Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.12653/jecd.2014.21.3.0271

EU Rural Development Evaluation System and Implication for Rural Development in Korea  

Lee, Minsoo (Jeonbuk Development Institute)
Publication Information
Journal of Agricultural Extension & Community Development / v.21, no.3, 2014 , pp. 271-305 More about this Journal
Abstract
There is an inescapable requirement in public policy to provide evidence. For the evaluation of the EU Rural Development Policy, the European Commission has designed a Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework(CMEF). The principal objectives of evaluations are to improve decision-making, resource allocation and accountability. In Korea, howerver, the opinion-based policy by expert is still rural development evaluation system. It does not provide the objective quantitative indicators for impact of rural development project. According to this, the budget-making body (parliament, government, etc.) have questioned the effectiveness of rural development projects, rural development projects often reduced or changed. To improve the accountability of rural development policy, it is necessary to build a reliable monitoring and evaluation system based on the evidence. First, rural development evaluation indicators should be considered the multipul goal of rural development, namely economic development, social development. Second, the purpose of the evaluation is necessary to be designed for the learning rather than reward. Third, the participation by local residents should be strengthened in evaluation process. Finally, it is necessary to establish rural development monitoring and evaluation system, such as CMEF of the EU (CMEF).
Keywords
Rural Development; Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework(CMEF);
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 김정섭. (2009). 농촌개발사업 실행 과정에 관한 사례연구. 한국지역개발학회지, 21(3), 103-121.   과학기술학회마을
2 박덕병, & 이민수. (2009). EU의 농촌개발정책의 동향과 시사점. 한국지역개발학회지, 21(3), 123-162.   과학기술학회마을
3 Farrell, G. & Thirion, S. (2005). Social capital and rural development: From win-lose to win-win with the LEADER initiative, in Schmied D. (ed.) Winning and Losing: The Changing Geography of Europe's Rural Areas. Aldershot, Ashgate, pp. 281-298.
4 GAO (US Government Accountability Office). (2005). Performance Measurement and Evaluation. GAO-05-739SP, May, Washington, DC.
5 Bergschmidt, A. (2009). Powerless evaluation. Eurochoices, 8(3), 41-46.
6 Blandford, D., Boisvert, R., & Hill, B. (2010). Improving the Evaluation of Rural Development Policy. EuroChoice, 9(1), 4-9.
7 Bradley, D. Dwyer, J., & Hill, B. (2010). The Evaluation of Rural Development Policy in the EU. EuroChoices, 9(1), 15-20.   DOI
8 Cavazzani, A, & Moseley, M. (2001). The Practice of Rural Development Partnerships in Europe: 24 Case Studies in Six European Countries. PRIDE Research Report
9 CEC(Commission of the European Communities). (2000). The Communication on Evaluation (SEC(2000) 1051), EC, Brussels.
10 CEC(Commission of the European Communities). (2004). Evaluating EU Activities - A Practical Guide for the Commission Services. July 2004, DG Budget Evaluation Unit, EC, Brussels.
11 CEC(Commission of the European Communities). (2006). Rural Development 2007-2013: Handbook on Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework. Draft guidance document. Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development, EC, Brussels.
12 CEC(Commission of the European Communities). (2007). Responding to Strategic Needs:Reinforcing the use of evaluation. Communication to the Commission from Ms Grybauskaite in agreement with the President. SEC(2007)213, EC, Brussels.
13 Dargan, L. and Shucksmith, M. (2008). LEADER and innovation. Sociologia Ruralis, 48(3), 274-291.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Davies, H.T.O., Nutley, S.M. & Smith, P.C. (eds) (2000). What works? Evidence-based policy and practice in public services. Bristol: Policy Press
15 Dietz, M-A. (2002). Evaluating new regional policies: Reviewing the theory and practice. Evaluation, 8(3), 285-305.   DOI
16 Dwyer, J., & Findeis, J. (2008). Human and social capital in rural development - EU and US perspectives. EuroChoices, 7(1), 38-45.
17 Dwyer, J., & Hill, B. (2009). Rural development policies in the EU and their evaluation. Paper presented at the Aiding the process of agricultural policy reform: evaluation of public policies for rural development, Paris.
18 Hill, B. (2008). The power of evaluation. EuroChoices, 7(3), 4-5.
19 Dwyer, J., Bradley, D., & Hill, B. (2008). Towards an enhanced evaluation of European rural development policy - Reflections on United Kingdom experience. Economie Rurale, 307, 53-79.
20 Edwards, B., Goodwin, M., Pemberton, S., & Woods, M. (2000). Partnership working in rural regeneration: Governance and empowerment?. Bristol: The Policy Press.
21 Midmore, P., Langstaff, L., Lowman, S., and Vaughan, A. (2008). 'Qualitative Evaluation of European Rural Development Policy: Evidence from comparative case studies. Paper presented at the 12th Congress of the European Association of Agricultural Economists, August 26-29, Ghent, Belgium.
22 OECD. (2009). Coverning regional development Policy; The use of performance indicators. Paris.