Abstract
The participation of stakeholders in the design and application of rural development policies is one of the major concerns of policy makers. The Framework for Participatory Impact Assessment (FoPIA) is a methodology to measure the impact of policies, which could include different stakeholders. This paper used FoPIA to assess the impact of rural development policies in Mexico and Colombia. The results showed a positive impact in the case of Mexico, whereas in Colombia, just one of the policies showed positive results. In both cases, social themes were remarked in order to take them into account at the moment of designing rural development policies.
Highlights
Rural development has been described as a complex or ‘wicked’ problem because it involves many challenges and engages many people
The results showed that a profitable crop such as avocado has a positive impact on some rural development indicators, and on the heritages, but at the same time, it has a negative effect on some others
This paper aims to identify the potential implications of some public policies on the rural development indicators and Heritages and Patrimonies of the Peasantry in Colombia and Mexico, and as a consequence, it intends to recognise the underlying effects in the process of improving the quality of life and the respect for the rights of all rural inhabitants
Summary
Rural development has been described as a complex or ‘wicked’ problem because it involves many challenges and engages many people. The actors interested usually differ in the best manner to address and manage rural development concerns; that is why the policymakers of rural development have been unable to solve all the issues involved. In such scenario, tackling rural development needs an organised process. Thereafter, the step is the assessment of the possible impact of public policies on the countryside, usually taking into account the indicators defined previously, which aims to identify the best public policy option to be executed in the territories. The final step, after the implementation of the policy, is the monitoring and evaluation of the results of that execution This step is usually carried out years after the implementation of the public policy. New problems must be identified, and frequently the process starts again with new challenges to be solved (Australian Public Service Commission, 2012; Probst & Bassi, 2014; Vennix, 1999)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
