The impact of EU governance and rural development policy on the development of the third sector in rural Poland: A nation-wide analysis

Journal of Rural Studies 43 (2016) 225e234

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Rural Studies journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jrurstud

The impact of EU governance and rural development policy on the development of the third sector in rural Poland: A nation-wide analysis
Marek Furmankiewicz a, *, Krzysztof Janc b, Aine Macken-Walsh c a b c

Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Department of Spatial Management, Grunwaldzka 53, 50-357 Wrocław, Poland Wrocław University, Institute of Geography and Regional Development, Department of Spatial Management, Ku
znicza 49/55, 50-138 Wrocław, Poland Rural Economy and Development Programme, Teagasc, Athenry, Ireland

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 12 June 2013 Received in revised form 8 October 2015 Accepted 13 December 2015 Available online xxx

Governance and rural development programmes such as the European Union's LEADER programme are claimed in the policy literature to mobilise the involvement of the third sector in local development decision-making. Tracing the emergence of the third sector from the collapse of the socialist regime in the late 1980s to the aftermath of Poland's EU LEADER programme, this paper presents nation-wide data relating to the changing profile of the third sector in Poland's rural areas over time. Our analysis suggests that the implementation of the Polish LEADER þ Pilot Programme (2004e2006) and the LEADER 4th Axis in Rural Development Programme (2007e2013) resulted in a significant increase in the number of third sector organisations. Using secondary data to examine the factors attributed to this increase, we found that the financial support offered by the LEADER programme incentivised the formal registration of third sector organisations. However, an analysis of primary data found that third sector organisations' dependence on acquiring funding constrained how they identified and achieved their own objectives. Nonetheless, we found that active involvement of the third sector in LAGs had a positive impact on the latter's engagement with local inhabitants in activities such as formulating local development strategies. We conclude that now, over a decade since the initiation of the Polish LEADER programme, the third sector has grown exponentially but its institutional character remains in flux. The presence of the third sector, its resources, and its power in rural governance is patchy. A greater period of time and targeted policy supports are required for the third sector to have a more defined and powerful presence in intersectoral partnerships and in rural areas more generally. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

JEL classifications: D71 D78 O17 P21 Keywords: EU rural policy Territorial governance Third sector participation Rural development LEADER Poland

1. Introduction Governance and rural development partnerships are now a mainstream approach to fostering the participation of nonstatutory actors in the management and development of local resources. Such partnerships have been prevalent in many Western countries since the 1980s (Geddes, 2000) and have been popularised in rural areas of European countries since 1991, largely through the European Union LEADER Community Initiatives (Edwards et al., 2001; Moseley, 2003; Scott, 2003). Rural

* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (M. Furmankiewicz), [email protected] (K. Janc), aine.mackenwalsh@
Macken-Walsh). teagasc.ie (A. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.12.011 0743-0167/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

partnerships, following the principle of subsidiarity, are typically organised on a territorial basis, representing geographical units that are sufficiently cohesive to allow the identification of territorially congruous development concerns (Murdoch and Ward, 1997; Osti, 2000). Following the principle of partnership, different sectoral actors representing the public, private and third sectors within territories ought to be proportionately represented in the membership of a partnership board, which undertakes decision-making in relation to the design and implementation of local development (Ray, 2000). The territorial and inter-sectoral dynamics of partnerships are their defining features, underpinned by a rationale that “all the competent actors in the development process be brought together in a way that will allow them to pool their talents and complement each other over a set period during which, under the stimulus provided by the partnership, a cycle of accelerated local

226

M. Furmankiewicz et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 43 (2016) 225e234

development will occur” Curtin and Varley (1997, p. 142). The active role of the third sector is considered pivotal in the creation of rural development conditions in which social and economic development can be stimulated (Curtin and Varley, 1997; Chaney, 2002; Hudson, 2002). With profiteering intrinsically associated with the private sector and bureaucracy and hierarchical power relations traditionally associated with the public sector, the third sector is imbued with notions of locality, voluntarism and promotion of the common good. A crucial role of the third sector in rural development initiatives is to address marginalised issues that have fallen between the cracks of public and private sector man
, 2013). Furthermore, the mobidates (Vacekov
a and Skarabelov a lisation of the third sector is associated with the nuanced local development approach required to maximise the use of local knowledge and resources, an important characteristic of neoendogenous development (Shucksmith, 2000; Ray, 2006; Adamski and Gorlach, 2007) and place-based development (OECD, 2003; Wellbrock et al., 2013; Woods, 2013). The third sector is acknowledged to represent what had been, prior to the establishment of inter-sectoral governance approaches, an ‘untapped’ resource of labour and ideas for state-sponsored local development (Hudson, 2002; Moseley, 2003). Representing both marginalised development issues and unexploited forms of development potential, the involvement of the third sector is symbolic of the ‘opening up’ of decision-making processes to non-statutory actors, crucial for instigating the ‘transverse inter-sectoral debate’ in addressing local development problems more effectively (Macken-Walsh, 2010). Partnerships are challenged with the general goal of advancing ‘public purpose’ and the third sector is a important participant in the ‘deliberative arenas’ through which the legitimacy of partnerships as public development institutions is generated (Connelly et al., 2006; Thuesen, 2011). Public involvement, advocacy, citizen participation, collaborative planning and inclusive development e all of which rely upon the involvement of third-sector actors e are themes that are drawn upon frequently in justifications of why governance programmes are funded and promoted by international, national and regional authorities (Healey, 2008; OECD, 2009). There is a growing emphasis in the literature on how different public, private and third sector representatives interact with each other and influence local development processes (Scott, 2003;
, 2008; Munro et al., 2008; Shortall, 2008; Lost
ak and Hude ckova Delin, 2012; Maurel, 2012). The underpinning theoretical discourse is typically preoccupied with issues of (neo-) endogenous and place-based development, social capital, social inclusion, power, and legitimacy (Shucksmith, 2000; Shortall, 2008; Ray, 2006; € cher, 2008; Wellbrock et al., 2013). Dominant themes in the Bo presentation of mostly qualitative empirical data have been how different sectors are strategically represented in LEADER partnerships (Thuesen, 2010; Macken-Walsh and Curtin, 2013) and intersectoral power relations (Edwards et al., 2001; Derkzen and Bock, 2009; Furmankiewicz et al., 2010; Marquardt et al., 2012). In post-socialist Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC) differentiations between private, public and third sector interests formally emerged after the collapse of ‘uni-sectoral’ state socialism in the early 1990s. Studies of rural partnerships have since observed the marginalisation of the third sector in governance and rural development programmes (Da˛ browski, 2008; Halamska, 2011; Lackowska-Madurowicz and Swianiewicz, 2013); the prevalence of power imbalances between statutory and non-statutory actors (Furmankiewicz et al., 2010); and the impact of the governance and rural development approach on local stakeholders' engagement in and outcomes of local development (Petrick and Gramzow, 2012; Wellbrock et al., 2013). Some quantitative studies have assessed

partnership board membership (Bristow et al., 2008; Thuesen, 2010); political accountability structures (Fałkowski, 2013) and network relations between local actors (Marquardt et al., 2012; Furmankiewicz et al., 2014). How the third sector has developed at national levels, taking into account the impact of inter-sectoral governance and rural development programmes such as LEADER, has not taken a discrete focus heretofore. This paper aims to contribute to the existing literature by presenting a straightforward analysis of the development of the third sector in Poland, taking into account the impact of LEADER type support programs. We begin by reviewing the existing literature on the changing role of the third sector, particularly in the context of governance and rural development programmes. Next, we trace the evolution of governance and rural development institutions in post-socialist Poland and, drawing from secondary data, we present a geographical illustration of the emergence of LEADER intersectoral development partnerships (Local Action Groups e LAGs) over time. The characteristics of LAGs and the role of the third sector in their operation is analysed with specific reference to the formulation of local development strategies. Against that backdrop, we then focus specifically on the emergence and development of the third sector in rural Poland, highlighting increases in the establishment rate of new organisations corresponding to the initiation of the LEADER programme. Using qualitative data drawn from interviews with members of 45 LAGs and 37 third sector organisations, we overview the challenges encountered by the third sector. Finally, we present a discussion of the changing picture of the third sector in rural Poland, taking into account its ongoing institutional flux and identifying key considerations for supporting its participation in inter-sectoral approaches to rural development henceforth. 2. Governance and rural development: the role of the third sector One of the key differences between governance and government lies in the processes by which society's approval of and involvement in official decision-making and outcomes is achieved (Bu cek and Smith, 2000). In direct, electoral democracy formally elected representatives and their administrations play leading roles in the management of resources. Civic participation through consultations, public hearings, meetings, and protests can potentially shape final outcomes, but such processes can be inconsistent. Governance-based approaches and participatory democracy, on the other hand, advocate direct citizen participation through citizens' assemblies and QUANGOs (QUAsi Non-Governmental Organisations), such as cross-sectoral, area-based partnerships. Partnerships do away with the traditional divisions of responsibility between elected local representatives and non-elected stakeholders (Edwards et al., 2001), creating a locus for building of ‘public purpose’ through ‘deliberative arenas’ (Connelly et al., 2006). According to policy advocates (OECD, 1990, 2001, 2003), multilevel partnerships can help create coordination and cooperation networks that propagate negotiation and consensus norms between diverse development stakeholders. Third sector organisations are necessary participants in governance processes and LEADER type initiatives are identified as ways of supporting and incentivising the mobilisation and participation of third sector or
ski, 2005; Adamski and Gorlach, 2007; ganisations (Bła˛ d and Kamin Varga, 2009; Shucksmith, 2010; Marquardt et al., 2012). The success of governance and rural development programmes in supporting and mobilising the third sector can depend on the commitment of political and the status of non-statutory actors at the local level. The government is encouraged to act as a facilitator, supporting and enabling local interest groups to act on their own (Andersson and

M. Furmankiewicz et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 43 (2016) 225e234

van Laerhoven, 2007). Government actors in post-socialist CEEC, however, can often lack experience, understanding and initiative to successfully undertake such leadership (Ga˛ sior-Niemiec, 2010). However, it is in contexts such as CEE, where the weakness of civil society is a widespread phenomenon (Bernhard, 2006; MorjeHoward, 2003; van Oorschot et al., 2006), that there is an express need for government actors to support third sector organisations. Andersson and van Laerhoven (2007) emphasise that strong civic participation is unlikely to emerge as a natural consequence of decentralisation reforms within societies that have high inequities to begin with. Decentralisation may, in fact, exacerbate existing
lites taking control and inequalities as a result of traditional e capturing opportunities and benefits. Furthermore, while intersector partnerships can enhance relationships between public, private and third sector representatives and can lead to the creation of new participatory norms, the relationships can also transpire to be shallow, tokenistic or clientelistic (Shucksmith, 2000; Thompson and Atterton, 2010; Zajda, 2014). The public sector can often maintain and further its power through governance and rural development partnerships, particularly partnerships that are established with strong municipal government involvement (Edwards et al., 2001; Scott, 2003; Maurel, 2012). Somewhat paradoxically, the imposition of an inter-sectoral structure to achieve a more inclusive and locally representative approach to local development can backfire when, in reality, the third and private sectors are weak on the ground and the natural course is for the statutory sector to take control. As observed by Edwards et al. (2001, p. 297), inter-sectoral structures may not necessarily correspond with the structures of rural territories: “Partnership is demonstrated by the involvement of a tick-list of established institutions who are perceived to ‘represent’ different interests within the town … . implying no necessity either for the enrolment of non-establishment organisations, or for the actual engagement of the people who live in the town” Newly formed inter-sectoral organisations can thus transpire to mirror the modus operandi and culture of pre-existing organisations rather than representing entirely new organisations (MackenWalsh and Curtin, 2013). Such a dynamic is arguably more likely to occur in post-socialist countries, such as Poland, where there is a relatively limited tradition of civic participation and third sector organisation compared to western European countries with longstanding free-market economies and liberal democracies. How the third sector in post-socialist contexts has evolved since the early 1990s and how the instigation of nation-wide rural development partnerships, such as LAGs, has impacted on its evolution is a crucial question. We shall now turn to this question, focussing on CEE and in particular on rural Poland. 3. Civic mobilisation in the post-socialist countryside? At the time when the first LEADER programme was incubating at the EU level, post-socialist CEEC were mobilising against the socialist regime (Campbell and Coulson, 2006). While this period of rupture involved a significant uprising of civil society, after the shift to democracy many authors claim that the second half of the 1990s was characterised by a decline in civic engagement and the rise of political apathy (Regulska, 1997, 2009). What has been termed the ‘democracy parabola’ (Campbell and Coulson, 2006) culminated partly from public disillusionment at the disputes and tensions of electoral democracy and the demise of economies in the free market environment. The transfer of power from the old authoritarian regimes to electoral democracy was representative of political transition in the basic Schumpeterian sense, yet a process of

227

maturation and development was required for a consolidated, civically engaged democratic polity to emerge (Paczynska, 2005). A hallmark of the new liberal democratic regime was administrative decentralisation through the establishment of selfgoverning municipalities (Swianiewicz, 2006). The process of Europeanization followed, marked by the gradual transformation of the organisation and legislation of policy to coincide with the acquis
ch, 2000). The modus operandi of the acquis communautaire1 (Kova required greater contact between statutory organisations and civil society groups (Ga˛ sior-Niemiec, 2010; Petrick and Gramzow, 2012). In Poland, the Polish Public Benefit and Volunteer Work Act was passed in 2003, requiring local municipalities to develop formalised cooperation mechanisms with the third sector. By then, academic commentary had emerged in relation to how the third sector was taking shape. Despite the emergence of policy mechanisms to foster inter-sectoral cooperation, a weak capacity for cooperation was noted to be typically present in rural areas of CEEC (Chloupkova et al., 2003; Majerov
a, 2009; Marquardt et al., 2012), contributing to low civic engagement in the development of municipal development strategies (Regulska, 2009). Furthermore, the so-called ‘self-organisation’ governance processes of the 1990s
ski, yielded few genuine inter-sectoral approaches (Bła˛ d and Kamin 2005; Furmankiewicz et al., 2010). A frequent observation in relation to the emergence of the third sector in rural Poland overall was that it was often closely tied to or influenced by statutory organisations and local government institutions (Regulska, 2009). Where third sector participation was evident, cooperation between local government and the third sector was largely the result of state employees leveraging their own professional and personal contacts in populations of rural inhabitants (Sroka, 2009, 107). The failure of a genuine inter-sectoral dynamic to emerge was attributed to factors such as third sector organisations' poor financial status and no material resources or property (Churski, 2008; Ga˛ sior-Niemiec, 2010); the legacy of civil society agitating against the socialist regime resulting in tensions between government and NGOs (Regulska, 1998; Ga˛ sior-Niemiec, 2010; Grosse, 2010); and lack of public familiarity with and trust in third sector organisations that were at that time in their infancy in CEE (van Oorschot et al., 2006; Bu cek and Smith, 2000; MackenWalsh and Curtin, 2013). A lack of differentiation between public and third sector representatives was pervasive in some areas of CEE (Halamska, 2011; Macken-Walsh and Curtin, 2013; Zajda, 2014). In 2011, 43% of Polish third sector organisations in rural areas had a government representative as a member of their management boards (Przewłocka, 2011). The most prevalent third sector activities in Polish rural areas were identified as sport clubs, Ochotnicza Straz_
Wiejskich Poz_ arna (voluntary fire brigades) and Koła Gospodyn (farmer's wives' circles), many of which in early years were not
ski, 2005). formally registered (Bła˛ d and Kamin EU policy supported the implementation of place-based ‘partnership’ development planning, often requiring the creation of inter-sectoral committees to manage EU financial support at the regional and local levels (Da˛ browski, 2008; Barca, 2009; Wellbrock et al., 2013; van Depoele, 2003). Although an inter-sectoral approach to managing funds was required by EU programming rules, it was noted in the literature that regional political and public bodies actively attempted to maintain control over the distribution of funds (Da˛ browski, 2008; Lackowska-Madurowicz and Swianiewicz, 2013). However, such control was often an easy feat considering that the third sector was typically lacking in experience and

1 Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary joined EU in 2004 (with Malta and Cyprus) and Romania and Bulgaria joined in 2006.

228

M. Furmankiewicz et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 43 (2016) 225e234

resources (Ga˛ sior-Niemiec, 2010; PSDB, 2012). As time progressed, there was evidence that the increased presence of the EU LEADER programme in rural Poland often did not disrupt the status quo in power dynamics and local governments were found to dominate the funding-allocation and strategic decisions of many LAGs (Furmankiewicz et al., 2010; Halamska, 2011; Zajda, 2014). As has been observed elsewhere in CEEC (Churski, 2008; Maurel, 2012; Macken-Walsh and Curtin, 2013), third sector organisations that were involved in and drew down funding from EU programmes were often nationally organised NGOs with little or no involvement of small rural-based NGOs that were either absent in rural areas or present in small numbers. However, while local third sector organisations were relatively marginalised in many governance and rural development partnerships, it is also the case that the official requirement for balanced sectoral participation in LEADER partnerships is likely to have played some role in catalysing the increased presence and visibility of the third sector in Polish rural areas over time. To examine at a national-level the emergence and development of the third sector in rural Poland, thus, we also consider the emergence of LAGs and the involvement of the third sector in LAGs. In this paper, we present an analysis of wide-ranging secondary data, supplemented by primary qualitative data. Secondary data were drawn from the Foundation of Assistance Programmes for Agriculture (FAPA) that implemented Polish LEADER Pilot Programme (2004e2006, which operated from 2005 to 2008). Data relating to the LEADER Rural Development Programme (2007e2013, operative 2008e2015) were drawn directly from the formal strategy documents, data held locally by LAG offices, and websites of 336 LAGs. Statistical indices of civil associations and foundations in municipalities inside and outside of regions in
wny which LEADER was operational were acquired from the Gło Urza˛ d Statystyczny (Central Statistical Office of Poland). Municipalities participating in Axis 4 of the Rural Development Programme 2007e2013 (LEADER) included more than 93% of rural areas, which makes it impossible to statistically compare the changes in the areas participating in the programme and those that were uninvolved. Consequently, historical data regarding the LEADER Pilot Programme were used as a supplementary data source. To explore the participation of the third sector in LAGs, qualitative data were collected by one of the authors who conducted open-ended interviews with board members of 45 randomly selected case-study LAGs and with representatives of 37 third-sector organisations operating in LAG territories (2011e2012). The qualitative data were analysed using a basic thematic approach.

Rolnictwa (Foundation of Assistance Programmes for Agriculture), the institution with overall responsibility for implementing the programme, evidenced that an average of 45 persons were directly involved in each LAG over the years 2004e2006, amounting to almost 6750 people nationally. By 2006, an average of 35% of all rural and urban-rural municipalities, inhabited by a total population of more than 7 million residents, lived within the catchment areas of LEADER LAGs. Demonstrating the impact of the LPP, the number of inter-sector development partnerships increased almost twelve-fold in the period between 2003 (before the commencement of the LPP) and 2006 (when the LPP was coming to an end). Inter-sectoral partnerships in rural Poland and their date of establishment is presented geographically in Fig. 1, highlighting the large spread of partnerships established over the period 2004e2006 by comparison to other time periods. Fig. 1 also demonstrates a high proportion of inter-sectoral partnerships established in the time period 2007e2010. In 2008, Poland's second LEADER programme commenced (funded through the 4th Axis of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development), heralding local development funding opportunities for public, third and private sector actors. Almost 120 existing LAGs adapted their organisational structures to operationalise the new programme and an additional 218 new LAGs were created. The total number of 3382 LAGs that were operating by 2009 covered almost 93% of rural
n _
ski and Zak, territories eligible for the LEADER programme3 (Scia 2009) in which 18 million people inhabitants lived. According to data gathered by the authors from LAG strategy documents, LAGs had an average membership of 57 people in 2011 (compared to 45 in 2006), totalling at approximately 19,000 LAG members nationally. Most LAGs had 46-54 members, with almost a third of LAGs with 35 or fewer members (Fig. 2). When the periods 2008e2013 and 2005e2007 are compared, an increase is evident in both the geographical area covered by LAGs (Fig. 3) and in the average number of members per LAG. We used the secondary data to analyse the approaches of LAGs in the development of LEADER local development strategies, a crucial aspect of the development process that identifies local priorities and has a significant impact on decision-making regarding the allocation of funding for local development projects. There was significant diversity in the approaches of LAGs to in this regard. As illustrated in Fig. 4, almost 7.5% of LAGs engaged with over 400 inhabitants employing wide-ranging consultation techniques, for example, surveys, public meetings and focus groups. The greatest proportion of LAGs, almost 50%, engaged with up to 100 inhabitants and they typical method was public consultation meetings. A quarter of these consulted with 40 people or less.

4. The emergence of governance institutions in rural Poland The first governance and rural development structure in Poland established in the south-west in 1994 (Gramzow, 2005) and it remained the only example of governance in rural development until the late 1990s. In the early 2000s, further local partnerships
ski, emerged with the support of foreign donors (Bła˛ d and Kamin 2005; Furmankiewicz et al., 2010) and after Poland's accession to European Union in 2004, momentum grew with the implementation of the LEADER þ Pilot Programme (LPP). The LPP, concentrated as it was on the development of LAGs and capacity-building for inter-sectoral cooperation, had no funding for allocation to independent local development projects (Furmankiewicz et al., 2015). The LPP was found to have a generally positive impact through generating awareness in rural areas of principles of governance, participation and territorial development
ski, 2005; Zajda, 2014). Data more generally (Bła˛ d and Kamin
w Pomocy dla collected and analysed by the Fundacja Programo

5. The impact of territorial partnerships on the emergence of the third sector in rural Poland (2004e2011) A first step in analysing the impact of the LEADER programme on the emergence and development of the third sector in rural Poland involved measuring the number of registered third sector organisations per 10,000 inhabitants in 2003 (prior to the LPP) and 2007 (after the LPP).4 Using secondary data, the analysis took a regional focus, differentiating between regions that had and had not been involved in the LPP (Table 1). Furthermore, on the basis of

2

By 2011, the number decreased slightly to 336 due to LAG amalgamations. Areas eligible for inclusion in the LEADER programme were: 1) all rural municipalities; 2) urban municipalities up to 5000 inhabitants; and 3) areas of urbanrural municipalities, excluding the towns inhabited by more than 20,000 persons. 4 LAGs that were themselves registered as third sector organisations were excluded from calculations. Data from 2004 to 2006 were not available. 3

M. Furmankiewicz et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 43 (2016) 225e234

229

100 km

The year of establishment: 1994-1999 2000-2003 2004-2006 2007-2010

Fig. 1. The establishment of LEADER Local Actions Groups in Poland existing in 2011. Source: developed by the authors using data from formal LAGs strategies and LAGs offices.

RelaƟve frequency [%]

25

20

15

10

Number of members Fig. 2. The number of members in Polish LAGs in 2011 (relative frequency histogram). Source: The authors analysis of data retrieved from 336 LAGs.

153-191

143-152

133-142

123-132

114-122

105-113

94-104

85-93

75-84

65-74

55-64

46-54

36-45

26-35

0

16-25

5

230

M. Furmankiewicz et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 43 (2016) 225e234

Number of partners in LAG 16-41 42-50 51-60 61-77 78-191

Fig. 3. The number of members of Polish LAGS in 2011. Source: The authors' analysis of data retrieved from 336 LAGs.

RelaƟve frequency [%]

30 25 20 15 10 5 0

Number of engaged persons Fig. 4. The number of rural inhabitants involved in developing LAG development strategies (2008e2009, relative frequency histogram). Source: the authors' analysis of data retrieved from 183 LAG strategy documents.

M. Furmankiewicz et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 43 (2016) 225e234

231

Table 1 Mean and median changes in the number of third sector organisations per 10,000 inhabitants (2003 and 2007 comparison). Municipality type

Mean change in NGOs (2003/2007) Median change in NGOs (2003/ 2007)

Rural and urban-rural municipalities All eligible municipalities, excluding suburban municipalities Rural municipalities Urban-rural municipalities and rural municipalities with population density up to 150 persons for 1 square km

LPP regions

Non-LPP regions

Difference LPP regions

Non-LPP regions

Difference

A

B

C

D

E

F

þ5.70 þ5.73 þ5.67 þ5.79

þ4.98 þ4.89 þ4.73 þ5.07

þ0.72 þ0.84 þ0.90 þ0.72

þ4.62 þ4.59 þ4.41 þ4.73

þ4.13 þ3.99 þ3.69 þ4.16

þ0.49 þ0.60 þ0.72 þ0.57


wny Urza˛ d Statystyczny (Central Statistical Office of Poland). Urban municipalities that were ineligible for LEADER Source: The authors' analysis of data sourced from the Gło programme support were excluded from the analysis.

prior evidence that the number of third sector organisations increases with population density and urban proximity (Przewłocka, 2011), the analysis differentiated between rural (below a population density of 150 persons per sq. km), ‘urbanerural’, and suburban municipalities. We found that the number of newly created third sector organisations was 14% higher in municipalities that participated in the LPP, even when the impact of urban proximity and population density was controlled for. The differences between groups are statistically significant using the KolmogoroveSmirnov test (p < 0.01). A second stage in the analysis was to examine annual trends in the establishment of third sector organisations in the period 2004e2011 in rural areas (Fig. 5). An analysis of the number of registered third sector organisations across all ‘urbanerural’ and rural areas of Poland evidenced that there was an average of 2255 organisations established annually over the period 2004e2011. The highest number was in 2006 (2514) and the lowest was in 2009 (2042). The average number of registered third sector organisation in rural areas alone was 1192. The highest number was in 2006 (1328) and the lowest in 2010 (951). Investigating the reasons for these increases qualitatively, interviews with third sector representatives indicated that the

prospect of receiving funding from the LEADER programme was an important motivator for the formal registration of third sector organisations. It is conceivably the case that organisations incubating in rural areas that would have emerged organically over the period 2007e2010 accelerated their formal organisation due to the prospect of LEADER funding resulting in a peak in 2006 and a lower rate of establishment in the years thereafter. Following the establishment of high numbers of third sector organisations in 2006, there was a significant drop in numbers particularly in the period 2009e2010, which could arguably be attributable to saturation. However, the qualitative interviews undertaken for this study indicated that newly established third sector organisations were at that time becoming disillusioned with the financial and administrative procedures required for acquiring and managing LEADER Programme funding: “the residents are only slowly becoming active, as they are preparing for action encouraged by the prospects of attaining funds” (representative of the social sector and LAG board member, 2011). “the people were glad that there would be grants” (third sector representative and LAG board member, 2011),

3000

Number of civil associations created

rural municipalities

urban-rural municipalities

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0 2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Year Fig. 5. The number of third sector organisations established annually 2004e2011 (non-cumulative) in all rural and urban-rural municipalities eligible for inclusion in the EC LEADER programmes.
wny Urza˛ d Statystyczny (Central Statistical Office of Poland). Source: The authors' analysis of data from Gło

232

M. Furmankiewicz et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 43 (2016) 225e234

25

Relative frequency [%]

20

15

10

5

0 0

1-5

6-10

11-15

16-20

21-25

26-30

31-65

Number of third sector members in LAG Fig. 6. The number of third sector members in LAGs in 2011 (relative frequency histogram). Source: the authors' analysis of data derived from 298 LAG strategy documents.

The failure of many third sector organisations to accrue LEADER funding was becoming apparent to the organisations as well as more publically visible and, arguably, had a demotivating effect on informal groups to establish themselves formally: “[an obstacle to cooperation between LAGs and the third sector is the latter's] reluctance due to the fact that they [third sector organisations] participated in many competitions and became discouraged because of complicated procedures and they are no longer willing, ( … ) they are turning away” (LAG third sector representative, 2011); “the zeal was strong at first, but people [in third sector organisations] found the created procedures discouraging” (municipal mayor in LAG board member, 2011). Focussing on third sector organisations' participation in LAGs, there was an average of nine third sector members representing the third sector per LAG and 47% of LAGs involved one to ten third sector representatives in their membership. However, 17% of LAGs lacked any formal third sector organisation representative in their membership (Fig. 6). Our analysis found that the proportion of third sector membership of a LAG was statistically correlated with particular features of LAGs. The number of third sector LAG members was positively correlated with the number of members of the LAG board, which is the decision-making body undertaking the allocation of funding to local development projects (Table 2). The number of third sector LAG members was also positively correlated with the number of persons engaged in the formulation of LAG local development strategies. These statistical observations highlight how the membership of third sector representatives in LAGs was associated with a greater numbers of inhabitants both directly involved in the LAG and the number of inhabitants consulted with in relation to the

development strategies of the LAG. Furthermore, interviews undertaken for this study found that third sector LAG members undertook particular functions within LAGs and were prominently involved, for example, in activities relating to public consultation such as the distribution of questionnaires. However, the weak correlation between third sector LAG members and municipal unit workers in LAG decision councils suggests personal interdependencies between the public and third sectors.

6. Conclusion Our analysis clearly evidences that in geographical locations where LEADER programmes were operating, there were greater numbers of newly established third sector organisations. Considering the low number of third sector organisations and intersectoral development initiatives in Poland before the LEADER programme, the establishment of 336 LAGs, in which 2877 third sector organisations were involved, represents remarkable change. The change in the size of the third sector in rural Poland is particularly pronounced considering the noted ‘weakness of civil society’ and ‘democratic parabola’ that has characterised the post-socialist environment (see also Bernhardt, 1996; Campbell and Coulson, 2006). The involvement of third sector organisations in LAGs had a positive impact on the extent of civil engagement in local development strategy building. However, it is also the case that 25% of Polish LAGs did not involve meaningful civic participation in how local development strategies were formulated. While there is little doubt that the LEADER programme prompted the establishment of greater numbers of third sector organisations, the picture regarding their meaningful participation in and influence on decision-making processes in LAGs is less clear. The qualitative analysis presented in this paper reinforces the findings of existing studies suggesting that the third sector is continuingly weak in many regions of rural Poland. High

Table 2 The Pearson's statistical correlation between the number of third sector members (associations and foundations) engaged and other LAG structures. The number of third sector members in LAGs, correlated with:

N

Pearson correlation

Statistical significance

The number of persons engaged in LAG strategy development The number of LAG decision council members The proportion of municipal units workers (both clerks and mayors) in LAG's decision council

193 298 298

0.183 0.331 0.117

0.018 0.000 0.043

Source: The authors' analysis of secondary data sourced from LAGs.

M. Furmankiewicz et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 43 (2016) 225e234

expectations and hopes of acquiring LEADER funding was a primary motivator of third sector organisations in establishing themselves formally. Growing awareness of bureaucratic procedures coupled with limited access to funding resulted in disillusionment among those involved in newly established third sector organisations. Our qualitative analysis suggests that not only the ‘weakness of civil society’ in post-socialist states (Morje-Howard, 2003) but the strength of the statutory sector prevents the meaningful participation and influence of third sector organisations. Strategies of tokenism and clientelism used by networks of powerful actors, although present in many LAGs across the EU, are noted to be particularly strong in CEE where the third and private sectors remain relatively immature. The socialist background of many new member states has had a significant impact on how organisational structures transposed from western democracies have become operational in CEE. The domination of LAGs by the most powerful is likely unless targeted strategies are adopted to include and engage the marginalised. Development programmes with the goal of building social capital and good governance, particularly in postsocialist CEE, arguably require more than seven years' duration (Shucksmith, 2000; Marquardt, 2012). Congruous with discussions concerning the evolution of democracy in the 1990s in Poland (Grochowski and Regulska, 2000; Paczynska, 2005) one can say that partnership governance structures have been installed in postcommunist new member states, but their institutionalisation through real engagement on the part of third sector organisations requires a greater duration of time and targeted development supports. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank two anonymous referees and the editors for their useful suggestions. This research was funded by Narodowe Centrum Nauki (National Science Centre), Poland (project number NN114171036 and DEC-2012/07/B/HS4/03011). References Adamski, T., Gorlach, K., 2007. Neo-endogenous development and the revalidation of local knowledge. Pol. Sociol. Rev. 160, 481e497. Andersson, K., van Laerhoven, F., 2007. From local strongman to facilitator: institutional incentives for participatory municipal governance in Latin America. Comp. Polit. Stud. 40, 1085e1111. Barca, F., 2009. An Agenda for a Reformed Cohesion Policy: a Place-based Approach to Meeting European Union Challenges and Expectations. Independent Report prepared at the request of Danuta Hübner, Commissioner for Regional Policy. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/policy/future/pdf/report_barca_ v0306.pdf.
ski, R., 2005. Social capital enhancement in the Polish countryside: Bła˛ d, M., Kamin experiences from the implementation of LEADER-type programmes. In:
ska, K. (Ed.), Development in the Enlarged European Union. Institute of Zawalin Rural and Agricultural Development. Polish Academy of Sciences, Warszawa, pp. 235e247. Bernhard, M., 1996. Civil society after the first transition: dilemmas of Postcommunist Democratization in Poland and beyond. Communist PostCommunist Stud. 29, 309e330. €cher, M., 2008. Regional governance and rural development in Germany: the Bo implementation of LEADERþ. Sociol. Rural. 48, 372e388. Bristow, G., Entwistle, T., Hines, F., Martin, S., 2008. New spaces for inclusion? Lessons from the ‘Three-Thirds’ partnerships in Wales. Int. J. Urban Regional Res. 32, 903e921. Bu cek, J., Smith, B., 2000. New approaches to local democracy: direct democracy, participation and the ‘third sector’. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy 18, 3e16. Campbell, A., Coulson, A., 2006. Into the mainstream: local democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. Local Gov. Stud. 32, 543e561. Chaney, P., 2002. Social capital and the participation of marginalized groups in government: a study of the statutory partnership between the third sector and devolved government in Wales. Public Policy Adm. 17, 20e38. Chloupkova, J., Svendsen, G.L.H., Svendsen, G.T., 2003. Building and destroying social capital: the case of cooperative movements in Denmark and Poland. Agric. Hum. Values 20, 241e252. Churski, P., 2008. Structural funds of the European Union in Poland - experience of the first period of membership. Eur. Plan. Stud. 16, 579e607.

233

Connelly, S., Richardson, T., Miles, T., 2006. Situated legitimacy: deliberative arenas and the new rural governance. J. Rural Stud. 2, 267e277. Curtin, C., Varley, A., 1997. Take your partners and face the music: the state, community groups and area-based partnerships in rural Ireland. In: Brennan, P.
s et modernite
. Centre de Gestion des Revues. Universite
(Ed.), L'Irlande, identite Charles de Gaulle, Lille, pp. 141e155. Da˛ browski, M., 2008. Structural funds as a driver for institutional change in Poland. Europe-Asia Stud. 60, 227e248. Delin, M., 2012. The role of farmers in Local Action Groups: the case of the national d. network of the Local Action Groups in the Czech Republic. Agric. Econ. Zeme Ekon. 58, 433e442. Derkzen, P., Bock, B., 2009. Partnership and role perception, three case studies on the meaning of being a representative in rural partnerships. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy 27, 75e89. Edwards, B., Goodwin, M., Pemberton, S., Woods, M., 2001. Partnerships, power, and scale in rural governance Environment and Planning C. Gov. Policy 19, 289e310. Fałkowski, J., 2013. Political accountability and governance in rural areas: some evidence from the Pilot Programme LEADERþ in Poland. J. Rural Stud. 32, 70e79. Furmankiewicz, M., Knie
c, W., Atterton, J., 2015. Rural governance in the new EU member states: the experience of the Polish LEADERþPilot Programme (20042008). In: Bu cek, J., Ryder, A. (Eds.), Governance in Transition. Springer Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, pp. 133e153.
Stefan
ska, J., 2014. Territorial governance, Furmankiewicz, M., Macken-Walsh, A., networks and power: cross-sectoral partnerships in rural Poland. Geogr. Ann. Ser. B Hum. Geogr. 96, 345e361.
ska, M., 2010. Area-based partnerships in Furmankiewicz, M., Thompson, N., Zielin rural Poland: the post-accession experience. J. Rural Stud. 26, 52e62. Ga˛ sior-Niemiec, A., 2010. Lost in the system? Civil society and regional development policy in Poland. Acta Polit. 45 (1e2), 90e111. Geddes, M., 2000. Tackling social exclusion in the European Union? the limits to the new orthodoxy of local partnership. Int. J. Urban Regional Res. 24, 782e800. Gramzow, A., 2005. Experience with Endogenous Rural Development Initiatives and the Prospects for LEADERþ in the Region “Dolina Strugu”, Poland. Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO), Halle. Grochowski, M., Regulska, J., 2000. New partnership and collaboration: local government and its supporting institutions - the case of Poland. In: Amnå, E., Montin, S. (Eds.), Towards a New Concept of Local Self-government? Recent Local Government Legislation in Comparative Perspective. Fagbokforlaget, Bergen. Grosse, T.G., 2010. Social dialogue during enlargement: the case of Poland and Estonia. Acta Polit. 45, 112e135. Halamska, M., 2011. Sceny rozwoju lokalnego w Polsce: Dekoracje i aktorzy. Wie
s Rol. 153, 103e120. Healey, P., 2008. Civic engagement, spatial planning and democracy as a way of life. Plan. Theory Pract. 9, 379e414. Hudson, R., 2002. New geographies and forms of work and unemployment and public policy innovation in Europe. Tijdschr. Econ. Soc. Geogr. 93, 316e335. Kov
ach, I., 2000. LEADER, a new social order, and the Central-and East-European countries. Sociol. Rural. 40, 181e189. Lackowska-Madurowicz, M., Swianiewicz, P., 2013. Structures, procedures and social capital: the implementation of EU Cohesion policies by subnational governments in Poland. Int. J. Urban Regional Res. 37, 1396e1418.
k, M., Hude
, H., 2008. Agriculture and farming related activities: their Losta ckova d. Ekon. 54, actors and position in the LEADER approach. Agric. Econ. Zeme 245e262.
, V., 2009. Local initiatives functioning as a condition of rural development Majerova of the Czech countryside. East. Eur. Countrys. 15, 127e149. Macken-Walsh, A., 2010. Towards a ‘transverse inter-sectoral debate’? a case study of the rural partnership programme (RPP) in post-socialist Lithuania. East. Eur. Countrys. 16, 45e64.
Curtin, C., 2013. Governance and rural development: the case of Macken-Walsh, A., the rural partnership programme (RPP) in post-socialist Lithuania. Sociol. Rural. 53, 246e264. € llers, J., Buchenrieder, G., 2012. Social networks and rural Marquardt, D., Mo Development: LEADER in Romania. Sociol. Rural. 52, 398e431. Maurel, M.-C., 2012. The role of local elected officials in the making of LEADER Local Action Groups in the Czech Republic. Wie
s Rol. 156, 47e65. Morje-Howard, M., 2003. The Weakness of Civil Society in Post-Communist Europe. Cambridge University Press, UK. Moseley, M.J., 2003. Local Partnerships for Rural Development. The European Experience. CABI Publishing, Wallingford Oxon. Munro, H., Roberts, M., Skelcher, C., 2008. Partnership governance and democratic effectiveness: community leaders and public managers as dual intermediaries. Public Policy Adm. 23, 61e79. Murdoch, J., Ward, N., 1997. Governmentality and territoriality: the statistical manufacture of Britain's ‘national farm’. Polit. Geogr. 16, 307e324. OECD, 1990. Local Partnerships for Rural Development. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris. OECD, 2001. Local Partnerships for Better Governance. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris. OECD., 2003. The Future of Rural Policy. From Sectoral to Place-based Policies in Rural Areas, Paris. OECD, 2009. Focus on Citizens. Public Engagement for Better Policy and Services. OECD, Paris.

234

M. Furmankiewicz et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 43 (2016) 225e234

Osti, G., 2000. LEADER and partnerships: the case of Italy. Sociol. Rural. 40, 172e180. Paczynska, A., 2005. Inequality, political participation, and democratic deepening in Poland. East Eur. Polit. Soc. 19, 573e613. Petrick, M., Gramzow, A., 2012. Harnessing communities, markets and the state for public goods provision: evidence from post-socialist rural Poland. World Dev. 40, 2342e2354. _ Przewłocka, J., 2011. Polskie organizacje pozarza˛ dowe 2010. Najwazniejsze pytania, podstawowe fakty. Stowarzyszenie KLON-JAWOR, Warszawa. PSDB, 2012. Ocena funkcjonowania lokalnych grup działania realizuja˛ cych lokalna˛ strategie˛ rozwoju w ramach PROW 2007 e 2013. PSDB, Warszawa [unpublished report accessed 10.05.13. at. www.minrol.gov.pl/pol/content/download/37011/ 206108/file/Raport_LGD_i_studia_przypadku_20092012.pdf. Ray, C., 2000. The EU LEADER programme: rural development laboratory. Sociol. Rural. 40, 163e171. Ray, C., 2006. Neo-endogenous rural development in the EU. In: Cloke, P., Marsden, T., Mooney, P. (Eds.), Handbook of Rural Studies. Sage, London, pp. 278e291. Regulska, J., 1997. Decentralization or (re)centralization: struggle for political power in Poland. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy 15, 187e207. Regulska, J., 1998. Building local democracy: the role of western assistance in Poland. Voluntas. Int. J. Volunt. Nonprofit Organ. 9, 39e57. Regulska, J., 2009. Governance or self-governance in Poland? Benefits and threats 20 years later. Int. J. Polit. Cult. Soc. 22, 537e556. Scott, M., 2003. Area-based partnerships and engaging the community sector: lessons from rural development practice in Northern Ireland. Plan. Pract. Res. 18, 279e292. Shucksmith, M., 2000. Endogenous development, social capital and social inclusion: perspectives from LEADER in the UK. Sociol. Rural. 40, 208e218. Shucksmith, M., 2010. Disintegrated rural development? Neo-endogenous rural development, planning and place-shaping in diffused power contexts. Sociol. Rural. 50, 1e14. Shortall, S., 2008. Are rural development programmes socially inclusive? Social inclusion, civic engagement, participation, and social capital: exploring the differences. J. Rural Stud. 24, 450e457. Sroka, J., 2009. Deliberacja i rza˛ dzenie wielopasmowe. Teoria i praktyka.

Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Wrocław. Swianiewicz, P., 2006. Poland and Ukraine: contrasting paths of decentralisation and territorial reform. Local Gov. Stud. 32, 599e622.
n _
ski, P., Zak, Scia M., 2009. O
s IV PROW 2007 e 2013 e Lokalne Grupy Działania i Lokalne Strategie Rozwoju. Ministerstwo Rolnictwa i Rozwoju Wsi, Warszawa unpublished report accessed 10.05.13. at. http://bip.minrol.gov.pl/. Thompson, N., Atterton, J., 2010. Twenty-first Century clientelism? State and community on the Isle of Rum, Scotland. Sociol. Rural. 50, 352e369. Thuesen, A.A., 2010. Is LEADER elitist or inclusive? Composition of Danish LAG boards in the 2007e2013 Rural Development and Fisheries Programmes. Sociol. Rural. 50, 31e45. Thuesen, A.A., 2011. Partnerships as associations: input and output legitimacy of LEADER partnerships in Denmark, Finland and Sweden. Eur. Plan. Stud. 19, 575e594. 
, G., Skarabelov
, S., 2013. The role of third sector organisations in rural Vacekova a 
, V., Zítek, development. In: Klímova V. (Eds.), 16th International Colloquium on Regional Sciences. Conference Proceedings. Masaryk University, Brno, pp. 549e556. van Depoele, L., 2003. From sectoral to territorial-based policies: the case of LEADER. In: The Future of Rural Policy. From Sectoral to Place-based Policies in Rural Areas. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, pp. 79e87. van Oorschot, W., Arts, W., Gelissen, J., 2006. Social capital in Europe: measurement and social and regional distribution of a multifaceted phenomenon. Acta Sociol. 42, 149e167. Varga, E., 2009. Non-profit organisations in Hungarian rural development - a LEADERþ example in the Southern Transdanubian Region. Eur. Countrys. 1, 93e104. Wellbrock, W., Roep, D., Mahon, M., Kairyte, E., Nienaber, B., Dolores, M., García, D., Kriszan, M., Farrell, M., 2013. Arranging public support to unfold collaborative modes of governance in rural areas. J. Rural Stud. 32, 420e429. Woods, M., 2013. Rural development, globalization and European regional policy: perspectives from the DERREG project. Geogr. Pol. 86, 99e109. Zajda, K., 2014. Problems of functioning of Polish local action groups from the perspective of the social capital concept. East. Eur. Countrys. 20, 73e97.