europe representing government, academia, farmers, and special interests, and covered perceptions of democracy, legitimacy, relevance, efficiency and impact in relation to the effectiveness of policies relevant to the management of PG. Our findings reveal generally positive perceptions of grassland policy effectiveness across Europe, with special interest groups being the least positive and governments the most. The in-depth country case studies reveal striking similarities, as well as differences between countries and stakeholder groups, which are illustrative of the problems, challenges, and barriers confronting policy effectiveness. We conclude this report by offering insights and policy implications. In particular, we suggest that the following four points are taken into consideration to improve the PG policy landscape: 1) Reduce complexity and administrative burden to make policies more understandable and accessible. 2) Require stakeholder involvement when developing strategic plans and assessing policy. 3) Encourage consideration of trade-offs between PG management and ES delivery, by designing policies to explicitly target the interaction between landscape structures and ES (or target them in parallel). 4) Encourage a balance of policy logic, by moving away from targeting farmers with regulation or subsidies to manage the landscape towards targeting consumer demand for ES (through information) and the value of ES (such as direct payments for regulating and cultural services).
