IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i24p13976-d705045.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Third Sector: The “Other” Actors of Rural Development, Andalusia 2000–2015

Author

Listed:
  • Eugenio Cejudo-García

    (Departamento de Geografía Humana, Universidad de Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Francisco Navarro-Valverde

    (Departamento de Geografía Humana, Universidad de Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • José Antonio Cañete-Pérez

    (Departamento de Geografía Humana, Universidad de Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Noelia Ruiz-Moya

    (Departamento de Geografía Humana, Universidad de Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

Abstract

Civil society plays an essential role in the development of our rural areas. In spite of this, little research has been conducted on the role of non-profit organizations, often referred to in general terms as the third sector, within the framework of the LEADER program for rural development, especially in such a large geographical area as Andalusia, the study area of this research. The diversity of the groups that make up the “Others” group of rural development stakeholders is one of its most important characteristics. Over the course of the study period (2000–2015), these organizations have played a very significant role in Andalusia in both quantitative and qualitative terms. In order to find out more about the diversity of third sector organizations and to quantify and evaluate their importance, we carried out a detailed analysis of all the LEADER projects commenced in Andalusia between 2000 and 2015. The quantitative and quantitative results obtained highlight the diversity of these projects and how widely their presence varied from one type of rural area to the next. Our research reopens the debate about the growing role played by non-profit organizations in developed societies at a global level and within LEADER in particular.

Suggested Citation

  • Eugenio Cejudo-García & Francisco Navarro-Valverde & José Antonio Cañete-Pérez & Noelia Ruiz-Moya, 2021. "The Third Sector: The “Other” Actors of Rural Development, Andalusia 2000–2015," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-27, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:24:p:13976-:d:705045
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/24/13976/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/24/13976/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Niina Rantamäki & Mari Kattilakoski, 2019. "On the trail of local welfare innovations in rural Finland," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(2), pages 329-343, June.
    2. Teemu Makkonen & Petri Kahila, 2021. "Vitality policy as a tool for rural development in peripheral Finland," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 706-726, June.
    3. Roberto Cafferata, 1997. "Nonprofit organizations, privatization and the mixed economy: A managerial economics perspective," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(4), pages 665-688, December.
    4. Ray Hudson, 2002. "New geographies and forms of work and unemployment and public policy innovation in Europe," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 93(3), pages 316-335, August.
    5. Enekoitz ETXEZARRETA & Baleren BAKAIKOA, 2012. "Changes In The Welfare State And Their Impact On The Social Economy: Contributions To The Theoretical Debate From A Systemic And Comparative Approach," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 83(3), pages 259-280, September.
    6. Andrea Bassi & Alessandro Fabbri, 2020. "Under pressure: Evolution of the social economy institutional recognition in the EU," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 91(3), pages 411-433, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dorota Ciołek & Anna Golejewska & Adriana Zabłocka‐Abi Yaghi, 2022. "Innovation drivers in regions. Does urbanization matter?," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 1933-1960, December.
    2. Bingqin Li & Huamin Peng, 2006. "The Social Protection of Rural Workers in the Construction Industry in Urban China," CASE Papers case113, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    3. Furmankiewicz, Marek & Janc, Krzysztof, 2010. "Wpływ Programu Pilotażowego Leader+ Na Aktywność Mieszkańców Gmin Należących Do Partnerstw Terytorialnych W Województwie Dolnośląskim," Village and Agriculture (Wieś i Rolnictwo), Polish Academy of Sciences (IRWiR PAN), Institute of Rural and Agricultural Development, vol. 1(150).
    4. Clea Beatriz Macagnan & Rosane Maria Seibert, 2021. "Sustainability Indicators: Information Asymmetry Mitigators between Cooperative Organizations and Their Primary Stakeholders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Li, Bingqin & Peng, Huamin, 2006. "The social protection of rural workers in the construction industry in urban China," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6226, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Eugenio Cejudo-García & Francisco Navarro-Valverde & José Antonio Cañete-Pérez, 2022. "Who Decides and Who Invests? The Role of the Public, Private and Third Sectors in Rural Development according to Geographical Contexts: The LEADER Approach in Andalusia, 2007–2015," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-20, March.
    7. Mariann Szabó & Zsuzsanna Banász, 2020. "SMSTs on thin ice: motivations behind migration from a Hungarian micro‐region," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(5), pages 815-831, October.
    8. Teemu Makkonen & Niko Vartiainen & Daniel Rauhut & Simo Rautiainen, 2024. "Local government expenditure and Quality of Life in Finnish municipalities," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 44(4), pages 457-478, December.
    9. Man Yuan & Jianxin Yang & Jian Gong & Yingge Wang & Lizhou Wang & Yajing Sun, 2024. "Strategies for Enhancing Rural Vitality from the Perspective of Comprehensive Land Consolidation: Integrating Production, Living, Ecology, and Efficiency Enhancement," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-25, December.
    10. Wenhua Yuan & Jianchun Li & Chengqing Liu & Ran Shang, 2022. "How to Realize the Integration of Urbanization and Rural Village Renewal Strategies in Rural Areas: The Case Study of Laizhou, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-21, November.
    11. Isabel Abínzano & Francisco J. López‐Arceiz & Idoia Zabaleta, 2023. "Can tax regulations moderate revenue diversification and reduce financial distress in nonprofit organizations?," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(1), pages 301-342, March.
    12. Fabienne Fecher & Benoît Lévesque, 2008. "The Public Sector And The Social Economy In The Annals (1975–2007): Towards A New Paradigm," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 79(3‐4), pages 679-727, September.
    13. Tianxiao Zhou & Zhiwen Luo & Xiaobin Zhang, 2024. "How do China's villages self‐organize collective land use under the background of rural revitalization? A multi‐case study in Zhejiang, Fujian and Guizhou provinces," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), March.
    14. Teresa Maria Gamito & Lívia Madureira & José Manuel Lima Santos, 2021. "Unveiling and typifying rural resources underpinned by innovation dynamics in rural areas," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 457-477, June.
    15. Xiaojuan Yang & Weiwei Li & Ping Zhang & Hua Chen & Min Lai & Sidong Zhao, 2023. "The Dynamics and Driving Mechanisms of Rural Revitalization in Western China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-26, July.
    16. Natanya MEYER & Daniel Francois MEYER, 2019. "A Comparative Analysis Of Developmental Progression: The Case Of Poland And South Africa," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2019(33), pages 147-164, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:24:p:13976-:d:705045. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.