Empowering Szydłowiecki Powiat: Unleashing Potential Through Entrepreneurship and Innovation

Exciting times ahead for Szydłowiecki Powiat! Join us as we embark on a journey of entrepreneurship, innovation, and community empowerment. Together, let's unlock the region's hidden potential and pave the way for a brighter future.

Nestled in the south-western corner of the Mazowieckie voivodeship lies the Szydłowiecki powiat. A district brimming with potential yet facing its fair share of socio-economic and demographic challenges. With a strategic position along the vital S7 express road, connecting major cities like Warsaw and Kraków, this region holds promise for development. However, to harness this potential fully, a transition from a traditional farming-based economy to a more diversified and modern economic landscape is imperative.

Challenges and Opportunities:

The main challenge facing the Szydłowiecki powiat is its transition from a predominantly agrarian economy to one that is more production and consumption-oriented. This transition demands not only economic restructuring but also an increase in spatial mobility and job opportunities. Despite its strategic location, economic dynamics have been sluggish, leading to high unemployment rates, particularly among the youth. Moreover, the district grapples with population outflow, aging demographics, and infrastructure deficiencies.

However, within these challenges lie opportunities for growth. The Living Lab initiative aims to tap into these opportunities by focusing on entrepreneurship development, leveraging the region’s natural resources, cultural heritage, and strengthening local networks. With five municipalities, each with its unique strengths and proximity to urban centers, there’s potential for economic revitalization.

Living Lab: A Path to Transformation:

The Living Lab initiative seeks to address these challenges head-on by fostering entrepreneurship, promoting local heritage, and enhancing connectivity. By harnessing natural resources like sandstone, iron ore, and chocolate flint abundant in Orońsko municipality, the region can drive economic and social development. Additionally, raising awareness about local cultural heritage and traditions can attract tourism and stimulate local businesses.

Research Questions and Data Needs:

To guide this transformative journey, several research questions need to be addressed:

  • What are the essential components of local development potential?
  • Which best practices from other regions can be adapted to address local challenges?
  • What new data sources and collection methods are needed to understand the local challenge better?
  • Which data is essential to develop a local index of entrepreneurship development potential?

Empowering through Data and Collaboration:

Access to diverse data sources and collaboration among stakeholders are crucial for informed decision-making. The Living Lab will leverage secondary data, spatial information, primary data from surveys and interviews, and additional tools like Maptionnaire to fill existing data gaps. Collaboration with local communities, businesses, research institutions, and public administrations will ensure that solutions are tailored to real needs and expectations.

Building Capacities for Success:

Success in this endeavor requires building partnerships, digital competencies, and openness to modern marketing trends. By embracing innovation, creative solutions, and fostering partnerships, the Living Lab aims to unlock the full potential of Szydłowiecki powiat.

In conclusion, the Living Lab initiative holds the key to unlock the latent potential of Szydłowiecki powiat. Through entrepreneurship, leveraging natural resources, and preserving cultural heritage, this region can pave the way for sustainable development and prosperity. With collaborative efforts and data-driven insights, the journey towards transformation begins, promising a brighter future for generations to come.

Exploring Climate and Environmental Transition in Italy: Parma, Piacenza & Ferrara

Delve into the heart of Italy's tomato processing hub, where the Emilia-Romagna region hosts three provinces renowned for their pivotal role in the tomato supply chain. Italy ranks as the third-largest producer of tomatoes for processing globally, with a significant portion of this production emanating from Parma, Piacenza, and Ferrara.

Delve into the heart of Italy’s tomato processing hub, where the Emilia-Romagna region hosts three provinces renowned for their pivotal role in the tomato supply chain. Italy ranks as the third-largest producer of tomatoes for processing globally, with a significant portion of this production emanating from Parma, Piacenza, and Ferrara.

Transition Focus: Climate and Environmental Challenges

The pressing issue of water management takes center stage amidst the climate and environmental transition. Intensive agricultural activities and recurring droughts amplify the demand for water, posing a threat to the vital tomato ripening cycle. As global warming reshapes natural water patterns, the region grapples with the adverse impacts, from soil erosion to hydrogeological instability.

Living Lab Challenge

In response to these challenges, the Living Lab initiative tackles the urgency of climate change, particularly focusing on water availability and management for irrigation. With water scarcity becoming increasingly prevalent, innovative solutions are imperative to ensure sustainable agricultural practices.

Rationale

Effective water management demands comprehensive governance structures and integrated monitoring systems. Despite existing weather stations and data sources, a cohesive approach to data analysis and model development is crucial for informed decision-making and resource allocation.

Policy Relevance

The water management challenge resonates beyond the agricultural sector, necessitating holistic solutions to meet the diverse needs of stakeholders. Local institutions and the Interbranch Organization (IBO) spearhead policy initiatives to address water scarcity and ensure rational development.

Research Questions

Key inquiries revolve around the development of an integrated monitoring system for water availability and needs, as well as strategies to enhance local water management effectiveness. Balancing the demands of various stakeholders remains paramount in shaping sustainable policies.

Emerging Data Needs

Robust data collection and analysis are essential for modeling water demand and distribution, especially during dry seasons. Coordinated efforts are required to harness existing data and fill knowledge gaps to mitigate the impacts of climate change effectively.

In the pursuit of sustainable agricultural practices, Italy’s Parma, Piacenza, and Ferrara regions stand at the forefront of climate adaptation and environmental stewardship. Join us as we navigate the challenges and opportunities on the path to a resilient future.

Implementing rural proofing in EU countries and beyond: review of instruments and experiences

Implementing rural proofing in EU countries and beyond: review of instruments and experiences

The collaborative efforts of RUSTIK partners, including Francesco Mantino, Barbara Forcina (CREA Council for Research in Agricultural economics), Heidi Vironen, Liliana Fonseca (EPRC University of Strathclyde), and Petri Kahila (UEF University of Eastern Finland, Karelian Institute), have culminated in a comprehensive review of rural proofing instruments and experiences across both European and non-European countries. The complete report is accessible here.

In their examination, the report highlights concrete case studies which materialised the rural proofing concept in the formulation of policies and programs since the beginning of the millennium. While some national jurisdictions have achieved modest success, the report concludes that neither any country nor the EU as a whole can be deemed fully successful in integrating an effective and enduring rural proofing model into their administrative systems up to the present moment. To bridge this gap, the authors formulate the data and methodology needs to be tested within rural stakeholders in RUSTIK Living Labs.

What is rural proofing? Definition and policy relevance

The authors cite Jane Atterton, from the Scotland’s Rural College, who states that “Rural proofing is a systematic process to review the likely impacts of policies, programmes and initiatives on rural areas because of their particular circumstances or needs (e.g., dispersed populations and poorer infrastructure networks). In short, it requires policymakers to ‘think rural’ when designing policy interventions to prevent negative outcomes for rural areas and communities. If it is determined that a policy may have different – negative – impacts in rural areas compared to urban areas, policies should be adjusted to eliminate them”.

This concept was first introduced by a UK governmental publication in 2001 and was then included at EU level in 2016 in the Cork 2.0  declaration. Since then, regular mentions of the rural proofing mechanism are made in OECD and EU institutions’ strategies, reports and tools (Committee of the Regions in 2022) Rural proofing is also a pilar of the European Commission Long-Term Vision for Rural Areas, the new EU flagship initiative for Europe’s rural areas to which RUSTIK contributes to bring to the local level.

Comparing rural proofing characteristics in different countries

In most countries, rural proofing is applied to policy impact on living conditions and well-being in rural areas: this implies taking into consideration a broad range of policies (from infrastructures, social services to environment and business development). This ensures a good margin of flexibility to screen out those policies not having a significant impact and concentrate the proof only on relevant policies. In some countries, rural proofing is activated when specific rural territories could be impacted by policies. The table on the next pages portrays this well and expands on the specific methodology and guidelines used in the different countries where a rural proofing mechanism has been experimented.

Rural proofing mechanisms and attempts in EU and non-EU countries

Country
Starting year
Thematic focus
Methodologies
Institutional responsibility
Application
Proofing on a broad range of policies
England
2000 National: Policies having impact on Infrastructures, services, working and living conditions, environment, equality Checklist; Decision Tree; Examples of possible assessment; Descriptive assessment of impacts; Annual rural proofing reports National: DEFRA (Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) oversees rural proofing across the government; Rural Affairs Board provides strategic guidance; each government Department has nominated ‘rural proofing lead’ Mandatory (in principle) with patchy application
Northern Ireland
  2015-2017 All national policy proposals having an impact on the economic, social, cultural and environmental well-being of rural communities Rural needs impact assessment: coherence of likely impact with social and economic needs of rural areas; annual monitoring reports National: Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA) Mandatory (in principle) with patchy application
Canada
 1998-2013 National: Federal policies and programmes from the perspectives of remote and rural regions. Some provinces have published their own Rural Lens and guidelines. Checklist; Rural Lens: process in 10 stages, including a template to fill, questions to answer and examples to follow. Guidelines for using it provided by the national level. “Rural Secretariat” within the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food (founded in 1996) Voluntary, no sanctions
New Zealand
 2008 Policies having impact on infrastructure, health, education, business development and equity Impact assessment checklist; process in 7 stages; Rural proofing guide; Ministry for Primary Industries published the guide and checklist. The implementation lies with the authorities responsible for a specific policy. Voluntary, no sanctions
Proofing on specific geographical/ thematic areas
Scotland
 2020 Policies with specific and differentiated impacts on Islands Communities Island Communities Impact assessment Agriculture and Rural Economy Directorate and its Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Islands Mandatory (with justification for not doing it) only for policies having effects on Scottish Islands
Finland
 2007 National: Policies having impact on municipal merging, rural livelihoods, expertise, housing and services, accessibility, attractiveness factors and community cohesion. Emphasis ono sparsely depopulated areas. Checklist, with 6 thematic areas and flexible application Rural Policy Council (MANE) under the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF) Voluntary, no sanctions. Formalisation into legislation is being discussed in the Parliament.
Australia
 2003 Regional services Checklist; Regional Impact Assessment Statement (RIAS) Standardized guidelines as a template Department of Primary Industries and Regions of the Government of South Australia (PIRSA) Mandatory, for any legislation affecting regional services
USA
 2018 National for drug addiction in rural areas Rural Community Action Guide with best practices; Federal Rural Resource Guide with key challenges; Rural Community Toolbox website with all federal fundings and tools to build healthy drug-free rural communities The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) of the White House develops Federal drug policy and coordinate its implementation across the Federal Government. Political rather than a legislative commitment, and it is not mandatory.

Lessons learned for RUSTIK experiments

To conclude, rural proofing is strongly focused on policy assessment, whether spatially focused policies or not. This implies the definition of an appropriate list of questions to be explored and, in parallel, specific data concerning potential policy effects upon the concerned Living Labs of the project. For this, the deliverable lists the questions forming the basis for a place-based analysis depending on the types of policies considered. Moreover, the authors explore the necessary conditions for a successful data collection leading to robust evidence-based territorial policies and applying rural proofing mechanisms. All these elements will be practically explored in coordination with the RUSTIK Living labs from the end of 2024 onwards.