Transcript Document

REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FOOD
Department for structural policy and rural development
INTEGRAL RURAL
DEVELOPMENT AS THE
GROUND OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
SUSTAINABILITY
BONN, 3.-7. 09. 2005
GORAN SOSTER
SRDN
Slovenian rural development network
Janja Kokolj Prošek
MAFF
Luka Juvancic
BTF
WHEN NEW WINDS START TO BLOW,
SOME PEOPLE BUILD WINDBREAKERS,
BUT SMART PEOPLE BUILD WINDMILLS.
2
GEOGRAPHIC POSITION OF SLOVENIA
Territory: 20.256 km2
Borders: Italy (202 km),
Austria (324 km), Hungary (88
km), Croatia (546 km), 46 km of
coastal line
Geographical macro
regions:
-alpine (12% of territory),
-sub alpine (31%),
-subpannonian (23%),
-dinaric-karst (26%),
-sub Mediterranean (8%)
Inhabitants (1998):
1.982.603
Population density: 97.9
inhab./km2
Rural population: 57.3 %
3
SLOVENIAN COUNTRYSIDE
 In Slovenia countryside occupies 93% of total
area, there lives 60 % of all population
Large number of settlements, mainly very small
(almost 6.000)
 80% of all settlements are in hilly, mountainous
and karst areas, there are just 40 % of people
living there
 86.467
holdings
European
comparable
agriculture
 Average largeness of farm with forests is 9,9 ha
 Average largeness of 5,9 ha agricultural land on
farm
 80% of Slovenian areas are LFA
4
SLOVENIAN AGRICULTURAL POLICY
Basis for Integrated Rural Development are:
 Strategy for development of agriculture
(1993):
beside production important role in
preserving of culture landscape,
protection of natural resources,
protection of the environment and
incorporation of Integrated rural
development.
 Programme of agricultural policy reform
(1998-2002):
four pillars of agricultural policy
5
POST ACCESSION IMPLEMENTATION
Year 2004
Preaccession
programme
SAPARD
National scheme
Rural
development
programme
2004 – 2006
Implementation of 7
measures within
Single programming
document 2004 2006 (SPD)
6
RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN SLOVENIA
Rural development policy
• Objective: development of rural areas
(preservation of environment, settlement, vitality)
Long term
Integrated
Self renewable
7
RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES
 CRPOV programmes
(Integrated Rural Development
and Village renewal Programmes)
 Rural development
programmes - Local
development initiatives support
8
2000: Establishing of SRDN
Slovenian Rural development network
• The CRPOV Programme of
Integrated Rural development and
other rural development projects over
the last 12 years have shown that
there is a need of formal and effective
cooperation and networking between
those who offer support and funding
and those who actually carry out
development projects.
• The neeed for PARTNERSHIP in
horizontal and vertical direction
9
SLOVENIAN RURAL DEVELOPMENT
NETWORK
• Legal based on the law for establishing
nonprofitable organisations
• STRUCTURE
– Aktive Members (200)
– Management board (8) - elected by
members
• President
• Underpresident
• Members
– Suppervisory board (3)
– Financial control (3)
– Disciplinary comision (3)
10
SLOVENIAN RURAL DEVELOPMENT
NETWORK – THE MISSION STATEMENT
• To bring together all players on a field of rural
development
• To inform and educate the members and others
• Cooperation and mutual help among individuals and
organisations
• To ensure effective representation of rural interests in
the flow of information between Government and
NGOs and from local to regional and national to
international level
• To be active partner in the process of forming
legislation and Rural Development Policy
11
MAIN IDEA ON CRPOV PROJECTS IN 90’TIES
THE MAIN IDEA IS
3XI
 i – Identity
 i – Innovation
i - Initiative
12
PRINCIPLES OF THE CRPOV PROGRAMME
Three steps of the CRPOV programmes:
Preparation
starting the
programme
Introduction
development strategy for
villages and future development
Implementation
action plan and its
of the projects
implementation in rural areas
13
CRPOV DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
 Five different working areas (themes)
 Animation and education
 Project management
CULTURAL
SPACE
LIVING
SPACE
SETTLEMENT
SPACE
SOCIAL
SPACE
WORKING
SPACE
14
RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES
RDP
Introduced in year 1996 with the intention to continue and
upgrade CRPOV projects
Basic characteristics:
 It combines development goals of at least three municipalities
 It represents basics for the preparation of implementation of
LEADER programmes
 Same methodology and approach as with CRPOV projects
15
CONTEMPORARY GUIDELINES FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT
• Local partnerships – carriers of local development
–
–
–
–
Development objectives set
Appropriately organised
Included in every development faze
“Bottom up” approach
• Profession – “right hand” in the development process
– Helping the population with definiton of aimes
– Presence at all times (monitoring activities)
• Municipality – important factor for development of local areas
– Contemporary trends of decentralisation
– Village development – important task for local communities
and municipalities
– European countries: Integral development principle
– Responsibility, independence and autonomy from external
sources
16
CURRENT SITUATION ON THE CRPOV PROJECTS FIELD
Two types of projects:
 CRPOV projects for the area of village,
settlement, and part of the municipality. Since
1991 till 2003 cca. 300 projects in different
phases of implementation
 Rural development programmes - projects for
the area covering at least three municipalities.
Since 1996 till 2003 19 projects in 118
municipalities, 20 projects of Wine roads of
Slovenia in 76 municipalities
17
UNDERSTANDING THE DYNAMIC OF
SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL
CHANGES
• It is necessary to know that gradually building of the
rural development policy adopted to the specifics of
particular country is proper GROUNDING for the
common rural RDP in EU 25 (strong enough to hold the
new building, which shape was inspired from the
western experience)
18
EFFECTIVE RDP:
BUILDING ON THE PROPER GROUNDING
• Continually informing and awarenesss
rising of the farmers to avoid the
conflicts and misunderstanding of the
CAP
• Selection of the proper measures to
the national circumstances (tradition,
needs, oportunities)
• Monitoring and evaluation in the
function of the permanent
improvements of the RDP
19
SLOVENIA 2004-06:
FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND PROGRAMME OF
THE MEASURES FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Programme
document
2004 - 2006
Rural
Development Plan
2004-06
Single
Programming
Document
2004-06
Financial frame
2004 - 2006
249,8 mio EUR
23,6 mio EUR
Structure funds
total:
237,5 mio EUR
Financing line
'Rural
'Structure funds'
development'
EAGGF EAGGF –
guarrantee section Guidance section
20
IMPLEMENTATION OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAMME:
EU15 (2000-03); Slovenia (2004-06)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
B
DK
D
GR
E
F
IRL
Okoljska in krajinska plačila
I
LUX
NL
A
P
FIN SWE UK
EU- SLO
15
Prestrukturiranje/konkurenčnost
Razvoj podeželja/izven kmetijstva
21
SIGNIFICANT CORRELATION OF THE CAP
MEASURES WITH THE ENVIRONMENT
IMPROVEMENT
• In Slovenia the number of the Organic farms grew
constantly in co-relation with the stimulating measures
(payments) – 2004: 1.600 farms in control (apr.3,5%)
• In 2004 the total payments per farm reached permitted
upper level of maximal payments
• Huge shift from the conventional to integrative farming
with tremendous environmental impact
• TO SMALL difference between organic and integrative
farms (WRONG MESSAGE)
22
NATURA 2000 IN SLOVENIA:
CHALLENGE FOR THE NEW FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE
2007 - 2013
Government 29.4.2004
(Ur. l. RS, št. 49/2004)
SPA - 26 areas (22,8 %)
SCI - 260 areas (31,6 %)
TOTAL - 35, 5 %
(9 % above 900 m)
23
NATURA 2000:
BUILDING ON THE WEEK GROUNDING
• It was URGENT NEEDED programme for
the protection of the European nature
heritage
• Week grounding in social sense
(UP – BOTTOM APPROACH)
• Not ready for implementation because of
the lack of communication
(CONFLICTS WITH THE LAND OWNERS)
24
SAVING NATURA 2000
• Saving the programme Natura
2000 is possible only with the
BOTTOM - UP establishing of the
MANAGEMENT PLANS for non
covered areas – including the
parks
• Ownership
• Financial resources ?
25
CO-RELATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF RDP
• For THOUSANDS YEARS small farmers were keeping
tradition of sustainable agriculture
• Only one generation was needed to loose the
proportions of sustainability (size according only to the
technical capacities, environmental demmage, loosing
of fertile-living soil, …)
• Huge domination of the small, medium and semisubsistence farms in the world WHICH DO NOT HAVE
REPRESENTATIVES IN ANY BODY
26
• “To expect” is justified.
• “To take measures” is necessary.
• “TO EXECUTE” • is the only thing that counts.
27