Opinion by Hannes Lorenzen.
The Rural Pact Conference “From vision to action: Empowering rural areas for the future” took place in Kortrijk, Belgium on 16-17 September. Following this event, ARC2020 president Hannes Lorenzen shares his thoughts on the outlook for European rural policy and rural movements.
Last week Kortrijk, a small village in Belgium, saw another European gathering of a highly motivated group of rural stakeholders, called the “Rural Pact Community”. The event carried the motto: “From vision to action: Empowering rural areas for the future”.
Was it?
The Rural Pact Community is an unusual creature. It emerged from a public consultation process called The Long-Term Vision for Rural Europe, initiated by the European Commission, which then became a Rural Pact, a Rural Action Plan and now forms the Rural Pact Community. The Commission offered facilities for networking and gatherings of that Community. Regional and national governments, civil society and rural communities contributed ideas and suggestions for Europe’s rural future, many of them on a voluntary basis.
However, five years on, this undertaking does not seem to have any impact on legislative initiatives related to rural policy, and it remains doubtful whether it will secure the targeted financing. The recently leaked draft regulation does not reflect such provisions.
So, the Rural Pact remains an appeal to rural stakeholders to: “Do it yourself”.
It may be good to bring people together regularly for networking and to help them agree what they want to do. But it is unfair to create shop windows without access to the shop. The Rural Pact gathers highly knowledgeable and engaged people and communities from across Europe. To pretend to empower them without offering policy change or public support, will sooner or later avert the most precious partners for making tangible things happen. People who have contributed to consultations like this for decades rightly ask: why has nothing happened?
Yes, a rural pact is needed – now. Frustrations and tensions across rural Europe have had a worrying impact on European and national elections and put our democratic cultures at risk. We need a solid and honest response from European institutions, from national governments, but also from organised civil society. All three seem to be stuck in a loop of reflection without action. The Commission is stuck in the silos of unconnected or even competitive political competences. Member states struggle with their strategic plans for farming which follow mainly the agro-industrial complex and food security; and rural civil society is currently unable to overcome their own fragmented interests to build a critical mass which enforces policy change.
The EU and rural Europe are at a crossroads. The moment of strategic reorientation of EU institutions – and the opportunity for seizing that moment – is now. However, the current state of the rural cause has bad and good news.
The first of the bad news: At the recent reshuffle of EU Commissioners’ competences “rural development” got lost. CAP and Food policy are now Commissioner Hansen’s insignia and priorities. Not a single other General Directorate carries rural responsibilities. Sectoral interests of farmers, landowners or energy firms might well be dealt with in various contexts – or they might be not. But as new CAP legislation organised a roll back on Green Deal ambitions, an integrated Rural Policy must simultaneously assure social, economic and environmental cohesion and critical infrastructure, promote resilient farming practices, preserve biodiversity, and climate – and strengthen democracy. Rural policy may challenge urban dominance, but it could also enhance rural-urban cooperation on many levels and offer better governance and inclusion. So why not create a new DG Rural? Community-led programs like LEADER, Community-Led Local Development (CLLD), and Smart Villages have been a success, that is why rural civil society insists so much on preserving and further strengthening this integrated approach to rural challenges in the future.
There is more bad news: The EU’s new strategic priorities and post-2027 budget proposals do not even mention such an integrated policy or specific funding for rural areas. The suggestion to create a new mega fund which would merge the CAP budget with cohesion and defense money, including high flexibility of reprogramming and spending, will create investment insecurity and sectoral competition for public money. The geopolitical climate will put concerns about defense, global competitiveness or food security first and leave complex long-term strategies like rural resilience and livelihoods on the fringe. In such a competitive setting it is even more important to flag resilient rural development now as a precondition for economic and social stability in a much broader context of the role the EU must play. At this moment the power structure within the Commission and the external lobby for defense, trade and the agro-industrial complex point to short-term consolidation rather than a new integrative policy trend.
On the other hand, there is also good news. Rural communities and local and regional municipalities are bravely experimenting with policy integration at their own risk and on their respective levels of competence. They are building new strategic local alliances to reach a critical mass for community-based transformation on the ground. In the past, rural movements did not seek cooperation with farmers at all. Now many have recognised that a considerable number of small farmers are their potential allies. At the recent conference of the Polish EU presidency on rural development, the newly created Polish Rural Parliament invited farmers to join the movement.
The second piece of good news is that new alliances are emerging along local and regional food chains. They focus on preserving or creating the critical infrastructure to regain a fair income for farmers and smaller enterprises. They address opportunities to revitalise the local food value chain by emphasising the value of cooperation against unfair competition. Cereal farmers work with local or regional mills, bakers, breeders, brewers and shops to claw back the added value which has been lost to big supermarkets. Alliances of this kind exist already in France, Belgium, Germany and the UK.
How do we get un-stuck?
So, with this bad and good news in mind – how to get out of the loop of reflection to action?
First and foremost, it seems that we must build upon what has worked so far. The EU’s community-led approaches have been the most empowering and most efficient public spending ever. The core of an alliance for the future should match the local with the European. Despite new restricted budget priorities, this would be good news.
Next, more good news could be that the EU trusts its rural people and their capacities to manage their challenges and communities. The LEADER method carried that message and empowerment initially, but somehow has come of age. CLLD has bridged urban and rural local divides but is desperately underfunded.
To get out of the loop, a proper Rural Fund, managed by local communities, would be a new start and an expression of trust.
Thirdly, some more good news should be that a lot of exaggerated bureaucratic control is to be dropped, and responsibility for good management of public funds will be in the hands of local communities. Much time, effort and money could be saved this way. The EU would then concentrate its role on investments into critical rural infrastructure, which would attract young people to live in rural areas instead of letting them go to the cities.
Geopolitical challenges and budget restrictions are the opportunity to negotiate political priorities. The EU is considering cutting subsidies for farmers and offering them loans from the European Investment Bank instead. Alternatively, public money could be made available for critical infrastructure which would strengthen local and regional food chains and support small farmers in getting a fair income.
Ms. Lina Noreikaitė-Rimkienė, in her speech at the Rural Pact conference, made it pretty clear:
“We need a shop, we need a cafe, we need a post office, we need reliable internet. These are not luxuries. These are the difference between people staying or leaving.”
It is fair to say that many of the concerns and solutions mentioned here have been raised many times by conferences and declarations like the European Rural Parliament or the Rural Pact Community. Many encouraging examples of community initiatives and regional governmental action were published in ARC2020 and Forum Synergies’ book Rural Europe takes Action, including the Unwritten EU Regulation for an integrated rural development Policy. There is good reason to be optimistic that all these mostly voluntary efforts will bear fruit, if, against all odds, community spirit wins.
