This article analyses the prevailing types of interaction between two important actors, namely, Danish municipalities and the EU-funded LEADER Local Action Groups (LAGs), in a qualitative case study of LAG-Djursland. In addition, parallels are drawn to the national implementation of the programme through a quantitative study. The analysis addresses interaction at the policy-making (board) level, the operational (staff) level and the implementation (project) level and employs inter-organizational theory. The analysis concludes that at LAG-Djursland, the policy-making level has the least integrated mode of interaction with the municipalities, followed by the operational level, and the implementation level is the most integrated. However, the analysis indicates that the operational level is most important for achieving the objective of delivering rural development. The study shows that the municipalities are valuable partners in fulfilling the LAG objectives; however, it is difficult to define the inflection point at which municipalities become too dominant and come into conflict with the rationale behind the LEADER approach to self-governance in LAG partnerships.
AgranoffR.2006. ‘Inside Collaborative Networks: Ten Lessons for Public Managers’, Public Administration Review, 66 (1): 56–65.
2.
AgranoffR.McGuireM.2001. ‘Big Questions in Public Network Management Research’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11 (3): 295–326.
3.
BurtR.2001. ‘Structural Holes versus Network Closure as Social Capital’, in LinN.CookK.BurtR. (eds), Social Capital—Theory and Research, pp. 31–56. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
4.
CEC. 2005. Council Regulation No. 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on Support for Rural Development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). Brussels: Official Journal of the European Union.
5.
ConnellyS.RichardsonT.MilesT.2006. ‘Situated Legitimacy: Deliberative Arenas and the New Rural Governance’, Journal of Rural Studies, 22 (3): 267–77.
European Court of Auditors. 2010. ‘Implementation of the LEADER Approach for Rural Development’, Special Report No. 5. European Court of Auditors, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
8.
HuxhamC.1993. ‘Pursuing Collaborative Advantage’, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 44 (6): 599–611.
9.
ImperialM.2001. Collaboration as an Implementation Strategy: An Assessment of Six Watershed Management Programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Bloomington: Indiana University.
10.
ImperialM.2005. ‘Using Collaboration as a Governance Strategy—Lessons from Six Watershed Management Programs’, Administration Society, 37 (3): 281–320.
KeastR.BrownK.MandellM.2007. ‘Getting the Right Mix: Unpacking Integration Meanings and Strategies’, International Public Management Journal, 10 (1): 9–33.
13.
KickertW.KlijnE.H.KoppenjanJ.1999. Managing Complex Networks: Strategies for the Public Sector. London: Sage Publications.
14.
LAG Djursland. 2008. Udviklingsstrategi 2007–2013 (Development strategy 2007–2013). Rønde: LAG Djursland.
15.
LoweP.BullerH.WardN.2002. Setting the Next Agenda? ‘British and French Approaches to the Second Pillar of the Common Agricultural Policy’, Journal of Rural Studies, 18 (1): 1–17.
16.
MandellM.1990. ‘Network Management: Strategic Behaviour in the Public Sector’, in GageR.MandellM. (eds), Strategies for Managing Intergovernmental Policies and Networks, 29–53. New York: Praeger.
17.
MandellM.KeastP.2009. ‘A New Look at Leadership in Collaborative Networks: Process Catalysts’, in RaffelJ.LeisinkP.MiddlebrooksA. (eds), Public Sector Leadership: International Challenges and Perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
18.
MarsdenT.SonninoR.2008. ‘Rural Development and the Regional State: Denying Multifunctional Agriculture in the UK’, Journal of Rural Studies, 24 (4): 422–31.
19.
McGuireM.2006. ‘Collaborative Public Management: Assessing What We Know and How We Know It’, Public Administration Review, 66 (1): 33–43.
20.
MFAF
. 2007. Bekendtgørelse om oprettelse og drift af lokale aktionsgrupper under landdistriktsprogrammet for perioden 2007–2013, BEK nr. 490 af 30/05/2007.
21.
NardoneG.SistoR.LopolitoA.2010. ‘Social Capital in the LEADER Initiative: A Methodological Approach’, Journal of Rural Studies, 26 (1): 63–72.
22.
O’ConnorD.RentingH.GormanM.KinsellaJ.2006. ‘The Evolution of Rural Development in Europe and the Role of EU Policy’, in O’ConnorD. (ed.), Driving Rural Development: Policy and Practice in Seven EU Countries. Assen, pp. 1–30. The Netherlands: Koninklijke Van Gorcum.
23.
OECD
. 2006. The New Rural Paradigm: Policies and Governance. France: OECD Publications.
24.
RayC.1999. ‘Endogenous Development in the Era of Reflexive Modernity’, Journal of Rural Studies, 15 (3): 257–67.
25.
RayC.2000. ‘The EU LEADER Programme: Rural Development Laboratory’, Sociologia Ruralis, 40 (2): 163–71.
26.
RittelH.W.J.WebberM.M.1973. ‘Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning’, Policy Sciences, 4: 155–79.
27.
ScottM.2004. ‘Building Institutional Capacity in Rural Northern Ireland: The Role of Partnership Governance in the LEADER II Programme’, Journal of Rural Studies, 20 (1): 49–59.
28.
ShortallS.2004. ‘Social or Economic Goals, Civic Inclusion or Exclusion? An Analysis of Rural Development Theory and Practice’, Sociologia Ruralis, 44 (1): 109–23.
29.
ShortallS.2008. ‘Are Rural Development Programs Socially Inclusive? Social Inclusion, Civic Engagement, Participation and Social Capital: Exploring the Differences’, Journal of Rural Studies, 24 (4): 1–8.
30.
ShortallS.ShucksmithM.1998. ‘Integrated Rural Development: Issues Arising from the Scottish Experience’, European Planning Studies, 6 (1): 73–88.
31.
ShucksmithM.2000. ‘Endogenous Development, Social Capital and Social Inclusion: Perspectives from LEADER in the UK’, Sociologia Ruralis, 40 (2): 208–18.
32.
ShucksmithM.2010. ‘Disintegrated Rural Development? Neo-endogenous Rural Development, Planning and Place-Shaping in Diffused Power Contexts’, Sociologia Ruralis, 50 (1): 1–14.
33.
SvendsenG.T.SvendsenG.L.H.2006. Social Kapital—En Introduktion. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
34.
SørensenE.TorfingJ.2007. ‘Governance Network Research: Towards a Second Generation’, in SørensenE.TorfingJ. (eds), Theories of Democratic Network Governance, pp. 1–21. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.
35.
TeilmannK.2012. ‘Measuring Social Capital Accumulation in Rural Development, Journal of Rural Studies, 28(4): 458–65.
36.
ThuesenA. Aa. 2010. ‘Is LEADER Elitist or Inclusive? Composition of Danish LAG Boards in the 2007-2013 Rural Development and Fisheries Programmes’, SociologiaRuralis, 50(1): 31–45.
37.
TorfingJ.2007. ‘Introduction: Democratic Network Governance’, in MarcussenM.TorfingJ. (eds), Democratic Network Governance in Europe, pp. 1–22. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.
