Proposals for National Rural Network support for LEADER, and LEADER co- operation. Presented by: Ed Dyson Date: 24 th September 2014, LEADER Exchange Group
A. Network support for LEADER • Brings together comms and engagement across RDPE, CAP stakeholders including activities of Delivery Bodies and stakeholders. • RDPE External Working RDPE stakeholders Environment Agency Group provides strategic RDPE LEPs and other direction. Network Growth Support Programme • Plan of activities co-ordinated Unit Forestry stakeholders Commission by Network Support Unit. • £2.1m Technical Assistance RPA – budget (2014-2020) for especially Network Support Unit local Rural Developme activities and 4-5FTE costs. nt Teams Responds to recommendations from independent evaluation (including whole RDPE approach and strategic 2 involvement of stakeholders).
Mandatory activity areas for NRNs EAFRD support under Article 51(3) shall be used for the preparation and implementation of an action plan covering at least the following: (i) activities regarding the collection of examples of projects covering all priorities of the rural development programmes; (ii) activities regarding the facilitation of thematic and analytical exchanges between rural development stakeholders, sharing and dissemination of findings; (iii) activities regarding the provision of training and networking for local action groups and in particular technical assistance for inter-territorial and transnational co- operation, facilitation of co-operation among local action groups and the search of partners for the measure referred to in Article 35; (iv) activities regarding the provision of networking for advisors and innovation support services; (v) activities regarding the sharing and dissemination of monitoring and evaluation findings; (vi) a communication plan including publicity and information concerning the rural development programme in agreement with the Managing Authorities and information and communication activities aimed at a broader public; (vii) activities regarding the participation in and contribution to the European network for rural development. 3
Principles and constraints • Limited resources in the NRN as in the Programme – what should the priorities be for LEADER networking? • We should work alongside and strengthen existing networks – how best to do this? Area networks? Thematic e.g. upland and lowland networks? • The NRN is a “network of networks” e.g. RPA’s Rural Development Team will have particular role in supporting LEADER networking and providing training/core capacity building for LAGs. What networking activities do you think should be provided by – Network Support Unit? RDT? LAGs? Others? How can LAGs take the initiative? • The NRN will foster innovation and knowledge transfer across the programme – how best to support innovation in LEADER, and link LEADER to other areas of the RDPE and the Growth Programme? 4
NRN activities – conclusions from EWG • EWG – important “feedback loop”/networking hub – consistent, timely and joined-up messages for regional dissemination; could e.g. ensure integrated approach to innovation across RDP… • Stakeholder orgs/networks – offer a wide range of channels for communication, networking, training; co-host events/workshops; support familiarisation with CAPD IT; innovation pilots; can help change behaviours and perceptions, building on traditional management… • NSU – share best practice, case studies across programme; website/blog; newsletter; facilitate programmes of events; package of comms material that can be used by others; innovation – support EIP. Focus - don’t do too much! • Delivery Bodies – keep NRN informed of opportunities, deadlines; share implementation plans; identify training needs • MA/Defra – ensure stakeholders can engage; collect info on innovation, local and international R&D., link with EIP network. 5
Proposed networking activities Activity Mechanism Information hub/resource GOV.UK website, online project database, case study analysis, Network newsletter… Co-operation Facilitation of informal and formal co-operation via website, ENRD and events. Training for LAGs Initial focus on promoting RDT programme of training/capacity building for LAGs Networking LEADER-specific and whole-programme networking including to promote innovation, and for advisor networks. RDT could support local and/or thematic networking? EU level engagement/learning Active participation of NRN members in ENRD including events, study visits and online tools for co-operation etc. Dialogue with Government Re-establish LEADER Exchange Group once new LAGs announced. Others? 6
Questions for discussion • What should the priorities be for LEADER networking? • How should we work alongside and strengthen existing networks? Can we support area based networks? Is there scope for upland LAG and lowland LAG networks? • What networking activities do you think should be provided by – Network Support Unit? RDT? LAGs? Others? How can LAGs take the initiative? • How best to support innovation in LEADER, and link LEADER to other areas of the RDPE and the Growth Programme? 7
B. Co-operation …can take many forms: • Formal co-operation projects under LEADER • Co-operation projects involving other funds? • Informal co-operation/collaboration/networking • UK and EU-level co-operation/collaboration • Approach in other parts of UK? 8
LEADER co-operation under RDPE • LAGs have no set requirements to undertake co- operation projects, but RDPE aims to encourage both formal and informal co-operation. • To ensure resources are available: up to £2m in RDPE to support formal LEADER co-operation, calls operated by Network Support Unit and RDT. • Network Support Unit can facilitate UK and EU level co-operation. • Other co-operation activity including informal co- operation can be supported by LAG M&A budget. …details of proposals are not fixed 9
Example 1: between LAGs in England Auto Chestnut Coppicing - forestry diversification project to develop and testing innovative machinery that would automate the process of splitting chestnut coppice. Funding: £100k total project size at 50% intervention with 25k - North Nottinghamshire LAG and 25k - West Kent LAG Development of project • Chestnut is farmed in West Kent. There was a decline in the sector due to the age of the workers and the hard manual work involved. • The processor is based in Nottinghamshire and had expertise in automated wood products. • West Kent contacted North Nottinghamshire to see whether a joint project would be possible - sharing costs and limiting risks. (http://www.jonwalkertimber.co.uk/chestnut-products.htm) Outputs: • 30 jobs created/Safeguarded • Benefits to both areas – increased market for chestnut by diversifying into different/new products; increased turnover for processor who is hoping to mass market the new automated machines. 10
Example 2: UK-level co-operation Cheviotfutures – an initiative committed to providing practical real-world solutions to the challenges communities face to the effects of climate change. Funding: - £249,547 (English contribution - £137,547; Scottish contribution £112,000) Partners : Northumberland Uplands LAG and Scottish Borders LAG Development of project : • Partners identified similar geographical features across the border and similar climate change predictions • Land management communities have links across the border • Developed a network of demonstration projects covering a range of climate change issues – informing policy negotiations on agri-environment schemes; Initiating broader activity on flood management Outputs: • Skills transfer by using land manager and local contractors • Links to broader projects across the EU – ‘Wildfire simulation exercise’ • Direct benefits to the local economy and local universities • Lessons learnt benefit both countries and respective policy framework • Broader perspective strengthens and improves local decisions and provides new opportunities 11
Examples of projects Wildfire Natural Flood Management Resource Protection 12
Example 3: trans-national co-operation Nature Tourism Project – to develop and promote a range of nature and culture based tourism products encouraging visitors to stay longer and spend more. Funding: 728573.74 Euros, (approx £573,009) Partnering countries: England; Scotland; Finland; Portugal; Hungary; France; Cape Verde. Development of project • LAG attended RDPE network event in Midlands – met representatives from ENRD and Austria • Attended events in Austria and Brussels to find interested parties • Finland lead partner and project management Outputs: • A network of quality nature experiences and tourism packages linked to other LEADER funded activities, (Local Food, walking/cycling, etc) • Tourism businesses have better understanding of marketing/attracting visitors • A number of new tourism businesses have already set up due to this project and the products developed • International recognition – winner of the Nordic-Baltic LEADER Cooperation Awards 13
Examples of Projects – Waterways and Wildlife 14
Recommend
More recommend
