Maaseutukunta ja hallinta: Kunnan strategiatyö ja hanketoiminta maaseutualueiden kehittämisessä

The study examines the role of Finnish municipalities in rural development and the form of rural governance employed by the municipalities. Rural development in municipalities has been influenced by administrative reforms, regional development based on European Union programs, and the expansion of municipal economic policy into a vitality policy covering all municipal activities. Municipal strategies and projects are key tools for promoting local vitality. Both require cooperation and investment to facilitate interaction between stakeholders.

The strategy work and project activities carried out by municipalities in their rural areas are examined in the study as governance in a rural context. Strategy work and project activities are, on the one hand, governance instruments that connect the region to various forces of change and, on the other hand, broader manifestations of rural governance. First, the analysis focuses on how municipalities develop their rural areas through strategy work and project activities. What kinds of exogenous and endogenous forces of change do municipalities utilize in rural development work, and what kinds of cooperation arrangements arise in municipalities on this basis? The conceptual starting point are exo-, endo- and neoendogenous theories of rural development. Second, governance in rural areas is seen to be constructed in the municipal context specifically on the basis of the municipalities’ strategy work and project activities. The governance produced by these two forms of development is further analysed using David J. Douglas’s theory of rural governance.

In terms of philosophy of science, the research is based on weak social constructionism and, as part of that, critical realism. The phenomenon under study is approached through a case study focusing on eleven municipalities. The research data consists of interviews, municipal strategy documents, field notes on the observation of municipal strategy preparation, other public documents from the municipalities, and selected articles on municipal development in local newspapers. The interviews were conducted either as semi-structured thematic interviews or using a qualitative attitude approach based on rhetorical social psychology. The observation data was compiled using political ethnography method. The data has been analysed using thematic analysis, content analysis, the core concepts of critical realism, and thematic analysis based on it.

The study strongly suggests that municipalities consider the prerequisites for local development to be dependent on exogenous forces of change, and that they act accordingly in rural development. In municipal strategy work, the utilization of endogenous rural resources is experimental, and no permanent operating models have been developed in municipalities. However, change in rural development can be triggered by the municipality’s own endogenous processes, such as a change in the municipal executive officer, a change in the municipality’s economic situation, or a shift in municipal policy. In this sense, rural development in municipalities can be seen to have its own characteristics of neo-endogenous development.

The study shows that, under pressure from exogenous forces of change, rural project activities in municipalities are easily marginalized, even if there is interest in exploiting endogenous potential. At the same time, the study makes it understandable why municipalities are keen to rely on the work of LEADER action groups in rural development. Promoting cooperation between LEADER groups and villages is a way of addressing both exogenous and endogenous development challenges in municipalities. Based on the study, enabling LEADER activities is currently one of the most important ways of promoting neo-endogenous rural development in municipalities.

The study examines municipal governance in rural areas using the four dimensions of Douglas’s theory. These are 1) governance change in general, 2) globalization, 3) emphasis on locality and community development, and 4) rural areas and their changing meanings. Based on the study, municipalities are quite cautious as actors of governance in rural areas and do not seek to build governance networks in a rural context in any systematic way. One reason for this is the images associated with rural areas, which are still strongly linked to agriculture in municipalities. The fact that municipalities’ strategic actions often target villages and rural areas that are already developing is likely to lead to internal regional differentiation within municipalities. In villages that fall outside the municipality’s strategic interests, the future seems to depend largely on their own action.

Overall, the study prompts reflection on the role and potential of municipalities as developers of rural areas, also in a broader social context. Are municipalities able to take rural areas into account in their current operating environment? Based on the study, rural development in municipalities is a matter of responsibility not only for municipal communities but also for actors at the national level.