A Comparative Study of Two Networked (neoendogenous) Development Approaches: The EU LEADER and China’s Resident Work Team in Poor Villages (RWTIPV)

Networked (neoendogenous) development is a prescriptive of rural development that merges the positive aspects of exogenous and endogenous approaches by integrating bottom-up demands and top-down planning, internal and external resources and networks, and vertical political-administrative and interterritorial contexts. The current paper opted for a multicase analysis approach and used a tailored networked rural development institutional analysis and development (NRD-IAD) framework to analyse four organizational aspect changes, namely, institutional characteristics, configuration and structure, actions and activities, and outcomes and evaluation, among four case studies; two studies came from the EU LEADER (links between actions for the development of the rural economy), and the other two came from China’s resident work team in poor villages (RWTIPV). The research questions are as follows: What is the difference and common principle between these two approaches, and to what extent can they engage in exchange and be mutually learned from? Primary data were collected through involvement, observation, and open-ended interviews with actors in rural regions of China. Secondary data consisted of the resident cadre’s job log, resident work team ledger, minutes of the meeting, village’s work reports, government regulations, guidelines for poverty-alleviation planning in China’s RWTIPV cases, and published journals and internet sources in EU LEADER cases. In terms of difference, we identified the LEADER system mainly as a regulation-based network with relationships as supplementary information, while the RWTIPV system was mainly found to be a relationship-based network with regulations as supplementary information. Although the two systems seem different, the underlying logic is the same, that is, to engage with a collective reflexivity and action agency (CRAA), embedded in the locality and representing much of the local resource base, and to obtain a sufficient level of relational capacity to create the necessary conditions for integrated rural development. These common principles enable exchange and mutual learning to occur between the LEADER and RWTIPV systems through the unified idea (theory) of CRAA. The current findings contribute to the emergence of a new rural development paradigm mechanism and the role of institutional work.