Integrating the NRE Project Insights

1
Integrating the NRE Project Insights

• Bill Reimer
• reimer_at_vax2.concordia.ca
• 2006/04/29

2
Lessons (1)

• Working Proposition
• Community Capacity is a function of assets (or
  liabilities) and the ability of communities to
  recognize and (re)organize those assets to
  achieve their valued outcomes.

3

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

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

outcomes can become new assets and liabilities
4
(No Transcript)
5
Gaps

• Formal-Informal economy
• Rural women relatively disadvantaged by
  participation in informal economy
• Municipal financing
• Resources greater constraint on discretion than
  autonomy
• Social capital
• Relational frameworks and context related to
  particular outcomes
• Capacity
• Potential, level and group dependent, outcomes
  may be positive or negative

6
Activities

• Social capital papers (2)
• Capacity paper
• Municipal finances paper
• Social economy paper
• Social support paper
• CSD Trajectories
• Cleaning and archiving data, documentation, 2006
  census data, NRE Scrap book

7
Integrating the NRE Project Insights

• The Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation
• nre.concordia.ca
• www.crrf.ca
• 2006/04/29

8
Normative Systems
Market-based Contractual, short-term, supply and
demand E.g. commerce, labour, housing, trade
Bureaucratic
Market
Bureaucratic-based Rationalized roles,
principles E.g. government, law, corporations
Associative-based Shared interests E.g.
recreation, charity, religious groups
Associative
Communal
Communal-based Generalized reciprocity,
identity, birth E.g. families, cultural groups,
gangs
9
Social Capital in Action
10
Lessons (2) Social Capital

• Available social capital is not always used
• Opportunities for community development
• Social capital types most often used in
  combination
• Indirect and concerted programs may be more
  effective
• Context matters
• Local consultation and control are critical

11
Learning (3) SoKp and Soco
12
Learning (4) Social economy

• Social economy mostly small, volunteer-based
  organizations in our sites
• Site contexts are related to the types of social
  economy organizations
• Use of social capital and participation in social
  economy are related (variously)

13
CSD Trajectories - Employment
14
Learning (5) - Municipalities

• Access to resources major challenge
• Increasing taxes major obstacle to fund-raising
  in small municipalities
• Small municipalities face different challenges
  than large

15
Learning Informal Economy

• Functions of Informal Economy
• Safety net
• Buffer for structural changes
• Capacity builder
• Support for social inclusion
• Formal-Informal economy mix
• Self-employment increases womens informal
  economy load, but decreases mens
• Self-employment increases non-metro womens
  informal economy load, but decreases metro womens

16
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 plt.01 Source NRE Site Profiles 2000
Return
Next
17
How Do Systems Inter-relate?
Return
Bureaucratic Associative Communal
Market .18 .28 .27
Bureaucratic .37 .40
Associative .29
Correlations between types of social capital used
(1995 NRE Households) p lt .01
18
Available Social Capital is not always Used
Correlation (r) Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital
Used Social Capital Market Bureaucratic Associative Communal
Market .12 .22 .20 -.18
Bureaucratic .08 .14 .09 .09
Associative .21 .35 .28 .07
Communal .05
Return
NRE HH Survey (N1849) plt.01 plt.05 Social
Capital Used within 30 minutes of site
19
Social relations most often used in combination
Return
NRE Household survey 2001 1995 respondents
20
Multiple Pathways
21
Context Matters
Correlation (r) Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital
Used Social Capital Market Bureaucratic Associative Communal
Market .12 .22 .20 -.18
Bureaucratic .08 .14 .09 .09
Associative .21 .35 .28 .07
Communal .05
Local ns Global .16
Stable .25 Fluctuating .11
Not Adjacent .18 Adjacent ns
Low Capacity .19 High Capacity -.13
NRE HH Survey (N1849) plt.01 plt.05 Social
Capital Used within 30 minutes of site
22
Context Matters (Metro Adjacency)
Correlation (r) Correlation (r) Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital
Used Social Capital Used Social Capital Market Bureaucratic Associative Communal
Market NAdj .36 .40 .43 -.31
Market Adj. -.09 -.08 -.07 -.16
Bureaucratic NAdj .19 .18 .18 ns
Bureaucratic Adj. ns ns ns .13
Associative NAdj .42 .53 .52 -.22
Associative Adj. ns .09 ns .17
Communal NAdj .11 .11 .14 ns
Communal Adj. -.18 -.08 -.22 ns
Return
NRE HH Survey (N1849) plt.01 plt.05 Social
Capital Used within 30 minutes of site
23
Context Matters
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 (N1698) Adj. R2 .04
24
Available Social Capital is not always Used
Correlation (r) Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital
Used Social Capital Market Bureaucratic Associative Communal
Market .12
Bureaucratic .14
Associative .28
Communal .05
NRE HH Survey (N1849) plt.01 plt.05 Social
Capital Used within 30 minutes of site
25
Characteristics of Social Economy Organizations
26
Correlations between Social Economy
Characteristics (Site list)
Democratic Service Ethic Legal Structure Non-government
gt 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)
28
Types of organizations used by HH respondents
(N1363)
Responses gt 20 from sales Democratic Service Ethic Legal Structure Non-govt
Yes 3.4 53.7 85.3 51.1 68.5
Probabily 2.9 21.7 .4 19.6 2.1
Probably Not 3.8 7.2 .1 7.9 2.7
No 74.0 .5 .2 1.8 6.6
Dont Know 15.9 16.9 13.9 19.6 20.1
29
Correlations between social economy
characteristics (HH survey)
Democratic Service Ethic Legal Structure Non-govt
gt20 from sales .09 (1108) -.95 (1141) .28 (1071) .35 (1059)
Democratic .94 (1130) .96 (1084) -.59 (1045)
Service Ethic .88 (1092) -.17 (1077)
Legal Structure -.66 (1013)
30
Type of social economy organizations(HH survey)
31
Correlations HH charactersitics by Use of social
economy services
HH Characteristic Narrow Broad
Young adults in HH -.13
Seniors in HH .10
At least 1 person empl -.06
Volunteer in site .19 .72
Volunteer outside site .06 .33
HH income .09
Educ of respondent .07 .12
Political action .12 .26
Use community services -.09
SoCo (perceived) .08 .22
SoCo (behaviour) .14 .41
32
No. of Sites with Social Economy Organizations
(20 sites)
Narrow Broad Both
At least 1 SE Organization 13 12 15
No SE Organization 7 8 5
33
Correlations NRE SF dimensions and social
economy organizations
Narrow Broad
Global exposure -.06 .05
Stable economy -.13
Metro adjacency .11
Institutional capacity .07
Leading status .06
34
Correlations Use of social capital and
involvement in social economy
Narrow Broad
Market .06 .13
Bureaucratic .05 .23
Associative .19 .57
Communal .05 .13
non-HH persons shared food .09
35

• Policy
• Goals and priorities defining public interest
• Measures to achieve those goals

• Research
• What are the trends, drivers, and processes
  conditioning those goals?
• What are the most effective measures to achieve
  them?
• What are the likely outcomes?

36
Rural Vision

• Rural is under stress
• Urban dominance will grow
• Rural-Urban interdependence remains
• Food, water, environment
• Goals Vital, safe, sustainable rural Canada
• Strategic options
• Build economic capacity
• Build Rural-Urban connectedness
• Build local governance capacity

37
Challenges and Opportunities

• Remote declining population
• Mid-sized population change and limited
  resources
• Metro-adjacent absorption and conflicting
  lifestyles
• All
• Global competition
• Knowledge importance
• New rules

• Connectedness
• Networks among rural places (social capital)
• Networks within places (social cohesion)

38

• Hypotheses
• All 4 forms are necessary
• Market and Bureaucratic critical in New Economy
• Rural communities strongest in Associative and
  Communal

• Implications
• Build Market and Bureaucratic
• Co-ops well placed

39
Many structures of networks
Bonding
Linking
40
Infinite content to networks
41
Available Social Capital is not always Used
Correlation (r) Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital
Used Social Capital Market Bureaucratic Associative Communal
Market .12 .22 .20 -.18
Bureaucratic .08 .14 .09 .09
Associative .21 .35 .28 .07
Communal .05
NRE HH Survey (N1849) plt.01 plt.05 Social
Capital Used within 30 minutes of site
42
Context Matters (Metro Adjacency)
Correlation (r) Correlation (r) Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital Available Social Capital
Used Social Capital Used Social Capital Market Bureaucratic Associative Communal
Market NAdj .36 .40 .43 -.31
Market Adj. -.09 -.08 -.07 -.16
Bureaucratic NAdj .19 .18 .18 ns
Bureaucratic Adj. ns ns ns .13
Associative NAdj .42 .53 .52 -.22
Associative Adj. ns .09 ns .17
Communal NAdj .11 .11 .14 ns
Communal Adj. -.18 -.08 -.22 ns
NRE HH Survey (N1849) plt.01 plt.05 Social
Capital Used within 30 minutes of site
43
Normative Systems
High Capacity Agility with all systems
44
Lessons (2)

• Available social capital is not always used
• The normative structure of social capital
  conditions its relationships with the various
  outcomes
• High social capital use increases incomes
• High social cohesion (behaviour measured)
  increases incomes

45
Connections and Networks

• Structure With whom are you connected?
• Content What brings you together?
• Norms What guides your relationship?

How can policy enhance or inhibit the formation
of connections?
46
Bureaucratic Norms and Connections

• Bureaucratic
• Fairness and Accountability
• Associative
• Commitment to shared interest
• Partnerships can be problematic

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

47
Implications for Policy and Programs

• Build and facilitate networks
• Respect and work with partners norms
• Work with and support existing networks
• Increase local and regional control and resources