1. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona Capturing impacts of Leader and of measures to improve Quality of Life in rural areas EAAE, Ancona, February 2011 Jela Tvrdonova, Evaluation Manager

2. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 Context of the presentation Common approach in Measuring impacts of Leader and Based on the Working Paper of the Helpdesk of the European Evaluation Network for Rural Development : Capturing impacts of Leader and of measures to improve Quality of Life in rural areas Prepared by a Thematic working group composed of a group of authors and editors in 2010: Grieve J., Weinspach U., Afonso Fernandes P., Brakalova M., Cristiano S. Geissendörfer M., Lukesch R., Nemes G., O´Grady S., Ortiz Sepùlveda R., Pfefferkorn W., Pollermann K., Pylkkänen P., Ricci C. and Slee B. 2

3. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 Content of the presentation Common approach in Measuring impacts of Leader and Main challenges in measuring impacts of Leader and Quality of Life measures within RDPs; Identified four dimensions of Quality of Life within Rural Development Programmes, impact areas, definitions and assessment criteria; Suggested methodological approach - common framework of reference; Conclusive remarks. 3

4. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 Main challenges in measuring impacts of Leader and of Quality of Life measures within RDPs 4  Broadening Rural Development Policies during the last programming period - enfaces not only to the competitiveness of key rural economic sectors and rural environment but also on Quality of Life and Leader approach in rural areas;  Measures supporting economic diversification, infrastructure and governance in rural areas cause enduring challenges in measuring their impact on Quality of Life in rural areas;  The Quality of Life and Governance still represent quite complex and challenging categories in evaluation accompanied with difficulties to find appropriate methodologies for capturing change;  Therefore there is a necessity to clarify the concepts and implications of Quality of Life and Leader interventions within the scope of wider objectives assigned to Axes 3 and 4.

5. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 Quality of Life in the context of Rural Development Programmes – - four dimensions 5 Quality of Life must be understood as a multi-dimensional concept, covering the following dimensions: The socio-cultural and services dimension The environmental dimension The economic dimension The successful implementation of the Leader approach shall lead to improved governance in rural areas as the fourth dimension of Quality of Life.

6. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 Illustrating the concept of Quality of Life - Four dimensions Source: Helpdesk of the Evaluation Expert Network

7. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 The 8 key features of Leader & links to Quality of Life dimensions

8. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 Common methodological approach - the framework of reference 8 Structured along the 4 dimensions of Quality of Life Introduced by the relevant Common Evaluation Questions of the CMEF Operationalized into four columns showing  impact categories (related to the four dimensions of Quality of Life)  assessment criteria for each category  specific Evaluation Questions related to each expected impact category  suggested impact indicators for each category Suggestions for the possible sources of verification for these indicators

9. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 The framework of reference – 7 impact categories The four dimensions of Quality of Life represent the following 7 impact categories: 9 Rural economy: (1) livelihoods and (2) liveability Socio-culture: (3) social capital and (4) cultural capital Rural environment: (5) enhanced well-being due to environment Governance: (6) multi-level and (7) local governance

10. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 Integration of the 7 impact categories and 14 assessment criteria

11. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 ImpactsRelated Common Evaluation Question Assessment criterionSpecific evaluation question Impact indicator S ocio-cultural To what extent has the Leader approach contributed to mobilising the endogenous development potential of rural areas? Local identity and coherence strengthened To what extent have the RDP measures increased the interaction amongst actors to promote a sense of place and to strengthen community ties? Number of people participating in collective investments and composition of participants in projects of this type. Rural environment To what extent has the measure contributed to the sustainable management and development of Natura 2000 sites or other places of High Nature Value and to environmental awareness of rural population? Improved environmental services and amenities and their perception” To what extent have QoL measures and Leader generated new services or contributed to improve the existing ecosystem services and environmental amenities of the territory? Increased share of people actively using new opportunities created to experience, watch, make use etc. of environmental amenities S ocio-cultural To what extent has the Leader approach contributed to mobilising the endogenous development potential of rural areas? Local identity and coherence strengthened To what extent have the RDP measures increased the interaction amongst actors to promote a sense of place and to strengthen community ties? Number of people participating in collective investments and composition of participants in projects of this type. Rural environment To what extent has the measure contributed to the sustainable management and development of Natura 2000 sites or other places of High Nature Value and to environmental awareness of rural population? Improved environmental services and amenities and their perception” To what extent have QoL measures and Leader generated new services or contributed to improve the existing ecosystem services and environmental amenities of the territory? Increased share of people actively using new opportunities created to experience, watch, make use etc. of environmental amenities Rural economy To what extent has the support contributed to improving the Quality of Life in rural areas? Valorisation of socio- economic performance To what extent have the new value added been produced from resources and potentials specific to the area? Number of businesses / jobs created through valorisation of specific resources Rural economy To what extent has the support contributed to improving the Quality of Life in rural areas? Valorisation of socio- economic performance To what extent have the new value added been produced from resources and potentials specific to the area? Number of businesses / jobs created through valorisation of specific resources S ocio-cultural To what extent has the Leader approach contributed to mobilising the endogenous development potential of rural areas? Local identity and coherence strengthened To what extent have the RDP measures increased the interaction amongst actors to promote a sense of place and to strengthen community ties? Number of people participating in collective investments and composition of participants in projects of this type. Rural environment To what extent has the measure contributed to the sustainable management and development of Natura 2000 sites or other places of High Nature Value and to environmental awareness of rural population? Improved environmental services and amenities and their perception” To what extent have QoL measures and Leader generated new services or contributed to improve the existing ecosystem services and environmental amenities of the territory? Increased share of people actively using new opportunities created to experience, watch, make use etc. of environmental amenities

12. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 Suggested methodological approach 12 The methodological approach in three steps: Step 1: Complete the framework of reference based on the CMEF monitoring information and on further information collected Step 2: Organise round table meetings with selected stakeholders in order to collect complementary qualitative information Step 3: Confront these judgements with the baseline situation

13. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 Conclusive remarks 13 Measuring impacts of measures connected to Quality of Life and endogenous rural development via the Leader Axis represents challenges; It is vital to suggest a common approach and evaluation framework (framework of reference) to bridge the existing methodological gap; The common framework of reference is proposed for this purpose based on four impact dimensions:  socio-cultural and services  economic  governance  environmental The framework is implemented in 3 steps approach:  the monitoring information provided by the CMEF indicators as the basic source for the framework of reference;  series of group meetings (round tables) with a selected panel of stakeholders;  judgment and validation of each impact criterion by the participants.

14. 122 nd EAAE Seminar Ancona 17 – 18 February 2011 Thank you for your attention! The Helpdesk of the European Evaluation Network for Rural Development 260, Chaussée Saint – Pierre 1040 Brussels – Belgium Tel: +32 2 736 18 90 Email: info@ruralevaluation.euinfo@ruralevaluation.eu http://enrd.ec.europa.eu/evaluation/http://enrd.ec.europa.eu/evaluation/ - click on „our publications“