Search

LEADER promotes integrated rural Community-Led Local Development with key features of bottom-up and multi-sector approaches, local partnerships and place-based design and delivery, funded through the Common Agricultural Policy (Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013), under a common framework (Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013). This study evaluated LEADER across the EU in the 2014-2020 programming period. Methods included: literature review; major surveys of local action group (LAG) managers, and Managing Authorities; indicator analysis; and in-depth case studies of 36 LAGs and 14 Rural Development Programmes across 10 Member States. The study found LEADER was relevant and effective for local rural development, targeting and achieving economic development, strengthening social fabric and capacity and enhancing local governance, with good coherence alongside other policies. Most LAGs promoted social inclusion in a more limited way, and environmental goals via integration within socio-economic projects or awareness-raising. Tackling rural poverty was not a LEADER priority, but positive impacts were identified in a few case studies. Clear relationships and excellent support from Managing Authorities, also sufficient funds for animation, were crucial to LAG performance. Fuller implementation of LEADER key features positively influenced quality and scope of impacts. Strengthened network support at EU and national levels is recommended, also further simplification to ensure future obligations and conditions are proportionate, especially in cases of multi-funded CLLD where CAP (EARDF) and other ESI funds combine.

This study is an evaluation of the Common Agricultural Policy’s (CAP) impact on\ud balanced territorial development (BTD) of rural areas across EU-28: socio-economic\ud aspects. The main focus of the study is on territorial development of rural areas, which\ud are investigated through the analysis of socio-economic aspects and social inclusion.\ud The evaluation work starts with a causal analysis which intended to scope and select\ud the CAP measures and instruments considered to have a direct impact on the general\ud objective of BTD in rural areas. The work is then articulated around five evaluation\ud criteria: effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, relevance, European added value.\ud Several methods have been applied to gather and analyse both quantitative and\ud qualitative information. Sixteen evaluation study questions have been answered by\ud using quantitative methods such as input-output analysis, clustering, and statistical\ud regressions, as well as qualitative methods, including case studies, literature review\ud and the observation of development trends over the programming period.\ud According to the evaluation study findings, the issues and needs faced by rural regions\ud in the EU-28 are significant. The evaluation’s quantitative and case study findings\ud indicate that the impact of the CAP in supporting BTD through the improvement of\ud socioeconomic aspects and social inclusion varies according to the characteristics of\ud the rural region and the policy mix applied. Pillar I instruments, in particular direct\ud payments, have been found to positively impact regional employment and reinvestment. Pillar II measures, some of which are specifically designed to address\ud socio-economic issues, demonstrate also positive effects.

This study outlines the current trends and patterns of farming\ud employment in the EU and discusses possible development\ud paths for the European agricultural labour force.\ud In particular, this study investigates the drivers of and structural\ud changes within agricultural labour markets at regional, national\ud and EU level, building on a range of quantitative and qualitative\ud analysis methods.

Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”