Multifunctional landscapes through planning: Discussion and concluding remarks

the countryside. Second, it has been discussed whether enough funds can be generated from such projects to cover the expenses of improving the spatial quality of the landscapes. The latter issue is partially related to the location of the development and the extent of the landscape-change project. However, experience from the Netherlands shows that, in many cases, the projects cannot gain sufficient money for effective improvement in the quality of the landscape (Rij 2009), implying that additional funds must be provided. Concerning the first issue, the red-green planning concept may be seen as going against former ideals of protecting open space against development; critics claim that investment cannot counterbalance the loss of green space due to development and that the approach may open the door for more development in the countryside (Rij 2009).

4. Multifunctional landscapes through planning: Discussion and concluding

important ecological functions. Additionally, understanding the countryside zone as non-urban space reserved for agriculture and forestry with a few landscape-related interests gives agriculture fundamental rights before other functions, leaving planners with very few instruments to regulate agricultural buildings and land use. Altogether, this implies that even though the zoning provisions have been modified over time to address the multifunctionality of the countryside zone, and comprehensive planning considers ‘balancing the interests’ from the outset, the zoning provisions and comprehensive planning system neither fundamentally copes with the multiple and changing functions of the countryside, nor with differences in spatiality.

The need for differentiated planning has been analysed and discussed in several studies. Primdahl and Agger (2006) and Kristensen and Primdahl (2009) suggest differentiation of the countryside zone into three sub-zones—nature and landscape, peri-urban, and agricultural zones—each having its own set of provisions. Differentiating the present countryside zone further might create the possibility of securing a more targeted planning approach to designated areas.

However, it still relies on a regulative approach, lacking the opportunity for flexible and positive guidance of multifunctional development, and maintains the rural-urban dualism.

In our analysis of the development trends in the Danish countryside, we have shown that a spatially differentiated countryside exists and is characterised by a mix of different and overlapping landscape functions with no strict borders between the partialities. An example of overlapping or coexisting functions demanded by society is that settlement may go hand-in-hand with development of recreation areas or certain types of agricultural practices needed to maintain and sustain specific types of habitats or landscape patterns. To promote and guide such development, planning must relate to the specific landscape in question, be accommodated through an assessment of the local resources and multifunctional demands, and include an explicit guide for future development through persuasive strategic framing (Healey 2009). Such an approach could be based on learning from the cities’ local/area planning tradition and draw on experiences from ‘red-green’ planning in the Netherlands. In peri-urban areas, planning could focus on safeguarding room for active and alternative agriculture settlements close to urban areas and reinforcement of the rural-urban interaction in relation, for example, to ecological infrastructure and recreation (Zasada 2011). In remote rural areas, where other coexisting functions are demanded, such a planning approach may enable development through which both agricultural and non-agricultural settlements are included in a parallel and equal process. Planning could, in these cases, provide the framework for a new interaction between protecting nature and settlement supported by extensive

farming approaches, allowing the restoration and development of the natural environment and removal of superfluous agricultural buildings. In this sense, it is the societal demand for new landscape functions that is pivotal to planning, rather than restrictive development in the countryside zone.

Some serious drawbacks of the Dutch red-green process may limit its application. However, the ideas may be used to initiate a discussion about how to revitalise countryside planning and hence regain legitimacy. We believe that a more context-specific and proactive planning approach is needed in certain parts of the countryside zone to solve contemporary rural landscape problems and, more fundamentally, cope with the demand for multifunctional landscapes.

The introduction of such a new planning approach should not be seen as being a complete contradiction of the division into three zones and the rural zoning provisions, or as an abandonment of the control of urban development in general, but should instead be regarded as a supplement. It would give the authorities a new planning approach that could be used to initiate context-specific and proactive planning in context-specific designated areas (e.g. landscapes with high natural value, coastal, and peri-urban areas) and to promote specific functions in different landscapes. In the remaining countryside zone, regulative control through zoning provisions could still be in effect, but modified to be

flexible enough to accommodate the differences in demanded functions in the countryside.

The rural development program has been highlighted in the present study as one initiative that inspires the development of multifunctional landscapes. This initiative should be integrated into the proposed planning approach so that development of specific functions designated in the countryside zone can be supported by the project based on rural development initiated through LAGs and local inhabitants. This may demand a closer collaboration and attuning of development strategies among the planning authorities—the municipalities—

and the LAGs.

The present study has illustrated that multifunctional landscapes will, to some extent, develop from societal demands and certain targeted policies (such as the rural development policy). However, to pursue the policy goals of multifunctional landscapes, planning needs to be proactive and promoted with public intervention. Though the analysis is grounded in a Danish context, the study contributes to the on-going research and practical grounded debate on how to pursue and support development towards sustainable, multifunctional landscapes, and thereby contributes to the discussion initiated by Selman (2009), Zasada (2011), Brandt (2003), and others. At national Danish level, the knowledge and analysis in the present study may be utilised by policy makers as

a novel, analytical view of the present planning system’s ability to cope with the spatially differentiated and increased demands for new functions in the landscape. This, in turn, may be perceived as a contribution to the future of the Danish planning system.

References

Andersen, L.B. 2001, Den regionale administration af landzone- og naturbeskyttelsesreguleringen. Working Paper, Nr. 2001:12, CESAM, Centre for Social Science on the Environment, Aarhus.

Anker, H.T. 1998, Landzone-og naturbeskyttelsessager i Hvorslev og Bjerringbro kommuner, Viborg Amt, 1992-1996. Working Paper, Nr. 1998:03, CESAM, Centre for Social Science on the Environment, Aarhus.

Atwell, R., Schulte, L. & Westphal, L. 2010, "How to build multifunctional agricultural landscapes in the US Corn Belt: Add perennials and partnerships", Land Use Policy, vol.

27, no. 4, pp. 1082-1090.

Bille, T., Christoffersen, H. & Wulff, E. 2005, Udviklingen i landzone efter ændringerne i planlovens landzonebestemmelser, Akf forlaget, København.

Bills, N. & Gross, D. 2005, "Sustaining multifunctional agricultural landscapes: comparing stakeholder perspectives in New York (US) and England (UK)", Land Use Policy, vol.

22, no. 4, pp. 313-321.

Boeck, A.B. 2002, Lov om planlægning, 2. reviderede udgave edn, Jurist- og Økonomforbundet, Kbh.

Boligministeriet 1968, Forslag til Lov om by- og landzoner. Folketingsåret 1968-69, tillæg C(57).

Brandt, J. 2003, "Multifunctional landscapes: perspectives for the future", Journal of Environmental Sciences-China, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 187-192.

Busck, A.G., Hidding, M., Kristensen, S.P., Persson, C. & Præstholm, S. 2008, "Managing rurban landscapes in the Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden: Comparing planning systems and instruments in three different contexts", Geografisk tidskrift, [Online], vol.

108, no. 2, pp. 1.

Busck, A., Hidding, M., Persson, C. & Praestholm, S. 2009, "Planning approaches for rurban areas: Case studies from Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands", Geografisk tidskrift, vol. 109, no. 1, pp. 15-32.

Clemmensen, T.J. 2011, "Ny grænser - nye perspektiver" in Grænseløse byer. Nye perspektiver for by-og landskabsarktitektur, ed. T.J. Clemmensen, Arkitektens forlag, Århus, pp. 10-22.

COM 2006, The LEADER approach – A basic guide. European Communities.

0-De Groot, R. 2006, "Function-analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable, multi-functional landscapes", Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 75, no. 3-4, pp. 175.

Gallent, N., Andersson, J. & Biancon, M. 2006, Planning on the edge: the context for planning at the rural-urban fringe, Routledge, London.

Hasler, B., Romstad, E. & Schou, J.S. 2003, "The complexity of modelling farmers' provision of landscape goods in a multifunctional setting" in Multifunctional landscapes - monitoring, diversity and management. Advance in Ecological Science, eds. J. Brandt &

H. Vejre, 15th edn, WIT Press, Southampton, pp. 163-182.

Healey, P. 1998, "Collaborative planning in a stakeholder Society", The Town Planning Review, vol. 69, pp. 1-21.

Healey, P. 2009, "In Search of the “Strategic” in Spatial Strategy Making 1", Planning theory practice, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 439.

Holmes, J. 2006, "Impulses towards a multifunctional transition in rural Australia: Gaps in the research agenda", Journal of Rural Studies, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 142-160.

Ilbery, B. & Bowler, I. 1998, "Agricultural Productivism to Post-productivism" in The Geography of Rural Change, ed. B. Ilbery, Longman, London, pp. 57-84.

Janssen-Jansen, L., B. 2008, "Space for Space, a transferable development rights initiative for changing the Dutch landscape", Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 192-200.

Jongman, R.H.G. 2002, "Landscape Planning for Biological Diversification in Europe", Landscape Research, vol. 27, pp. 187.

Kleijn, D., Berendse, F., Smit, R. & Gilissen, N. 2001, "Agri-environment schemes do not effectively protect biodiversity in Dutch agricultural landscapes", Nature, vol. 413, no.

6857, pp. 723-725.

Knickel, K., Renting, H. & Ploeg, J.D., 2004, "Multifunctionality in European agriculture" in Sustaining Agriculture and the Rural Environment, ed. F. Brouwer, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 81-103.

knooperfdeveldboer 2012, . Available: http://knooperfdeveldboer.nl/nl/home/ [2012, March/7].

Kristensen, L.S. & Primdahl, J. 2009, "Planlovens zonebestemmelser", Momentum, vol. 4, pp.

24-27.

Kristensen, L.S. & Primdahl, J. 2008, "Regulering af spredt bebyggelse i Danmark." in Spredt boligbygging i Skandinavia, eds. K. Harvold, L.S. Kristensen, J. Primdahl & O. Reiter, NIBR Norsk institut for by- og region forskning, Oslo, pp. 37-56.

Madsen, M., Kristensen, S., Fertner, C., Busck, A. & Jorgensen, G. 2010, "Urbanisation of rural areas: A case study from Jutland, Denmark", Geografisk tidskrift, vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 47.

Mander, Ü., Wiggering, H. & Helming, K. 2007, Multifunctional land use: meeting future demands for landscape goods and services, Springer, Berlin.

Marsden, T., Murdoch, J., Lowe, P., Munton, R. & Flynn, A. 1993, Constructing the countryside, UCL Press, London.

Mauchline, A.L., Mortimer, S.R., Park, J.R., Finn, J.A., Haysom, K., Westbury, D.B., Purvis, G., Louwagie, G., Northey, G., Primdahl, J., Vejre, H., Kristensen, L.S., Teilmann, K.V., Vesterager, J.P., Knickel, K., Kasperczyk, N., Balázs, K., Podmaniczky, L., Vlahos, G., Christopoulos, S., Kröger, L., Aakkula, J. & Yli-Viikari, A. 2011, "Environmental evaluation of agri-environment schemes using participatory approaches: Experiences of testing the Agri-Environmental Footprint Index", Land Use Policy, vol. In Press, Corrected Proof.

Miljøministeriet 2010, Landsplanredegørelse 2010, Miljøministeriet.

Miljøministeriet 2009, Bekendtgørelse af lov om planlægning, LBK nr 937 af 24/09/2009 . Miljøministeriet 2002, Vejledning om landzoneadministration, Planlovens §§ 34-38,

Miljøministeriet.

Murdoch, J., Lowe, P., Marsden, T. & Ward, N. 2003, The differentiated countryside, Routledge.

Murdoch, J. 2006, "Networking rurality: emergent complexity in the countryside" in Handbook of rural studies, eds. P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P.H. Mooney, Sage, London, pp.

171-184.

OECD 2001, Multifunctionality. Towards an analytical framework, OECD - Agriculture and Food, Paris.

Økonomi og erhvervsministeriet 2010, Danmark i balance i en global verden, Økonomi og erhvervsministeriet, København.

Parris, K. 2004, "Measuring Changes in Agricultural Landscapes as a Tool for Policy Makers" in Multifunctional Landscapes. Volume 1: Theory, Values and History, eds. J.

Brandt & H. Vejre, WIT Press, Southampton, pp. 194-218.

Potter, C. & Burney, J. 2002, "Agricultural multifunctionality in the WTO - legitimate non-trade concern or disguised protectionism?", Journal of Rural Studies, vol. 18, no. 1, pp.

35.

Praestholm, S. & Kristensen, S.P. 2007, "Farmers as initiators and farms as attractors for non-agricultural economic activities in peri-urban areas in Denmark", Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography, vol. 107, no. 2, pp. 13-27.

Primdahl, J. & Agger, P. 2006, "Forskellige slags landzoner", Byplan, vol. 5, pp. 196-199.

Primdahl, J. 1996, "Denmark" in The European Environment and CAP Reform. Policies and Prospects for Conservation, ed. M. Whitby, CAB International, Wallingford, pp. 45-69.

Primdahl, J., Busck, A.G. & Lindemann, C. 2006, Bynære landbrugsområder i Hovedstadsregionen 2004, Udvikling i landbrug, landskab og bebyggelse 1984-2004, Danish Centre for Forest, Landscape and Planning, Hørsholm.

Primdahl, J. & Kristensen, L.S. 2003, "Danske erfaringer med det åbne landsplanlægning", Kungl. Skogs- och Lantbruksakademiens tidskrift, vol. 142, pp. 11-24.

Ray, 2000, "The EU LEADER programme: Rural development laboratory", Sociologia ruralis, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 163.

Rij, E.v. 2009, "The viability of cross-subsidy strategies. A Netherlands case study" in Regional Planning for Open Space, eds. A.v.d. Valk & T.v. Dijk, Routledge, London, pp.

83-105.

Selman, P. 2009, "Planning for landscape multifunctionality", Sustainability, vol. 5, no. 2, pp.

45.

Skov- og Naturstyrelsen 1999, Naturforvaltning gennem 10 år/ 1989-1998 , Skov- og Naturstyrelsen, Miljø- og Energiministeriet, København.

Sørensen, E., M. 2002, "Danmarkshistoriens største beslutning for fremtidig bolig- og erhvervslokalisering", Byplan, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 15-19.

Stockdale, A. & Barker, A. 2009, "Sustainability and the multifunctional landscape: An assessment of approaches to planning and management in the Cairngorms National Park", Land Use Policy, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 479-492.

Terkenli, T. 2001, "Towards a theory of the landscape: the Aegean landscape as a cultural image", Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 57, no. 3-4, pp. 197-208.

Thuesen, A. 2010, "Is LEADER Elitist or Inclusive? Composition of Danish LAG Boards in the 2007-2013 Rural Development and Fisheries Programmes", Sociologia ruralis, vol.

50, no. 1, pp. 31.

Tress, B., Tress, G., Decamps, H. & d'Hauteserre, A. 2001, "Bridging human and natural sciences in landscape research", Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 57, no. 3-4, pp.

137-141.

van der Ploeg, J., Renting, H., Brunori, G., Knickel, K. & Mannion, J. 2000, "Rural development: From practices and policies towards theory", Sociologia ruralis, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 391.

Vatn, A. 2002, "Multifunctional agriculture: some consequences for international trade regimes", European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 309-327.

Vejre, H., Abildtrup, J., Andersen, E., Andersen, P.S., Brandt, J., Busck, A., Dalgaard, T., Hasler, B., Huusom, H., Kristensen, L.S., Kristensen, S.P. & Præstholm, S. 2007,

"Multifunctional agriculture and multifunctional landscapes - land uses as an interface"

in Multifunctional land use. Meeting Future Demands for Landscape Goods and Services, eds. U. Mander & H. Wiggering, Springer, Berlin, pp. 93-104.

Vesterager, J., Teilmann, K. & Vejre, H. 2011, Assessing long-term sustainable environmental impacts of agri-environment schemes on land use, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.

Wiggering, H. & Müller, K. 2002, "The Concept of Multifunctionality in Sustainable Land Development" in Sustainable Development of Multifunctional Landscapes, eds. K.

Helming & H. Wiggering, Springer, Berlin, pp. 3-18.

Wiggering, H., Dalchow, C., Glemnitz, M., Helming, K. & Muller, K. 2006, "Indicators for multifunctional land use - Linking socio-economic requirements with landscape potentials", Ecological Indicators, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 238-249.

Willemen, L., Hein, L., van Mensvoort, M.E.F. & Verburg, P.H. 2010, "Space for people, plants, and livestock? Quantifying interactions among multiple landscape functions in a Dutch rural region", Ecological Indicators, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 62-73.

Wilson, G.A. 2007, Multifunctional agriculture: a transition theory perspective, CABI, Cambridge, MA.

Zasada, I. 2011, "Multifunctional peri-urban agriculture-A review of societal demands and the provision of goods and services by farming", Land Use Policy, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 639-648.

(11

66&# "8 !(8 9(

01(

(1(

!(8 9( 0 1(

$#8 !"#! "$%!"$&

!"$'( )

* ) !"$' ( * * ) *

* *)

* !"$(*+*

!"# )

, * *

** * (- . * *%! / 0110+# 2333+ 0114+56#$ 7 0118+ 5 0118+ . 2334&) 5 9

!"# * *

(1)

*( * )5 .!"# .

! "$%!"$&)

, . !"# .

* *+ * . ) *

!"# * )" * * %(: 0118&) *

* * ) !"$

; <

!"$ ) , !"#

* %

" 0121&) = * !"#>

9 !"$ +!"$

$ 9 2? %&

!"$@

. % " 0121&) , !"$ A $ *9 !"$(

!"# % "0121&) !"$

(1*

. !"# )

!"# * )"

* * *) !"#

* * * ) , !"#@

* *

* %AB 0111&) "

9 ** * * %# 2334&) , , * * * %C ! 0121+!C 0122&)%011D&

* !"# )5

!"# * *

*%# 0111+.0111&+ * !"# 9 *

* *% 70110&)E* . * F * !"#!"$ + )

.!"#

*) * * . !"$ + . *) ..

(1+

* - *

* .% 7 0113+, 011?+

" 0118+: 011G&) . !"$'(

( C(!"$) HI / . !"$

* * J

= * . !"#!"$+ * .)*

. *) H)

= )

$ 0&&#01

!"# . #

*A 011G'012K"9K% ;#A011G'012K<&

(* ;* H

* < %5 011? ) 3&) !"# * I ** '*

* . * )

(1,

, . !"$ (*

* ( ) * )C K1 !"$

011G'012K 2D + % 0121&) ( ( . . !"$ ) !"$ + * - E9 %233K&

; * * )<

, !"$ !"#

*) * !"$+

- *- *)

* ; *<

*)7.7( 7( %2333)0&*

* ; . <+ *

;" . **

* * *)<5 * * * . ) * . (

* %7. 7( 7( 2333+ 011G&) #A 011G' 012K .* * * B.%# 0111&

)

** * * ) , %011? ) 048&

; < ; ( * * . )<

, * - *) , + * * * %, 011?&) ,

%" $0112&)= * . * %" $ 0112+ $

(1.

0118&) / . . %" 0118&I *%

7 0113+" 0118&),* " %0118&

) . * %" 0118&) = $ %0118&

. + * )E*

* F * (*

) C. + . . ; < ** * (*

%" 0118)?3&)

5 * * ) E*

.) H %" 0118+ $ 0118&) * * . %, 011?&) .

* * * . %A*

(1/

0112&)" 7 %0113& . ) * . A* %0112&

* . *

*.) . . H .

%A* 0112&

%7 011G&

*.% 7 0113&***

* . - - * I * . * . * .)

* !"$

), *. + .- H - * . ) , * . + ().

. **

9), *.H . + . ), *.

(10

* ; * * * * < % 7 0113)28?&) * H )5 *..- H - )

* 2)

2I % 7 0113&

, =

( = ( L

$ ,L

A #

# #

( A*

# !

#. ! E

# ! E

%7 011G&) # * . %7 011G&) -

((1

- (* . * ) , 9 9 * * )5

* )

/ !"$

;* * .< * ,

%011?+0112&) .* %, 011?&

I * ; *<

*)*

.* *

*), .* . ) * **

!"$ * + ( * . * ) * 9 *), * *!"$ *+*

9 (*( ) * * +

(((

** !"$ !"$ )

= * !"$ (+

* * )

*- . - 9 0)(*9 * *) * )

9 0)

0I, 9 9 * A . M

5 M

, M

9 !"$ * ( + * * * 0) 9 H * H * )"

!"$'( 9* H *

(()

* !"# H * H )

( I

• " . * * !"$

* *)

• " * *. !"$'(

!"$ )A * + )

• " * * 9 ( .9 !"$ **

)

!"$2D!"$)5 * ** * *) 20 * )

* * !"$) H * - !"$' ( - .

** H * ) = . . ** H * )

!"#

*H ?2 !"$

((*

)² ?2 % ?K & * . * !"$

) . A"/2G *

* !"$ )A

* + . . !"$ *) %E*

* . !"$ . H )&

!"$'( 9 *) , K)

KI *

A 5

N *

5!"$

(

N * ?2

9 H * !"$'(

*), * * - ( . (- **

!"$ )

((+

, H*

!"$'( ) * !"$ )

!"$'( * C(

(+ ( ⁰) * * !"$'( ; * ( * * *

< %!"$ ( 0114 ) G &) !"$' ( .( H + * * ( ) "

(* . ( (*

@ .( )

" .*

((,

* 7 %0113&

* ) !"$

. *)

, !"$*

!"$

!"$ ) * **

* (

#A )

, + * * ) * (

* * )" *9I;/ *

* , H) , ( ( )<

) H * *( I

((-;,( . + O P) . - ,

@)<% *&

* ** * I

;,. .!"$+

* ) , . B )<% *&

( @ + )

'!"$

.* - -

!"$ * ), *)

!"$ . %2331& ; <@

!"$* ) . * !"$

* )

((.

!"$ !"$ *) * * (+

( H ),(( * )

( ( . *+ !"$

.) . !"$ * H )" 7 @%0113&

* ) / #A !"$

;,O !"$ P * ) . ( , )O !"$ P I H . )<%!"$ &

((/

!"$ !"$

( ) !"$' I

O/P ;. O!"$ P @ . )<%!"$ &

!"$ *I ( !"$ )

<, . OP * . - ) * )<%!"$ &

@ *() , * ( !"$) , .%0112& !"$), * !"$

!"$ ( * )

((0

, * * )*

%2331& ;*

< * * ) .+!"$

*) *- . - I

;O P 9 I !"$

!"$ )<% !"$ &

!"# . *+*

. ) !"$

* * )

!"$** ( ***

* *) (* ( )"

()1

( ( (*

( + )

!"$ 9)

( C(

(** !"$() D

* **( **

* % 0121&+ D*

* *)

DIC (

(

%Q&

C( 22 004111 ( 28 0G4111 0GR D00111 R0G(

583( D C( ( * 22 28 ( * QD00111) ( 9 Q00111), ( . (* *)

* ( ( ) !"$

()(

+ * * **) / ( .(

* 9 * ), * * + ( H ( )

! " #

* 9 !"$* H ?2 !"$ ) ,

!"$ H ^K * I)H !"$

*)H

"& !"$ . !"$

& * .

* !"$ &

!"$

) H ) S T)K?8R%H" &ST)0GGR%H" & ST)?11RR

% H &) H *

())

9 9 ) * * * 9 * !"$)

* !"$' * 5C" $5"! ACCU 5C,",5C * ) * ?+ 8)

?IV

^D $H

W^? !"$

55#W⁸ !"$

ACCU^G !"$

5C"⁴ =H !"$

$5"!³ A !"$' 5C,",5C²¹ =

()*

8I#

5C"$5"!ACCU

5C,",5C) *

ACCU* )

OT2P 'G)G48RRR

%2)8K0&

OT0P '?)GD0RRR

%2)K24&

OTKP 'D)4D1RRR

%2)0?1&

OTDP 'K)K?3RRR

%2)2G1&

OT?P '2)328RRR

%2)131&

! O5C"T2)11P '0)D4K

%2)D23&

O5C"T0)11P '2)88G

%2)1G?&

O5C"TK)11P '2)2G?

%2)11K&

O$5"!T2P '0)2D8R

%2)230&

O$5"!T0P )K1D

%)80D&

OACCUT2P '0)430RRR

%2)188&

OACCUT0P '0)1?3RRR

%)GGK&

O5C,",5CT2P )D??

%)GKD&

O5C,",5CT0P )811

%)438&

!.I!)$⁰T0?)2G))T3T)11K)

= 8 ACCU) 9 *?2 !"$ ) 9 !"$ -

()+

**!"$- * 55#W W

* ) G) GI# !"$) W 55#W)

OT2P '?)02K

%2)082&

OT0P 'K)00G

%)G11&

OTKP '0)D0K

%)?4D&

OTDP '2)23G

%)D48&

OT?P ')11G

%)D?2&

! OWT2P ')810

%2)481&

OWT0P ')04?

%)??K&

O55#WT2P 'D)02GRRR

%2)?3D&

O55#WT0P ')33?R

%)?G0&

* )!.I!)$⁰T21)48))TD T1)104)

= G !"$

* )

* !"$

** !"$

*) %

(),

, !"$'( ' * F *

* 4)

4I, 9 *

A .

5 A

=H! ,

A (*

A E.'

= 4 .

* ) "

* )

" * ( H+ . .*

* * !"$(*),

*!"$ * H )"!"$

( *

* .)

()-" * (* * * ) * * *)59 **

* * * (*)9 * !"$ * )" * !"$+

!"$'(

. *) * ( )"* . H + H )**

* !"$ (* * H . ) ) " . *

().

!"$' !"$+

* *)

* !"$(*), . B * !"$+

!"$ * * @ (* * * B) , !"$ ) * ) "

* !"$

( )5

* *

* ) , !"#

+ . )

!"#

) #

*!"$ ) * I

* H

!"$)!"$ **

*9 * ),*

()/

* )!"#@ * * * . 9 *)

()0

;

2H + H %)); <; <;<&)

0) ( ).)

KH %2'K&

* ) I2>2>2 * 9 )

DHI"&/I2&0&H K&

!"$J+&, *!"$I2&

0& K& J+ &

!"$ I2& *+

0& +K& H J

?, !"$ I 2& !"$+0&

!"$+K&

!"$J

8, !"$

I2& !"$+0&

!"$+K&

!"$J

(*1

G,9 !"$

* I2&)) . +0&)) * +K&*)) * 9 )

4E !"$I2& 0&.K&D&

3E !"$J, I2&9 +0&

+K& J

21/ !"$I 2& - +0&

( +K& * )

(*(

" #) 0118) , * .I ) A

" #*88)?8 8?)

" #) $ ) %0112& 6 H . 6

&' ( "22%K&03? K08)

#))0112) E*C. IC)!7).

#))) *!( +CU.I"$)K2 ?8) 5)011?)# %&C2834L011?01011?

* " = # * %"=#& 5 X ) )

")0121) #I, ! *)

E9 ) 233K) A * "* ) X 5 # DD8)?33)

, ) ) %0112& 6 , I " 9 / A 6)

, )011?) * !9 )" KGK)042 K01)

7 #) 7) ) 011G) $ # 9I . , ), A X 212)3 KK)

7./)X))7() 7( X)=))2333) 9.I )!I A )

!"$( )0114)*. 011G'012K)

!")C $) #)0122) ** ! "

$!"#A )C212)DK)

! / )0110)9 J = " A)X # 242)2)

7 ) 0110) # * **I E )X # 24K)K1G K0D)

)A)2331)C. I *AI#)$

/) ) A)), -.+

CU.IA )03 ?K)

(*)

)A) 7 #)0113)". *.I I X) # ")A) !. ") . )' ) !+) 28K 2G4)

) A) 2331) C. I * A I #) /)

$ )A) ), -.+

)03 ?K)

) #) 0114) # * I 7)X # 0DD)D00 DK2)

$ ) 0118) * I " . .)A" #*88)KK DK)

(:) 0118) 5* * . Y 0113 7: *I.*C ! Z)

C $) #) ! ") 0121) !"# , *I )X # 082)8K G0)

56)#E)$ ) 7 X)0118)*# * #AI)56!/!

! 01 +"C I7.(.V $)

5)0118)C# A IA $* = I5A ) ABX)0111)!"# * )

# D10)011)

A* 7) E)0112). .J" .*

B .)A" #*82D)D2D D0K)

# )0111)!"# I# * ) # D1 0)28K)

# )2334) 6

!"#, )X # 2D2)G3)

# ) 2333) * 9* ) X # 2?K)0?G 08G)

)011D) C, I

* !"#,, )X # 012)D3 ?3)

) . ) 2334) , # *I , "

9) A 82)GK 44)

.)0111)* IA*

!"#7) # D10)014 024)

(**

:) X)011G)$* . I I): X) -. " .I A * )2 02)

") 0121) , !"# ,*J !"$

011G 012K# * =A ) # ?12)K2) X) 011G) , C. $* I X) -. 0!+ .IA * ) 2 00)

(*+

66&# /8 5 ( #

(*,

5(#!(

. 9 %!"$& () 9 I * 9)9 !"$ ( . * ( !"$ 9 )

= *

*( * ) ( ( * * )

:8 # *! "$)

!"# @

* ;,* H

* *<%5011?)3&)9 * * *(*

+ . %# 2334+ # 2333+ 011D+ / 0121+

.0111+!" C .011?+C

!0121&)

) * 9

*)5 9 ) , !"# C ) %0121&

! ) %0122&)

!"# %!"$& 9 *) 9 9 * *!"$(), !"$

( I *)=

* *.

I ) H 9) , 99 . ) "

9 ) )

" (

* * * * * * %/.2334+ = 011D&) +

(*.

)

* +**

.)"

! %0112 ) 0?&I ; . <)"!

* .) * ;

* OP O)))P * <%!0112)0?&) . )

* * * 9 %/.2334+7 . 7233G+/0118&) * ) E* * * H .%[0121+AB233G&)" \ @ * @ ) , **

* * * H %[ 0121+ ! 0121&) %!0121&)

* * ) / . * % = 011D+ 0111+ /. C 0111&) %7 . 7 233G& %, 7 011?&

*% 0112&)

(*/

* . *

* % 0110&) * %V $ ( 011?&

) * V*% 0110+ 0113&) %C ! 0121+ 0113&) . !%0121)8D&;

. <)

/ ((

*!%0121)2K&

;OP <)!%0121& . * )!

9I%2&*%0& %K& ) . . .9) 2*

** )

\ @ *9 * ) %*

& B 9 H 9)

(*0

2I 9

A "

!* 9

= , 9

" 9

2+3

!%0121& * * * * * * **

*), * * * ) ,*(*

* %&*

(%&* % &*)

* 9 * * ( ) * *) ( ( ( *)" * *) !"$ * * * * * ( *)

2+45!

* ) . .

(+1

. ) . * %!0112&)C * 9 ) , \ / . @

$ *%23GK& . H + ) E*

* ) , . .

* * .

* @ )

$ *@ .A %0111&

+ . . * . ) ! * * . I;,

* . < %! 0112 ) 8G&) / . * /.

C %0111& * )

"%2348)04G&

* ;

<) %!0112&) ), ; . <%" 70110) 00&)

(+(

= $ *@%23GK&\ .@ A @

%0111&

. H *) , ( 9 *) , ( 9 * ), .*

* 9)= @ B* ( ( ** )

* 9) 2+2

! %0121& . H . H * *) ) @ ; <%2348)0D2& )

* . H )H ! %0112&

9 % &+

. . )

/ * * * *%!0121&) * A @ I

; * ) I *

(+)

*) .*

* **)*

.I* )<%A 233K)KG3&

/H A **

) *

%AB233G+]0111& * * %,7 011?&)

" * * 9 ( * )E* . *(

*) = A %233?& %2344&7 . 7%233G&

* )/

* * * %!0121+

=0111&) B * % =0111+A ! C 233K&) 9 ( * )(*

9 9 !"#!"$

H * *)"

* * * .) B.

C $ %2334 ) 0?4& ;.

<) !"#

(+*

* (@) 4 (9

9 (*) , * * ) , !"#

* *)=

* !"#)

9*(* ), 9) * 9) 9 * * 1 2 * * )

6+3 !%

* ( . * * ** () * ()

* ***(

* ( @ *) , ) ** * 9 ²)

-'78 9%: ; :3;

(!5; 2

(++

. * *)

* ( I%2& %0& *

* * %K&

( H %D&

()" %2&

%0& * *.*

) * 9 ⁰)

# !78.9%:.; :4;

= * + ) * * B ) I%2&,.

+ %0& , + %K& , . )

* 9^K)

( 78. 9%:. ; :2;

); )159

@55,B+C)12

* ; 9 (, 5 9 <5 ! 9' 9= 55,B*C(,2

(+,

* . * ( ) * * I 9 % !"$

&) ** ) .* 9 .)

789%:; :6;

* ( ) 0 9 ( @ ) * ( **(), 2 K\ @ 0 \ ( H @ D \ (@) , * ( \,. @ 0 K\ , @),

* 2 0 K D 9 )

0I= 9 (@

# *

2 2 K

0 K 0

K 2 0

D D K 9

)))

9 * * ( *)

* 9)

%7-'<# !<( < :=;

9 !"$(

* 9)=9 ( * * ) H 9* ()

* 8((901.

,9 9 !"#!"$

.!"$ ( ) !"$ . ( )!"$ ( . * ( ) / !"$

( . ( * .()/

!"$

9 )

, ?8 84 * !"$ ( %40^& 9)

* X 0122 9 2? ) * H)H . 9 *) , * H * ( * . * . )

* % 9& * *.)"(

(+.

*"0114 0121 ( B+* )

* (* (

* . . ) ( 9

!"# ( * * ) 9 . ()

= * ()(

( * ) \ @ . H * )H 9 ) , * !"$

( * ) 2111Q 201111Q * ) K2?11Q) ( * + 2G (

* !"$0?!"$ 2D !"$ ) . ) 9

* ( 9 9)

$* *( * 9 * * .) , *(

* 9* ) . * 9 9

(+/

HI %2& B 9 ( J %0& !"$ ( 9 J= %K& * * ( 9 J

H*(

H *) 7 #

>+3 ?

/ !"$

( L I%2&* %0& %K& B %D&

%?& * ) ?8 ( !"$ ( * 9 K)

KI( 9

C (

"* 9 A* K 1)2DD

" KD 1)18K A K 1)?84 4 1)124 *

4 1)134

?8 1)13K

" (

= K \" @ ( * \A* @ \A @ ) \A @ 9 ) * H )

(+0

>+4(

) ** 9 * 9) ( ( + ( ) ( *9 D)

DI,

AWW

)

) ,9

C K8 )1?01 )133D0 )128?G 01 )28G1 )0K1DG )1?2?D

((

!*@

* H

= ) )

%0 &

)

3?^

! ,9 H

2K)4?3)111'0)810 ?D )120 ' )22D38

)1DD24 ' )01K?K

' )108K4 H

'0)20D 00)33 4

)1D? ' )22D38

)1?D2K ' )0083D

' )1103G

(,1

!*@H H * 9 \C @%T 1)1?01T1)33D0& \ @%T1)28G1T1)1?2?D&% H T1)1D &)

9 ( ) * * 9H ) E* 9 ( . 9)*(

. * ) *

* !"$ * % 0122& @ !"$*)

>+2 !

* B?8(

!"$ () ?* **

!"$ ( * ?8 ()

?I ( !"$ ?8 (

A( !"$

"(%Q& 8)2DD)111 2)G81)111 A( * %Q& 221)111 K2)D11

9 !"$

)

(,(

HI !"$ ( 9 J

T1)112 !"$

* !"$

) = . * *( * ), . ( (!"$ ) ( )

>+6,

(@* . ( * ( . !"$

( * . ) A %2& (+%0& +%K&

* () 9 9 * ( ), * * 9 ) % @ .& S T)?8G)

* *

* !"# ),

!"# ( * 9 * )# %0111)28?HV & ;!"#

\ @<) # %0118&

* + *%.0111&)

(,)

* .(

!"#(

* . ( * * ) * 9 H )

= * )

+ 1

9 /.

C ;5 < %/. C 0111 ) 0K3&) E* .

* * 9 ) ! * 9 )H .* ) * \ @ . 9 )

9 ), (

\@ * B 9), ( * * 9 * )

=9 . * *)

99 * !"$ ) (*

(,*

.) ),(*

\@ \ @%/. C 0111)0K0&

)

9 ()E* " 7%0110&

), ) E*

@+3)

, ; .\ @O)))P < %=. 0112 ) G&+

!"# ) 9 !"#

* * 9 . @ %=" =0121&)E**

.*)

* . .) 9 *

* )9

* !"#)

9 *

* *)

(,+

* !"#

!"$)E* . ) = 9 *)

. !"$(

() ( 9),((*

(@ ) * H *) " ( )

" 9 *- * ( - 9 *

%(&* %&*)9 9 !"$ * !"# * * %)) *&) 9 !"#

*9) 9 9 !"$ * ) E*

9H ) ,

* 9 !"$ ()9 I *) 9!"$ ( * ( B( **

(,,

)

* * ) H ( (*;,*H * *<%5011?)3&)

= .*

* * )) ( !"# ) * H *

*) = B ( ) .

* ( ( )

(,-$(

"A) 7)0110) IA )"

#*0G2)2G D1)

A)2348) IX)# A' ( ) 0 +CU.I$)0D2 0?4)

X)2344) )" X 3D2)3? 201)

5)011?)# %&C2834L011?01011?

* " =# *

%"=#&5 X ) )

A)0111)A , IA) ,) ) *!/, ! +/ I/

) = )011D) 59I"/A 011D 2D) )0110)5 )X 220D4K)=D?3

=DG3)

=. =)0112) * *)/N 002)G 01)

$ *)23GK)/ .)" X G48 )2K81 2K41)

,)7) )011?)

*)# K34)212? 21D1)

7 .) 7A)233G) * J"

* )N X 220D)20?2 2044)

!X)" ")C ") .)011?)C.I *) # D?D)083)

!X))0121) I )I C/A)

!C)0112) I ) I *A)

!")C $) #)0122) **

! "$!"#A )C212)DK)

(,.

=" =)0121)*(* . . *:*Y.! !.

".$)

C X) $ )2334) B * )" #*0K0)0D0) C $)#) !")0121) !"#, *I )X # 082)8K G0)

A #))233K)I A!)

" AD2K)K?)

A #))233?)"I" 6 )X 82)8? 8?)

A #))0111) I ** " ) CU.I_)

A #))! #) C #)U)233K) . .I*

, )AIA*A)

ABX)233G)A" " .@ I#

A )X , *3G)3K3)

# )2334) 6!"#, )X # 2D2)G3)

# )0118)C *IA).) A)E) A'+!I )0G4 032)

# )2333)* 9*)X

# 2?K)0?G 08G)

=)0113) C.I C= . H)X K4K)D03)

) ) =X)0111) I"#* HI) X)= )) *!/* ! +CU.I59

*A)2 K4)

)011D) *9J"

* ) # DD2)213)

(,/

) / )0121) , .*J"

# *A ) A " DD?)?G? ?3G)

.)0111)* I A*!"#7) # D10)014 024) ])0111) I*)A )A A ,#=, `I=

/J`, )

7)0122) # *I9 !

! "$ .)#C! )

)0112) *) X DD)D0G)

V $ ) ()011?)#$ I H ) C.0G2)2 03)

/")0118) * " I"

)X # 002)4K)

/.)2334) *I .) 0G0)2?2 014)

/.) C )0111) I, *

# A)/ .# 5*2?0)00? 0D3) [)0121) CBI""# J

" * ?K?)8?G)

(,0

((9 8 < ( 01.

(

I am calling you from CBS regarding an investigation of the collaboration between Danish municipalities and local action groups. I hope you have 10-15 minutes to answer my questions.

Interviewee:_____________________________________

Job title:___________________________________

Municipality:______________________________________

Office:______________________________

LAG:_________________________________

Municipal type:

1. Remote rural municipality 2. Rural municipality 3. Mellem

1. Who is mainly in contact with the LAG to which your municipality belongs?

1. Interviewee

2. Colleague in same office 3. Other

2. With whom are you usually in contact with at the LAG?

1. LAG-coordinator 2. Board of directors 3. Other

3. How often are you in contact with the LAG?

1. Daily 2. Weekly 3. Monthly 4. More rare

(-1

4. Where is your contact person in the LAG, physically situated?

1. Municipality 2. Other place

5. In instances where the LAG covers more than one municipality, does your contact peson (probably the coordinator) sits:

1. Alternating between both municipalities 2. Elsewhere

6. How many LAG-projects is your municipality involved in, where the municipality is project leader?

7. Besides those projects, where the municipality is project leader; how many projects do you think, that your municipality have co-financed?

8. How would you characterize the main objective with the collaboration with the LAG?

Is it mainly about:

1. Exchange of information

2. Coordinating resources to obtain a common goal

3. To obtain synergy effects through close collaboration on a common goal 9. If you can talk about a dependency relationship between municipality and LAG to

obtain a common goal about development of rural areas, would you characterize this relationship as:

1. Independent, i.e. you work on your own without much collaboration 2. Dependent, i.e. you collaborate to some extent to obtain a common goal 3. Interdependent, i.e. you are very collaborative and interdependent in relation

to exchange of information and resources

10. Which of the following statements best describes the way in which you mainly communicate with the LAG:

1. When necessary we communicate – informal 2. Our communication is formalized and project based

3. We have a close and formalized communication but also communicate when necessary

11. Which of the following statements do you agree most with:

1. The funds managed by the LAG would benefit more in the hands of the municipalities

(-(

2. The funds managed by the LAG are equally well managed by either the LAG or the municipality

3. The funds managed by the LAG is managed in a way that the municipalities is not able to and gives therefore added value for the rural areas

12. The investment the municipality puts in the collaboration with the LAG is that a:

1. Bad investment for the municipality 2. Acceptable investment for the municipality 3. Good investment for the municipality

13. Which of the following statements do you think best describes the role of the board of directors in the LAG:

1. The BoD is not so good in maintaining and define the strategy of the LAG 2. The BoD is good at maintaining and define the strategy of the LAG 3. The BoD is very good at maintaining and define the strategy of the LAG 14. In relation to the LAG BoD which of the following statements do you think is most

correct:

1. The role of the BoD is not important for the success of the LAG 2. The role of the BoD has some influence on the success of the LAG 3. The role of the BoD is the main reason behind the success of the LAG 15. In relation to the LAG BoD which of the following statements do you think is most

correct:

1. The role of the coordinator is not important for the success of the LAG 2. The role of the coordinator has some influence on the success of the LAG 3. The role of the coordinator is the main reason behind the success of the LAG 16. Which of the following statements concerning the collaboration between LAG and

municipality is most suitable for those projects where the municipality is project leader:

1. There is little collaboration between municipality, LAG and other partners 2. There is some collaboration between municipality, LAG and other partners but

it could be better

3. The collaboration is well functioning and there is a high degree of interaction between municipality, LAG and other partners

The following questions are open ended and there are no answering opportunities

(-)

17. The main objective with the LAG initiative is to create economic growth in rural areas. Do you think that there are any side effects to the LAG initiative?

18. What do you think is the most important result of the LAG initiative? Is it:

1. Economic growth

2. Social coherence in rural areas

3. Equal economic growth and social coherence

19. Besides the LAG, which organizations and associations do you think are important for rural development in your municipality?

20. Do you think that the municipality applies the LAG initiative adequately? Or could you be better at making collaborative projects with the LAG?

Thank you very much for answering my questions.

In document Interactive Approaches to Rural Development (Sider 101-196)