1 Integrating the NRE Project Insights Bill Reimer [email protected]/04/29 Click on for the data behind the claims and View Notes Page for Speakers

1

Integrating the NRE Project Insights


Bill ReimerBill Reimer

[email protected]@vax2.concordia.ca2006/04/292006/04/29

Click on for Click on for the data behind the the data behind the

claims and View claims and View Notes Page for Notes Page for Speakers NotesSpeakers Notes

2

Lessons (1)Lessons (1)

Working PropositionWorking PropositionCommunity Capacity is a function of assets (or Community Capacity is a function of assets (or

liabilities) and the ability of communities to liabilities) and the ability of communities to recognize and (re)organize those assets to recognize and (re)organize those assets to achieve their valued outcomes.achieve their valued outcomes.

3

ASSETS and LIABILITIES

•Economic Capital•Human Skills and Abilities•Social Capital•Natural Resources

OUTCOMES•Economic wealth•Social and political inclusion•Social Cohesion •Environmental security•Social and self-worth•Health•Personal Security

outcomes can become outcomes can become new assets and new assets and

liabilitiesliabilities

PROCESSES

Market

Bureaucratic

Associative

Communal

4

5

GapsGaps

• Formal-Informal economyFormal-Informal economy Rural women relatively disadvantaged by participation in Rural women relatively disadvantaged by participation in

informal economyinformal economy• Municipal financingMunicipal financing

Resources greater constraint on discretion than Resources greater constraint on discretion than autonomyautonomy

• Social capitalSocial capital Relational frameworks and context related to particular Relational frameworks and context related to particular

outcomesoutcomes• CapacityCapacity

Potential, level and group dependent, outcomes may be Potential, level and group dependent, outcomes may be positive or negativepositive or negative

6

ActivitiesActivities

• Social capital papers (2)Social capital papers (2)

• Capacity paperCapacity paper

• Municipal finances paperMunicipal finances paper

• Social economy paperSocial economy paper

• Social support paperSocial support paper

• CSD TrajectoriesCSD Trajectories

• Cleaning and archiving: data, documentation, 2006 Cleaning and archiving: data, documentation, 2006 census data, NRE ‘Scrap book’census data, NRE ‘Scrap book’

7



The Canadian Rural Revitalization The Canadian Rural Revitalization FoundationFoundation

nre.concordia.canre.concordia.ca

www.crrf.cawww.crrf.ca2006/04/292006/04/29

http://nre.concordia.ca/

http://www.crrf.ca/

8

Market

Associative Commun

al

R ob sonE con om ic

Jon esS oc ia l

P o lsonP o lit ica l

S m ithP res id en t

Bureaucratic

Normative SystemsNormative Systems

Market-based:Contractual, short-term, supply and demand

E.g. commerce, labour, housing, trade

Bureaucratic-based:Rationalized roles, principles

E.g. government, law, corporations

Associative-based:Shared interests

E.g. recreation, charity, religious groups

Communal-based:Generalized reciprocity, identity, birthE.g. families, cultural groups, gangs

9

Social Capital in ActionSocial Capital in Action

10

Lessons (2) Social CapitalLessons (2) Social Capital

•Available social capital is not always usedAvailable social capital is not always used Opportunities for community developmentOpportunities for community development

•Social capital types most often used in Social capital types most often used in combinationcombination Indirect and concerted programs may be more Indirect and concerted programs may be more

effectiveeffective

•Context mattersContext matters Local consultation and control are criticalLocal consultation and control are critical

11

Learning (3) – SoKp and SocoLearning (3) – SoKp and Soco

12

Learning (4) Social economyLearning (4) Social economy

•Social economy mostly small, volunteer-Social economy mostly small, volunteer-based organizations in our sitesbased organizations in our sites

•Site contexts are related to the types of Site contexts are related to the types of social economy organizationssocial economy organizations

•Use of social capital and participation in Use of social capital and participation in social economy are related (variously)social economy are related (variously)

13

CSD Trajectories - EmploymentCSD Trajectories - Employment

1986 1991 1996 2001

High 12%

Med 4%

Low 10%3%

2%2%

2%

2%

14

Learning (5) - MunicipalitiesLearning (5) - Municipalities

•Access to resources major challengeAccess to resources major challenge

• Increasing taxes major obstacle to fund-Increasing taxes major obstacle to fund-raising in small municipalitiesraising in small municipalities

•Small municipalities face different challenges Small municipalities face different challenges than largethan large

15

Learning – Informal EconomyLearning – Informal Economy

• Functions of Informal EconomyFunctions of Informal Economy Safety netSafety net Buffer for structural changesBuffer for structural changes Capacity builderCapacity builder Support for social inclusionSupport for social inclusion

• Formal-Informal economy mixFormal-Informal economy mix Self-employment increases women’s informal economy Self-employment increases women’s informal economy

load, but decreases men’sload, but decreases men’s Self-employment increases non-metro women’s informal Self-employment increases non-metro women’s informal

economy load, but decreases metro women’seconomy load, but decreases metro women’s

16

Correlation between Types of AVAILABLE Social Capital: Site-level

Correlation between Types of AVAILABLE Social Capital: Site-level

Bureaucratic Associative Communal

Market .76** .84** .29

Bureaucratic .87** .12

Associative .13

(r) 19 sites – raw sums with skewed variables logged ** p<.01Source: NRE Site Profiles 2000 ReturnNext

17

How Do Systems Inter-relate?How Do Systems Inter-relate?

BureaucraticBureaucratic AssociativeAssociative CommunalCommunal

MarketMarket .18.18 .28.28 .27.27

BureaucraticBureaucratic .37.37 .40.40

AssociativeAssociative .29.29

Correlations between types of social capital used (1995 NRE Households) p < .01Correlations between types of social capital used (1995 NRE Households) p < .01

Return

18

Available Social Capital is not always UsedAvailable Social Capital is not always Used

Correlation Correlation (r)(r) Available Social CapitalAvailable Social Capital

Used Social Used Social CapitalCapital MarketMarket BureaucraticBureaucratic AssociativeAssociative CommunalCommunal

MarketMarket .12** .22**.22** .20**.20** -.18**-.18**

BureaucraticBureaucratic .08**.08** .14** .09**.09** .09**.09**

AssociativeAssociative .21**.21** .35**.35** .28**.28** .07**.07**

CommunalCommunal .05*.05*

NRE HH Survey (N=1849) ** p<.01; * p<.05; Social Capital Used within 30 minutes of siteNRE HH Survey (N=1849) ** p<.01; * p<.05; Social Capital Used within 30 minutes of site

Return

19

Social relations most often used in combination

Social relations most often used in combination

0

5

10

15

20

25

Bur.-Comm Communal Bureau. M-B-C B-A-C

% u

sed

by H

H

NRE Household survey 2001; 1995 respondents

Return

20

Multiple PathwaysMultiple Pathways

R ob sonE con om ic

Jon esS oc ia l

P o lsonP o lit ica l


Bureaucratic Bureaucratic AvailableAvailable

Associative UsedAssociative Used+.35+.35

Market UsedMarket Used+.22+.22

Associative UsedAssociative Used

Market UsedMarket Used

+.28+.28

+.20+.20

Associative Associative AvailableAvailable

21

Context MattersContext Matters



MarketMarket .12** .22**.22** .20**.20** -.18**-.18**

BureaucraticBureaucratic .08**.08** .14** .09**.09** .09**.09**

AssociativeAssociative .21**.21** .35**.35** .28**.28** .07**.07**



Not Adjacent: .18Not Adjacent: .18

Adjacent: nsAdjacent: nsLow Capacity: .19Low Capacity: .19

High Capacity: -.13High Capacity: -.13

Stable: .25Stable: .25

Fluctuating: .11Fluctuating: .11

Local: nsLocal: ns

Global: .16Global: .16

22

Context Matters (Metro Adjacency)Context Matters (Metro Adjacency)Correlation (r)Correlation (r) Available Social CapitalAvailable Social Capital


MarketMarketNAdjNAdj .36** .40**.40** .43**.43** -.31**-.31**Adj.Adj. -.09**-.09** -.08* -.07*-.07* -.16**-.16**

BureaucraticBureaucraticNAdjNAdj .19**.19** .18** .18**.18** nsnsAdj.Adj. nsns ns nsns .13**.13**

AssociativeAssociativeNAdjNAdj .42**.42** .53**.53** .52**.52** -.22**-.22**Adj.Adj. nsns .09**.09** nsns .17**.17**

CommunalCommunalNAdjNAdj .11**.11** .11**.11** .14**.14** nsnsAdj.Adj. -.18**-.18** -.08**-.08** -.22**-.22** nsns


Return

23

Context MattersContext Matters

Index of Associative Social Capital

highlow

Est

imat

ed M

argi

nal M

eans

60000

50000

40000

Exposure

Local

Global

HH Income by Associative Social Capital and Global Exposure The use of social capital

increases HH incomes

…but not if exposure to the global economy is low

Public expenditure on associative social capital will have higher impact in

globally exposed sites

NRE HH Survey 2001 (N=1698) Adj. R2 = .04

24




MarketMarket .12**

BureaucraticBureaucratic .14**

AssociativeAssociative .28**.28**



25

Characteristics of Social Economy Organizations

Characteristics of Social Economy Organizations

0 20 40 60 80

>20% from sales

Democratic

Service Ethic

Legal Structure

Non-Gov't

% of organizations

Yes Probably Probably Not No Don't Know

26

Correlations between Social Economy Characteristics (Site list)

Correlations between Social Economy Characteristics (Site list)

Democratic Service EthicLegal

StructureNon-

government

> 20% from sales

-.68** 0.07 .62** .76**

Democratic -0.08 .37** -.76**

Service Ethic 0.03 0.04

Legal Structure

0.1

27

Type of social economy organizations(full NRE sample = 295 organizations)Type of social economy organizations(full NRE sample = 295 organizations)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Narrow (42) Broad (30) Other (223)

Type of definition

%

28

Types of organizations used by HH respondents (N=1363)

Types of organizations used by HH respondents (N=1363)

ResponsesResponses

> 20% > 20% from from salessales

DemocraticDemocratic Service Service EthicEthic

Legal Legal StructureStructure

Non-Non-gov’tgov’t

YesYes 3.43.4 53.753.7 85.385.3 51.151.1 68.568.5

ProbabilyProbabily 2.92.9 21.721.7 .4.4 19.619.6 2.12.1

Probably Probably NotNot 3.83.8 7.27.2 .1.1 7.97.9 2.72.7

NoNo 74.074.0 .5.5 .2.2 1.81.8 6.66.6

Don’t Don’t KnowKnow 15.915.9 16.916.9 13.913.9 19.619.6 20.120.1

29

Correlations between social economy characteristics (HH survey)

Correlations between social economy characteristics (HH survey)

DemocraticDemocratic Service Service EthicEthic

Legal Legal StructureStructure Non-gov’tNon-gov’t

>20% from >20% from salessales

.09.09

(1108)(1108)-.95** -.95** (1141)(1141)

.28** .28** (1071)(1071)

.35** .35** (1059)(1059)

DemocraticDemocratic .94** .94** (1130)(1130)

.96** .96** (1084)(1084)

-.59** -.59** (1045)(1045)

Service Service EthicEthic

.88** .88** (1092)(1092) -.17 (1077)-.17 (1077)

Legal Legal StructureStructure

-.66** -.66** (1013)(1013)

30

Type of social economy organizations(HH survey)

Type of social economy organizations(HH survey)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Narrow(1131)

Broad (1043) Other (1363)

Type of definition

%

31

Correlations: HH charactersitics by Use of social economy services

Correlations: HH charactersitics by Use of social economy services

HH CharacteristicHH Characteristic NarrowNarrow BroadBroad

Young adults in HHYoung adults in HH -.13**-.13**

Seniors in HHSeniors in HH .10**.10**

At least 1 person emplAt least 1 person empl -.06**-.06**

Volunteer in siteVolunteer in site .19**.19** .72**.72**

Volunteer outside siteVolunteer outside site .06**.06** .33**.33**

HH incomeHH income .09**.09**

Educ of respondentEduc of respondent .07**.07** .12**.12**

Political actionPolitical action .12**.12** .26**.26**

Use community servicesUse community services -.09**-.09**

SoCo (perceived)SoCo (perceived) .08**.08** .22**.22**

SoCo (behaviour)SoCo (behaviour) .14**.14** .41**.41**

32

No. of Sites with Social Economy Organizations (20 sites)

No. of Sites with Social Economy Organizations (20 sites)

NarrowNarrow BroadBroad BothBoth

At least 1 SE OrganizationAt least 1 SE Organization 1313 1212 1515

No SE OrganizationNo SE Organization 77 88 55

33

Correlations: NRE SF dimensions and social economy organizations

Correlations: NRE SF dimensions and social economy organizations

NarrowNarrow BroadBroad

Global exposureGlobal exposure -.06*-.06* .05*.05*

Stable economyStable economy -.13**-.13**

Metro adjacencyMetro adjacency .11**.11**

Institutional capacityInstitutional capacity .07**.07**

Leading statusLeading status .06*.06*

34

Correlations: Use of social capital and involvement in social economyCorrelations: Use of social capital

and involvement in social economy

NarrowNarrow BroadBroad

MarketMarket .06*.06* .13**.13**

Bureaucratic Bureaucratic .05*.05* .23**.23**

AssociativeAssociative .19**.19** .57**.57**

CommunalCommunal .05*.05* .13**.13**

# non-HH persons shared food# non-HH persons shared food .09**.09**

35

PolicyPolicy•Goals and priorities defining public interestGoals and priorities defining public interest

•Measures to achieve those goalsMeasures to achieve those goals

ResearchResearch•What are the trends, drivers, and processes What are the trends, drivers, and processes

conditioning those goals?conditioning those goals?

•What are the most effective measures to What are the most effective measures to achieve them?achieve them?

•What are the likely outcomes?What are the likely outcomes?

36

Rural VisionRural Vision•Rural is under stressRural is under stress

•Urban dominance will growUrban dominance will grow

•Rural-Urban interdependence remainsRural-Urban interdependence remains Food, water, environmentFood, water, environment

•Goals: Vital, safe, sustainable rural CanadaGoals: Vital, safe, sustainable rural Canada

•Strategic optionsStrategic options Build economic capacityBuild economic capacity Build Rural-Urban connectednessBuild Rural-Urban connectedness Build local governance capacityBuild local governance capacity

37

Challenges and OpportunitiesChallenges and Opportunities

•Remote: declining populationRemote: declining population•Mid-sized: population change and limited Mid-sized: population change and limited

resourcesresources•Metro-adjacent: absorption and conflicting Metro-adjacent: absorption and conflicting

lifestyleslifestyles•AllAll

Global competitionGlobal competition Knowledge importanceKnowledge importance New rulesNew rules

Connectedness• Networks among rural

places (social capital)• Networks within places

(social cohesion)

38

HypothesesHypotheses1.1.All 4 forms are necessaryAll 4 forms are necessary

2.2.Market and Bureaucratic critical Market and Bureaucratic critical in New Economyin New Economy

3.3.Rural communities strongest in Rural communities strongest in Associative and CommunalAssociative and Communal

Implications•Build Market and Bureaucratic

•Co-ops well placed

39

Many structures of networksMany structures of networks

BondingBonding

LinkingLinkingBridgingBridging

40

Infinite content to networksInfinite content to networks

41


Correlation (r)

Available Social Capital

Used Social Capital

Market BureaucraticAssociativ

eCommunal

Market .12** .22** .20** -.18**

Bureaucratic .08** .14** .09** .09**

Associative .21** .35** .28** .07**

Communal .05*


43

Market

Associative Commun

al

R ob s onE con om ic

Jon esS oc ia l

P o ls onP o lit ica l


Bureaucratic

High Capacity = Agility with all systems

Normative SystemsNormative Systems

44

Lessons (2)Lessons (2)

•Available social capital is not always usedAvailable social capital is not always used

•The normative structure of social capital The normative structure of social capital conditions its relationships with the various conditions its relationships with the various outcomesoutcomes

•High social capital use increases incomesHigh social capital use increases incomes

•High social cohesion (behaviour measured) High social cohesion (behaviour measured) increases incomesincreases incomes

45

Connections and NetworksConnections and Networks

•Structure: With whom are you connected?Structure: With whom are you connected?

•Content: What brings you together?Content: What brings you together?

•Norms: What guides your relationship?Norms: What guides your relationship?

How can policy enhance or inhibit How can policy enhance or inhibit the formation of connections?the formation of connections?

46

Bureaucratic Norms and ConnectionsBureaucratic Norms and Connections•BureaucraticBureaucratic

Fairness and AccountabilityFairness and Accountability

•AssociativeAssociative Commitment to shared interestCommitment to shared interest

•Partnerships can be problematicPartnerships can be problematic

Bureaucratic AccommodationBureaucratic Accommodation• Multiple venues for communicationMultiple venues for communication• Associative-appropriate competition proceduresAssociative-appropriate competition procedures• Support for proposals and accountabilitySupport for proposals and accountability• Long term funding for capacity-buildingLong term funding for capacity-building

47

Implications for Policy and ProgramsImplications for Policy and Programs

•Build and facilitate networksBuild and facilitate networks

•Respect and work with partners’ normsRespect and work with partners’ norms

•Work with and support existing networksWork with and support existing networks

• Increase local and regional control and Increase local and regional control and resourcesresources

Documents

1 Integrating the NRE Project Insights Bill Reimer [email protected]/04/29 Click on for the data behind the claims and View Notes Page for Speakers