Brian Harvey - Employment and social inclusion in rural areas

723 views

Published on

Presentation by Brian Harvey, Independent Social Researcher, Ireland.

9th Annual Meeting of the OECD LEED Forum on Partnerships and Local Governance (Dublin-Kilkenny, Ireland), 26/27 March 2013.

http://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/9thfplgmeeting.htm

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
723
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Brian Harvey - Employment and social inclusion in rural areas

  1. 1. 9th Annual Meeting IMPLEMENTING CHANGE: A NEW LOCAL AGENDA FOR JOBS AND GROWTH In co-operation with the EU Presidency, Irish Government and Pobal 26-27 March 2013, Dublin-Kilkenny, IrelandWORKSHOP C: EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL INCLUSION IN RURAL AREAS Brian Harvey Independent Social Researcher, Ireland
  2. 2. Brian Harvey and Kathy Walsh OECD conference, UCD, DublinWorkshop C, 1300 to 1500, 26th March 2013 brharvey@iol.ie kwresearch@eircom.net
  3. 3.  Capture recent (esp. 2008+) trends in employment, social inclusion in rural areas Fill a gap in analysis of triangle of: Rural development Employment Social inclusion Look at examples outside Ireland Make recommendations Here, statistical analysis first; then issues, findings, problems, solutions, recommendations
  4. 4. 1987 1994 2000 Open country 21.5% 19.6% 32.4% Village/town 25.2% 26.4% 36.3% <3,000 Town 3,000+ 14.2% 19.2% 25.2% Major cities 18% 18.4% 31.3% Dublin 8.7% 15.1% 17.1% Combat Poverty Agency
  5. 5.  2009 2010 2011 +- National 14.1% 14.7% 16% +13% Urban 11.8% 12.5% 14.2% +20% Rural 17.8% 18.1% 18.8% +5.6% EU SILC, 2013Rural poverty is higherBut urban poverty is increasing faster
  6. 6. Consistent poverty rate 2009 2010 2011 +- Urban 5% 6.6% 6.9% +36% Rural 6.2% 5.9% 7.1% +14.5%Deprivation rate 2009 2010 2011 +- Urban 18.7% 22.9% 26.2% +40% Rural 14.9% 22.2% 21.8% +46%  EU SILC, 2013A complex picture, so what’s going on…?
  7. 7.  We divided country into: ◦ Urban, 5,000+ ◦ 3,000 to 5,000 (towns or peri-urban) ◦ Rural (<3,000) to refine the analysis And these are the outcomes…
  8. 8. 5,000+ 3-5,000 <3,000 Border 26% 28% 21% Midland 27% 29% 19% West 20% 16% 18% Dublin 17% 17% 15% Mid-East 18% 18% 18% Mid-West 25% 0% 17% South East 25% 26% 19% South West 19% 19% 15% Rural unemployment lowest, 3-5,000 highest
  9. 9. Less Same More Deprivation Deprivation 5,000+ 21% 62% 17% 3,000 to 5,000 12% 62% 25% <3,000 14% 66% 20% Towns 3,000 – 5,000 are focus of problem ‘Towns are dying on their feet’ But we lack explanations (LA tenants? Closures public services, shops, where jobs are?)
  10. 10.  Need for more refined definition of rural Irish rural policy is out of date ◦ Enhancing our future, 1999 ◦ Rural initiatives (RSS, RTP) – but not same as a policy Need for a statement of basis for rural policy ◦ E.g. Future of rural society (Commission, 1988) ◦ Equivalence principle Absence of rural proofing ◦ Many key national policy documents have no rural sections or only passing mention ◦ Look at Action plan for jobs, National Skills Strategy, Enterprise Strategy, ministerial briefings 2011 ◦ ‘Rural’ has slipped down policy hierarchy
  11. 11.  Positively, convergence about what should be done ◦ Between Ireland and Europe ◦ Between NGOs and government Main elements ◦ Investment in infrastructure, public services ◦ Green jobs (agrifood, farmer markets, social farming, organic etc), low carbon economy (biofuels, wind, wave) ◦ Targeted assistance for SMEs, micro-enterprise, social enterprise ◦ Upskilling right through to upper age range ◦ Rural, heritage, eco-tourism
  12. 12.  Ireland lags behind Europe in key areas ◦ E.g. organics, biomass, nature protection, renewables ◦ Example inappropriately applied e.g. wind ◦ Missed opportunities e.g. heritage tourism, wave, Groundwork type improvements Activation does not match scale of problem ◦ Not adapted to rural situation ◦ Does not address transport, childcare, progression ◦ Need to re-direct resources from control Role of the state ◦ Criticized as extreme laissez faire ◦ State agencies traditionally played important role e.g. ACC, ESB, NET, BNM, CSE: can do so again
  13. 13.  Lack of apprenticeship development cf. successful European economies (only 1,400 places) Small size of social economy (0.68% cf 6% EU) Need to re-set social inclusion policy ◦ In rural context ◦ In post-2008 context Need to re-affirm role of community development ◦ It was a major driver in improvement in rural Ireland post 1980s ◦ Since then, CDP gone, LCDP down -42%, alignment process. Consequences if you cut out a main driver. Need for broader community of policy, practice
  14. 14. ◦ Rural vision, policy direction◦ Successful application of policy – proofing  Rural policy implementation group, incl. NGOs◦ Fall application of European menu◦ Community of policy, practice◦ Adapt activation to rural environment◦ Apprenticeships, social economy◦ Rebalance state support for rural enterprise◦ Revise NAPSIncl in light of rural, post-2008◦ Re-affirm value of community development  Operation of CLLD as a global grant 2013-2020

×