icrps norway 2011 final programme 22june€¦ · icrps 2011 programme icrps summer institute norway...

ICRPS 2011 Programme

ICRPS Summer Institute Norway 2011: Programme [June 25 to July 10, 2011] Final 22/06/2011 The Summer Institute Dates and Venues The Dates are Saturday 25 June 2011 (arrive) until Sunday10th/Monday 11th July 2011 (depart). The Venues are:-

i. UMB Campus in Ås for week 1. This has acceptable student and faculty accommodation in the time frame for the Summer Institute, catering facilities, and space for teaching, seminars etc. It is accessible to Oslo airports by bus (direct), and rail. Ås is a small university town 30 km south of Oslo, set in rural landscape, 10 km east of the Oslo fjord. The University of Life Sciences and other agricultural, forest and food research institutes are located here. See www.umb.no

ii. Sogndal, Sogn og Fjordane County in West Norway for week 2. Sogn og Fjordane has the longest and one of the most dramatic Fjords in Norway, and with lively and prosperous rural communities, with good examples of nature tourism, rural infrastructure development, and the local government system at work. It also has significant renewable energy involvement and tourism research institutions. See: http://www.hisf.no/en/home , http://www.vestforsk.no/www/show.do?page=36;10&lang=en. Accommodation has been booked at the Folk High School in Sogndal. See www.sogndal.fhs.no Travel to and from Sogn og Fjordane will be by long distance coach, taking one route on the way up (via Lom and Bøverdalen) and another on the return (via Bergen and Handangerfjorden), but timing the return to pass by Gardermoen airport on the morning of 10 July. The journey from Ås to Sogn og Fjordane is rather long, but it will be broken by some visits etc on the way. For images of the area see : http://images.google.no/images?hl=no&q=sogn+og+fjordane&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=kccgS8e-IM3D-QbJ_Pi8Bg&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4&ved=0CCkQsAQwAw Field visits and lecture seminar sessions will take place in both Ås and Sogn og Fjordane. The language at the Summer Institute will be English. This year we will prepare a group project for Sogn og Fjordane County, as an exercise in comparative policy analysis, as practice in group working, as a means of working with local experts and decision-makers, and also to assist our fund-raising for the Summer Institute. We have met with the County and discussed an outline proposal for a project which relates to our themes and topics, and expect to have a final detailed brief agreed in May. Students are expected to think about the Themes before coming to the summer Institute, and also to bring relevant materials on the themes from their own countries (to develop the comparative content). Thematic structure The summer institute applies an international comparative analysis to some key challenges of contemporary rural policy. The focus is mainly on the OECD countries, but we will also deal with several global issues, and welcome relevant inputs from ‘The South’ which can help us deal with North-South issues and comparisons. The themes outlined below provide a structure to the organisation of the sessions, field visits and project work. Of course, the themes relate to each other, and there is inevitably overlap between them. Nevertheless, we feel that this structure is useful in suggesting certain linkages and ways of approaching the policy issues we study.


1. ICRPS cross-cutting questions and themes The key ICRPS Questions run through all summer institutes and sessions:

Why conduct comparative policy analysis? What international comparisons can be made? How can we conduct comparative trans-national research? What lessons can be drawn from comparative analysis? What implications are there for policy?

Students are expected to develop their skills in different methods and approaches for comparative policy analysis throughout the Summer Institute. In particular, students can start by asking themselves

• How does Norwegian policy compare with policy in my country, region, or community, and why do differences exist? • How do OECD rural policies relate to rural policies in ‘the South’ • What impacts do OECD rural policies have on ‘the South’, and especially the achievements of global aspirations such as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),

‘Free Trade’ (GATT/WTO), Human Rights, and Climate Change mitigation and adaptation? The general Themes which recur during the Summer Institutes are:-

a. Making policies for sustainability The summer institute focuses specifically on the concepts of sustainability and “sustainable rural communities,” and the key institutional and governance issues

involved in making policies based on this framework in different national and international contexts. Concepts and institutional issues are dealt with at the start of the summer school, with a session on case studies of a range of policies and approaches in week 2.

b. Sustainable rural communities - contemporary policy challenges Grouped together in this theme are the “issues” that contemporary policymakers face. The sub-themes are thus: demographic change; poverty and inequality; climate

change; developing rural economies; assets and development; food security and health; renewable energy; water and waste management; sustainable tourism; public services; population and migration; and culture, language and identity. Running through the programme, these sub-themes provide rich material for international comparative analysis, and are also clearly key challenges that need to be met to build sustainable rural communities.

c. Research and analysis methods The summer institute provides information about and practice in conducting comparative research and analysing data for policymaking. Thus we include sessions on

comparative policy analysis, research design, evaluation, the uses (and abuses) of qualitative and quantitative data, and systems modelling.

The in-class sessions will be supplemented by field experiences, group projects, individual projects, and a comparative policy exercise. The Group project will continue throughout the summer Institute and be completed by the end of it, when it will be presented to a mixed audience of faculty, students, and local and other policy makers. Individual assignments will be discussed between students and their own faculty representatives, will start during the summer school, and may continue after it. Assessment will be by their relevant Faculty member. Second year students will play an important role in the group project, and in all comparative policy exercises. This will provide practical experience in field visits and interviews, note-taking and reporting, as well as group work, rapid rural appraisal, and presentation. Further, through the “knowledge exchange” format we hope to give students experience of something different from the standard interviewing, and also stimulate them to reflect on their experiences through an international comparative policy lens. Finally, the field experiences will provide an opportunity to explore policy relevant issues related to land and other assets, livelihoods, and culture, language and identity enabling students to address the broader dimensions of human and environmental ‘sustainability’ in a particular context.


2. Nordic Topics Some of the specific Nordic topics proposed for the Summer Institute are

a. Norwegian rural, regional and districts policy (broad and narrow rural and regional policies for remoter areas). These are unique and strongly developed in Norway, including relatively powerful municipal and county governments and governance, backup by a strong fiscal equalisation scheme to ensure relatively equal delivery of public services (including health, education, transport, social welfare etc) to all communities in Norway. The situation was similar in other Nordic countries, but has important variations and recent divergences. We can also look at designated ‘sustainable municipalities’ under a national scheme.

b. Nordic farming and forestry. Relatively small farms with privately owned forests are very common in Norway and also fairly common in Finland and Sweden. There has been some marginalisation of small farms and forests, and structural changes are occurring relatively rapidly (see http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/saf/fs/2009/00000055/00000006/art00006). There are important current controversies around such issues, and both the EU (through the EEA agreements) and the WTO (via the Trade Rounds), not to mention the OECD and EU put pressure on Norway to reduce and reorganise its support structures for Agriculture. Norway (NILF) has unusually good data on household sources of income and also activities of household members. Other special features include reindeer herding and associated Saami (originally nomadic Inuit herding families) culture.

c. Nature Based Tourism. Norway has a strong rural tourism sector, much of it based on nature and landscape. Cultural landscapes are important, and underpin some agricultural support programmes. UMB and the institutes in Sogn og Fjordane specialise in this topic, and we will pass through a National Park during the field trip, where there are active conflicts over use versus conservation or non-use.

d. Renewable energy. Norway is almost self sufficient in (rural-based) hydro power, which also provides revenue to municipalities and some farmers as well. There are important institutional arrangements explaining and underpinning Norway’s success in this respect. Recently Norway and Sweden agreed on establishing a market for so-called green certificates, promoting small-scale electricity production ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_certificate ; and http://www.tu.no/energi/article270724.ece ) . Norway is also part of a common Nordic energy market, and acts as a kind of ‘battery’ for other kinds of energy, such as Danish wind energy. Controversies around wind energy, and also around transmission lines in attractive areas, are also present. Small scale hydro power plants can also be found on farms, and wind power, bio energy and geothermal energy are developing. Norway is part of a new OECD project on ;’Renewable Energy as a Rural Policy Option’ which started in September 2010 and will last until 2012. Other partners in this project include Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, USA and Canada. Raffaele Trapasso from OECD Paris is leading this project, and will attend the Summer School to discuss it. John Bryden (ICRPS Faculty, NILF) is on the OECD group of experts for this project. Norway is also very involved in purchasing carbon credits through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) agreed in the Kyoto protocol on Climate Change, and recently boosted at Cancun. The CDM effectively stimulates approved renewable energy projects in the ‘South’ and adds to domestic pressures in India, China and Brazil (for example) to find renewable energy sources. The impacts of CDM (and related mechanisms) on rural communities in the South are controversial, and policy development will be needed.

e. Ecological Approaches to Sustainable Development. Norway (and UMB) has significant experience and expertise in ecological sanitation and buildings in and beyond Norway itself. For example, Norway (and UMB in particular) has skills and experience relating to ecological sanitation, an important and often economically preferable alternative to traditional systems which pipe sewage to expensive and energy intensive treatment plants before discharging into the sea, and one that can capture much phosphate and nitrate that would otherwise be lost to the sea or the air. There are also huge problems of water pollution and waste management in countries like India, Nepal and Pakistan.

Additional Nordic/ European issues raised concern:-

• Fisheries and fish farming • The implementation of the European Water Framework Directive in Norway, where there are controversies about who should pay for cleaning up the water courses,

pollution coming from municipal and household waste and sewage treatment, roads, farming and industry. • Migrant labour issues are very important for Norwegian farming, food processing industries, and construction, and this is an on-going issue as in many other countries.


3. Key Global Questions for the Summer Institute We also propose to use a series of key global questions or issues as the basis for broader student discussion and specific inputs from second year participants. Second year students will have some special sessions, some of which will be used to help develop these. Each of the second-year students will have to prepare a presentation and a paper. An outline has to be drafted before the summer school and discussed with faculty in the sessions during the first week. The presentation and final paper draft will then be prepared during the summer Institute and presented at the end to all faculty and students. Global questions include:-

• Do we need ‘Rural Policy’? What kind of rural policy? What should be its overarching goals and objectives? How do views differ on this question (between interests and countries), and why?

• Is it more ‘sustainable’ for everyone to move to cities and peri-urban areas during the 21st Century? If so, what kind of policy framework should support this? If not, how can this tendency be changed in different contexts? What kind of policies would help to reverse the present tendencies?

• Is renewable energy a good option for rural development policy? What conditions would make it such a good option or a better option, and what conditions would prevent it being a good option? How are the global mechanisms for ‘clean development’ operating in practice, and what impacts do they have in rural regions of rich and poor countries?

• What are the social and political consequences of food price inflation and future assessments of global supply and demand? Is ‘land grabbing’ a good idea? Where is it happening and why? What role is being played by national governments, International Institutions and Global Corporations? What are its local and global impacts in different contexts? If not a good idea, how can it be stopped or regulated?

• What impact has the financial and economic crisis had on rural areas and people, and on rural policies, in different contexts? What are the possible alternative development possibilities for the post-crisis world?

• Should international migration to work in rural farming, fisheries or food processing industries in rich countries be encouraged. Why, or why not? With what consequences in sending and recipient countries and regions? If ‘maybe’ then under what conditions should it be encouraged?

• Can lessons from one (country/regional) context be transferred to another? What are the implications for international cooperation? • How do international agreements ‘Kyoto/ Cancun, WTO, etc.’ affect rural policies and communities? • Should there be a hierarchy of international values which help to determine policy changes where there are conflicts of outcomes? In particular, should the Millennium

Development Goals (MDGs) take precedence as a set of human rights embodying human values over ‘Free Trade’? In what ways can international free trade (and other International Agreements) prevent or delay the achievement of the MDGs?

Second year students will be asked to select from these topics before the summer Institute, and advise their own Faculty as well as Karen, John and Sjur. The organizers may ask students to select other topics if there is duplication. 4. The Summer Institute Project This year we will work together as a team on a single summer institute project, commissioned by the County of Sogn og Fjordane, and present the draft report of this project at a seminar in Sogndal on Friday, 8th July. The project has been agreed in outline with the County, and will cover the following specific issues:- I. Social Structure and Change. The County Sogn og Fjordane is different from many other counties in Norway (e.g .neighbouring Hordaland) in having

no city or large town. The county population is 107,000, and the largest town is Førde, with 12,000 inhabitants. Sogndal municipality has around 7,000.


The County developed around hydro-electric power and aluminium smelting based on cheap power, and fishing. There are key challenges around changing internal settlement patterns related to internal and external migration patterns and changes, county labour market patterns and changes, and social preferences as to residence and access to a range of material and non-material quality of life elements, including livelihood possibilities, access to nature and recreation including extreme sports, housing availability and cost, access to cultural activities, and education, health and other services. Although there are no large towns in the county, there are a range of settlements of varying size. Some show growing population, while in others it is declining. In such a sparsely populated and mountainous geography cut by Fjords and Glaciers, even small declines in population can threaten the survival of small communities, while further growth in larger communities presents land use conflicts, given the scarcity of flat land. In general there is the triple challenge of youth out-migration (especially educated young women), immigration from third countries, and an ageing population. However, there is also some internal in-migration, including ‘footloose entrepreneurs’ settling in the County, driven by quality of life considerations. Questions raised by the County and Plan relating to social structure and change related questions include: Are specific policies needed? What good practices from other countries. What drives inward and outward migration (quality of life issues)? What is the role of extreme sports in attracting new young in-migrants? How important is access to broadband telecommunications? There is also a more general question about whether it is more ‘sustainable’ for people to move to/ live in cities? How does the answer to this question link with the discussion of decentralised renewable energy (salt-water heat pumps for district heating, as in Songdal, or individual solar7 wind/ bio etc?

II. Government and governance. Local choices are increasingly constrained by national directives and policies. For example, an “Expectations letter” is sent to both local municipalities and county, narrowing local room for manoeuvre and taking up the time of local staff. There are questions related to “Rettighetsstat” versus Local Governance and Democracy versus Technocracy and Professionalisation of decision making (the closure of maternity wards in small local hospitals is a common case in point). New Public Management is also relevant here, and is not liked by County officials we spoke to. Norway is remarkable for its relatively strong local government system, its fiscal equalisation scheme, and its relatively high local autonomy. However, there are clearly processes at work (some ‘universal’) which are increasingly constraining local autonomy. What are the conflicts between National and County level, and between Counties and Municipalities? How are such conflicts dealt with and resolved? What are the local consequences of ‘rule-based’ governance? How can and should adverse consequences by avoided or circumvented? What is the experience of other OECD countries? Can we identify principles and practices which are useful?

III. Tourism (based on nature and culture), adds to a set of planning issues and conflicts, nonetheless partly also related to 1. Due to the popularity of the County as a tourist destination, including cruise ships, foreign visitors, domestic visitors, vulnerable small communities can be overwhelmed by tourists in summer, and find difficulty adjusting. The UNESCO-site Nærøyfjorden and Geiranger with Undredal stavechurch is a good case. UNESCO is only a status, but local government decisions puts restrictions on use etc. This is a challenge for the locals. More tourism or restrictions on landscape creates problems as to maintenance, and leads to concentration of pressure on some vulnerable points. Another case – is the Solvorn area on the northern side of the Luster fjord and the south side is Urnes stave church is a Unesco-site with a small ferry – parking places and a little stave church on the other side. Locals have been under pressure here, but have changed from being hostile to now seeing tourism as something positive. Possibly a visit to Flom while large cruise-ships are visiting to illustrate the problem. Here the questions are related to how to take care of the local cultural and natural identity at the same time as these particularities can be utilized for local economic development. But there are also questions about how to get more local economic benefit from tourism. We were told that Sogn and Fjordane needs a “money eating box”. What can be bought – how can locals gain money from a nice view? There is too little for tourists to spend money on that leaves local


value-added, or too little that Tourists are willing to spend money on. (If time: Possibly a trip to Flom while there are large cruise ships in the harbour – to illustrate the problem)

IV. Renewable Energy and local development. Several issues came up in this key area of the link between the drive for renewable energy and the benefits (and costs) to local people. Renewable energy policy is driven by the need to reduce climate gas emissions, energy policy, and a range of other environmental considerations. Despite the fact that most of the very considerable new investment taking place in renewables takes place in rural regions, there is too often often little employment or other material benefit to these regions. The challenge for rural policy makers is how to change this situation and increase benefits to the regions which at the same time suffer from negative externalities often associated with renewable energy production. Some of the local issues are as follows:-

a. Small scale hydropower plants and green certificates. Norway recently adopted a Green Certificate Scheme similar to that adopted by Sweden (the effectiveness of which has been challenged by Bergek & Jacobsson1). What are the local impacts of denying them? What might be the impacts of applying green certificates to small-scale hydro?

b. Large scale windfarm projects. These are not under local control, and bring little if any benefits to local communities/ the County, unlike previous Hydro-Power. They are disruptive, and have negative externalities.

c. How can the County respond to such issues and develop a set of local policies to improve the benefits and reduce negative externalities?

V. Mitigation of Climate Emissions, and new Policy Initatives We need new ways of analysing problems which connect the different facets of for example climate-related issues, and cut across sectors, if policy mistakes are to be prevented.

a. The extent to which planting of new forest really does lead to increased carbon fixation has been raised. County officials feel that one project for replanting coastal forest has lead to a wrong strategy. The question is really related to how a lot of topics are being used in the name of addressing climate change, but not delivering.

b. What are the impacts of living close to waterfalls. The local politicians are arguing about this – some think it will benefit the local owners and locals. The farmers are able to build new farm buildings with the income from these hydropower plants. On the other hand, the landscape may suffer as waterfalls disappear. The outlets from small hydropower plants are often moved to artificial outlets, to avoid disturbance of the salmon in the fjord etc.

c. The county: is exporting renewable energy and power and at the same time closing down industries (aluminium smelting, e.g.) in order to reduce reducing CO2 emissions. However, the processing is merely moving elsewhere, where emissions may be higher. The responsibility for emission should be at the level of the consumer. We need broader analysis and thinking. Is there international policy or guidance on this? How can the situation be changed?

1 Anna Bergek Department of Management and Engineering Linköping University, Sweden ([email protected]) and Staffan Jacobsson Environmental Systems Analysis Department of Energy and Environment Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden: ([email protected]) “Are Tradable Green Certificates a cost‐efficient policy driving technical change or a rent‐generating machine? Lessons from Sweden 2003‐2008” European energy policy debate, tradable green certificates (TGC ) ... 2009. www.dime‐eu.org/files/active/0/Bergek‐Jacobsson‐090505‐Utrecht.pdf


VI. New Directions for Farming and Food in a Challenging Environment. The general question is how small scale, usually pluriactive, agriculture can

survive in a challenging environment in the context of the potentially increasing WTO pressures, budgetary constraints, general economic and governance reforms and climate change. Relevant themes to explore can be farm level innovation, cooperation among farmers (for example in production or marketing/sales), product diversification, income diversification, use of new technology etc. New concerns raise new opportunities, eg. in fruit and vegetable production, “value added” food (local food, organic food etc), as well as multifunctional activities related to public goods and pluriactivity of farms. How can the policy framework be developed to meet new farming practices and challenges such as extreme topography, long distances (both to markets, the processing industry and to other farmers), climate change and generation change/handing over of farms to the next generation?

VII. Can Information and Communications Technologies be used to reduce or remove the disadvantages of remoteness and small settlement

sizes? The County has made, and is making, considerable use of new information and communications technologies to meet its own communication problems between distant offices and clients etc., and in this respect is way ahead of many of its urban counterparts, centralised agencies, universities and research institutes. There has been much discussion over the past 20-30 years on whether or not such technologies offer new opportunities to rural regions to defeat some of the barriers and constraints of distance from centres and markets, as well as offering new economic possibilities to footloose entrepreneurs and businesses not bound to be close to main markets, and rural service delivery, including distance health and education and e-governance. For example, they have offered us the possibility of Webcast/Streaming of ICRPS summer institute lectures and workshops around in the county, facilitated by SFj, and allowing a back channel for questions. This also leads us to focus on ICT as a topic “How can we use the new information and communications technologies to overcome the obstacles of remote location, distances between institutions and people, political voice, service delivery ”. We collectively have some experience of this from different countries represented in the ICRPS, as well as at OECD level, and Sogn og Fjordane County also has some considerable experience to draw on. Can we make more and better use of this technology in future? What local policies and activities might help this process?

VIII. Two other issues would be dealt with in a horizontal way in the project report.

i. GIS: Fylkesspeglet and further work on this. Can we use data in other ways to show the problems. Data is meant to being used by the municipalities to show the problems and to plan for the development. ). How to read the numbers. Møre and Romsdal has just tables, S and F are more visual. RUPRI to be a partner here (Tom and Pamela).Jo Thor Christoffersen.

ii. International cooperation –efficient modes of mutual learning and exchange. The county has had some years of collaboration with

Scotland (Highland Council) following the Ackergill agreement of 1994 and subsequent exchanges, but they want to improve the mode of cooperation with similar places so that they can develop on-going cooperation on issues that concern them. Perhaps that the new OECD renewable energy and rural development collaborative model is potentially useful, with its focus on exchanges involving local Counties/ Regions accompanied by ‘experts’ and identifying good practices. We will discuss with OECD representatives, other Faculty and Students and seek to identify some examples of good practice from different countries in order to assist the County in thinking about the future.


Students and Faculty will be in seven Theme Groups for the purposes of this project, and second year students will play a key role in these groups. Each group will have at least one Norwegian speaker in it. 5. Norway field experiences and social events Norway field experiences as well as social events will emphasize sustainability issues including: (a) rural economic diversity and sustainability (timber, fishing, small farming, cultural landscapes, pluriactivity and amenity); (b) rural governance issues, including the importance of local governments and fiscal equalisation as well as agricultural, districts (regional) and forestry policies (c) rural cultural diversity, amenities and sustainability; and (d) emerging rural sustainability issues including renewable energy (wave and wind), climate change impacts and adaptation, land use (rural-urban interface, land use policy, land ownership policies, gender issues, communal land), climate change and disturbance/emergency preparedness (forest fire, flooding etc), and gender and sustainable development (local government and corporate leadership, etc). Potential field experiences:

(1) These are being developed – some are in the programme, some have to be finalized. The field visits in Sogn og Fjordane will be linked with the Summer Institute Project.

(2) Social events:

1. Welcome dinner at Ås station: Local foods, juices, fruits, etc highlighted in our first dinner together.

2. BBQ at Karen and John’s house (short walk from Campus and accommodation)

3. Picnic in Drøbak eating shrimps etc. A typical Norwegian summer dinner

4. Dinner in Oslo at ‘People and Coffee’

5. Outdoor picnic/dinner in Ås

6. Graduation and celebration dinner: Dinner at the Folk High School, Sogne og Fjordane.

7. BBQ at Sogndal folk highschool last evening


(Schedule) Saturday 25th June (Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås ) Arrive in Oslo, Norway. Take train or bus (details later) to Ås from Gardermoen, Rygge or Torp airports. We will have a group dinner and social event at 19:00, at the Ås Stasjon café on Ås railway station (the old Station building). Shopping for food for Sunday and Monday assisted by the Junior Faculty (NOTE: SHOPS ARE MOSTLY CLOSED ON SUNDAYS IN NORWAY, ALTHOUGH LIMITED PROVISIONS CAN BE FOUND AT THE GAS STATIONS!) - Day 1 Sunday 26th June (University of Life Sciences) Welcome, Orientation, and Introductions M Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Suggested Presenters Notes At hostel Breakfast 8-9 UMB 9:00-10:30 Summer institute overview and expectations; The main

group project. Summer institute arrangements and administration. Brief faculty introductions.

Karen Refsgaard Sjur Baardsen Helene Lie Kjersti Norskog Karen Refsgaard John Bryden Arezoo Soltani Katja Cappelen Other faculty

UMB 10:30-11:30 Coffee UMB 11:00-13:00 Brief student introductions (3 slides 3 minutes max) UMB 13:45-14:45 Nordic Policy Framework John Bryden Karen Refsgaard and Sjur Baardsen 15:00 Afternoon Lunch at UMB followed by local orientation, Samfunnet, possibly the Lake. Arezoo – aided by Katja, Helene, Kjersti

Kilehagen, Aas

Evening Meet at 6pm for BBQ at John & Karen’s House, Kilehagen 8, close to Pentagon accommodation (outside) With invited guests from NILF, UMB, Local Institutions and Civil Society


Day 2, Monday 27th June (UMB) Sustainable rural communities, policies, and research and analysis: Introduction to main themes of institute M Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Suggested Presenters Notes UMB 8:00-9:00 Breakfast at UMB 9:15-10:30 Policies for sustainability

– concepts What is a sustainable rural community?

Brent Steel Brent Steel John Bryden

9:15-10:30 Second year students Advanced Research Methods, Life Cycle Analysis Applied to Organic Food vs Conventional Food

Karen Refsgaard This is a course on techniques and skills building.

11:00-12:00 Introduction to Social and Policy research and analysis

The policy cycle, the research cycle, theory vs data, applied research. Remind students of the sub-themes: demographic change; poverty and inequality; climate change; developing rural economies; assets and development; services; and culture, language and identity

John Devlin John Devlin

12:00-12:30 Lunch at Sørhellinga 12:30-14:30

(UMB Biotech Building)

Nobel Prize Winner and Ecological Economist Elinor Ostrom, Public Lecture at UMB Campus

A polycentric approach to climate change. See http://www.umb.no/thor-heyerdahl-summer-school/article/programme

Sjur Baardsen

A pioneer on the economic of public goods and related institutions.

14:30-16:00, first and second year students and all Faculty present

Research and analysis methods – fieldwork exercise/assignments… To be adapted according to the agreements with the county Sogn and Fjordane for the Group Project, which is broken down into Themes

Intro to fieldwork methods; approach described, groups meet each other and their faculty contacts, begin drafting questions that address their selected theme and sub-theme Faculty contacts by sub-themes: Each group must have a Norwegian Student and at least one Faculty member. The Themes so far agreed for the group project for Sogn og Fjordane County, are:-

• Social Structure and

John Bryden (and Sjur Baardsen)

John Devlin Colleen Heflin Denise Lach

Intro as to what is expected of students through the field experiences; each group will select a specific topic (from a list of themes and sub-themes) and work together over the course of the session to develop and deepen their understanding of the theme. Local data will be collected through the field experiences and interviews, classroom


Change (in rural and remote regions)

• Government and Governance

• Tourism (Based on Nature and Culture)

• Renewable Energy and Local Development

• Mitigation of Climate change and new policy initiatives

• New Directions for Farming and Food in a Challenging Environment

• Can Information and Communications Technologies be used to remove or mitigate the disadvantages of small and remote communities?

sessions, and on-line research. This thematic work will link to the large group project for Sogn og Fjordane County, still being finalised. Remember you are expected to bring a comparative element to each of the Themes, and introduce relevant experience from other parts of the world.

Afternoon, 16:00 to 17:00

Second year students Special Methodology Session to prepare second year students for their work on the Group Project for Sogn og Fjordane County

Brent Steel Students and support faculty

Second year students and faculty play a key role in supporting and mentoring students.

16:00 to 17:00 Research and analysis

Theme group meetings to continue crafting research questions/strategies for field visits and group project. Second year students play an important role.

Denise Lach

Lach /Devlin

17:00 to 17:30 All: Field Trip Briefing To outline 28th June Field trips Karen Refsgaard Karen Refsgaard 19:00 Dinner at Ås Station


Day 3 Tuesday 28th June (UMB) Comparative Policy analysis; field research and analysis methods, field experience orientation M Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Suggested Presenters Notes UMB 7:00-8:15 Breakfast 8:30-10:00 Contemporary policy

challenges – Ecological Sanitation and Nutrient Recycling

Ecological Sanitation: Rationale, Challenges in different contexts, Policy and Institutional issues

Bob Annis Petter Jenssen UMB Karen Refsgaard

Professor Jenssen is a global expert on ecological sanitation issues.

10:15-11:00 Fresh water management Morsa Project

Karen Refsgaard Helga Gunnarsdottir

11:00- 14:00

Drive to Morsa and visit two different places.

Transport by hired bus Karen Refsgaard Helga Gunnarsdottir We will have lunch at the first visit.

14:00-14:45 Drive to Drøbak 15:00-16:45

17:00-18:30

Local planning issues, and the role of Municipal Government. Historic walk around Drøbak

Restoring old buildings. A national project also collaborating with international partners

Karen Refsgaard, Helene Lie

Anne Holten, Director of Planning and Administration at Drøbak Harald K. Hermansen, (Rådmann) Chief Municipal Executive Frogn Municipality Thore Vestby, (Ordfører) Mayor Frogn Municipality Per-Willy Færgestad, Follo Museum / Riktig Restaurering

Meet practitioners, policy makers, advisors Lunch provided by the municipality

18:30 Picnic in a park in Drøbak. We will provide prawns, bread, mayonnaise etc. Typical Norwegian summer activity. John will bring hummus for the non-prawn eating people.


Day 4 Wednesday 29th June (UMB) Field Experience: Visits to Policy Makers in Oslo; Ministry of Agriculture, Districts Ministry; County Governor’s Office – National and local policies, policy coordination issues. Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Presenters Notes UMB 7:00:8:15 Breakfast

08:30:0915

Field Visits to Policy Makers, Year 1 and year 2 Students

Briefing Sjur Baardsen

O9:35-10:10

Train to Oslo Kjersti N Make sure tickets in advance for

students and faculty Oslo 10:30-12:00 Agriculture and

Forestry Sjur Baardsen Ministry of Agriculture and Food

12:00-14:45 with lunch

Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development : Lunchtime and post lunch meeting

John Bryden Contact Person: Deputy Director General Arve C. Skjerpen.

The Ministry has responsibility for Norwegian Districts (Broad Regional) policy, and plays a very important role in rural regions.

15.00 – 17:00

County Governor, Akershus (County including Oslo City)

The role, function and financing of Counties and County Governors in relation to rural development. County-level policy issues and policy-making. Special reference to pressured urban and peri-urban regions.

Karen Refsgaard

Presentations by Ellen-Marie Forsberg and Morten Ingvaldsen .

Baguettes and coffee/tea offered

17:00 Visit to Oslo Town Hall with its famous murals and walkabout 18:30 Dinner in Oslo at “People and Coffee” Train from Oslo


Day 5 Thursday 30th June (UMB) Field trips debriefing; Rural Governance and Sustainability; Water, Pollution and Waste management; nature-based Tourism Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Presenters Notes 7:00-8:15 Breakfast

8:30-10:00 Field Trips debriefing, all students

Debriefing on the weeks fieldtrips so far (all students and faculty)

Bryden Students and Faculty

Debriefing: share observations and info with larger group. Continue analysis/synthesis with small group: what did you learn to support what you know? What surprised you?

10:30-12:00

Sustainable Rural Communities: Governance issues (all students)

Sustainability and rural communities in the U.S (new topic)

Denise Lach Brent Steele and Denise Lach

Based on their new book and module

12:00 – 13:00 Rural Policy Rural Policy in Quebec Bill Reimer Bruno Jean

13:00-14:00 Lunch at Sørhellinga

14:00-15:30 Group Project All students and support faculty Mentoring session

16:00-17:30 Sustainable Rural Communities

Nature based tourism (all students) Sjur Baardsen Doug Ramsay

Alison Whiteeyes?

19:00 Dinner at Ås station

20:00-22:00 Evening group meetings for group projects, all students


Day 6 Friday 1st July (UMB) Time Theme Topic Co-

ordinator Presenters Notes

7:00-8:15 Breakfast 8:30-~10:30

Contemporary policy challenges – public services

Setting the framework - Policy frameworks and starting assumptions for rural service provision and delivery. Policies for rural-urban equivalence in the Nordic Countries, India and the US compared

A Scottish perspective and case example: Philomena De Lima

Debate

Bob Annis Bryden De Lima Annis

Perhaps also have a Norwegian case here, possibly about policy coordination eg in pre-school and primary school in rural areas such as Nordland.

8:30 – 10:30Year 2 students

Advance Training in Methods and Approaches

Using System Dynamics for Sustainability research I Tom Johnson

11:00 – 12:30 Research and analysis methods – policy analysis

Introduction to comparative research and comparative policy analysis. Colleen will discuss methods of comparative research. John and Tom will talk about recent work comparing EU, UK and US rural policy. Doug will discuss comparative environmental policy relating to livestock in Spain and Canada.

Brent Steel Colleen Heflin John Bryden Tom Johnson Doug Ramsey

12:30-13:30 Lunch at Sørhellinga 13:30-15:00

Measuring progress (all students) – impacts from policies (outcomes)

Different policy measures in different settings and for different purposes Quality of life as an alternative to GDP Conceptual issues Measurement issues Measuring local economic impacts (SjurB) Comparative issues Other measures Quality of life

Philomena de Lima

Karen Refsgaard Sjur Baardsen John Bryden Brent Steel Bill Reimer

GDP is increasingly recognized to be an inadequate measure of economic and social progress. The Sarkozy report recently joined others (eg New Economics Foundation) in suggesting Quality of Life as an alternative approach. To an extent this is already embodied in UNDP Human Development Index


15:00-17:00 Participatory Research Methods

To be specified but will discuss the meaning and importance of participatory research, as well as methods and approaches.

Philomena de Lima

Doug Ramsay Bill Reimer

15:00-17:00 Year II Students and Faculty: Group project

A session on progress with the group project with second year students and facilitated by mentoring faculty

Denise Lach It is important to prepare the group project well, and this session will allow reflection on the learning from the first week, and how this affects the plans for the group project.

17:30 Dinner: BBQ outside Pentagon Free / open evening

Students

Evening ICRPS planning meeting

Faculty


Day 7 Saturday 2nd July (Travel to Sogn og Fjordane by Bus, Field Visits on route) Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Presenters Notes 06:30-07:30 Breakfast

8:00 Leave on bus with all luggage etc. Lunch at approx. 14.00 in Lom. Short stop(s) before that

Travelling day with some breaks and field visits on the way including Lund Mountain Museum and Lom Bakery, Lom Stave Kirk and presentation on nature-based Tourism

Kjersti Norskog and Helene Lie

Jan Vidar Haukeland Baker to hold presentation during lunch

About 7 hours to Lom, and 2.5 hours after that to Sogndal via Gaupne. This is a longer route, but it also scenic and interesting, passing glaciers and mountains, and allowing some field visits en route.

Sogndal FHS

18:30 Arrive, Sogndal Folk High School

20:00 Dinner ~20:00 New faculty introductions


Day 8 Sunday 3rd July (Folk High School, Sogn og Fjordane) Research and analysis methods; demographic change Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Presenters Notes 8:00-8:45 Breakfast 9:00-10:30 Research and

analysis methods

JD: Research cycle:: theoretical aspects LV: Evaluation as a research tool

John Devlin Lourdes Viladomiu (research design exercise)

10.45-12.405 Project work Supervision on group work for Sogn and Fjordane project

12.45-13:45 Lunch 14:00-17:00

Contemporary rural policy challenges – demographic change

Community sustainability: demographic change •

Philomena de Lima Philomena de Lima (migration)

• Analyzing demographic change

• Outmigration from remote rural areas in Norway, and policies to attract return migrants and new settlers

• Welcoming communities – immigration, demographic, and cultural migration

• Ageing • Motivations for migration:

Quality of Life as a driver of inward and outward migration

Case studies • Canada, UK, Norway and

Germany: temporary and permanent worker programmes

Rural mexican workers motitvations to migrate to US and Canada

Bob Annis Lidia Carvajal

18.00 Dinner


Day 9 Monday 4th July (Sogndal FHS) Monday focus Nature-based turism (Rural poverty, sustainability, and economic challenges) Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Presenters Notes 7:00-8:15 Breakfast

08:30-11:15

Contemporary rural policy challenges: Poverty and the social safety net

Rural poverty and inequality – approaches, definitions, measurement and indicators, trends. Comparisons especially with the Scandinavian model. Welfare interventions (welfare to work, children and families , etc) to address poverty and inequalities. Family and children policies in the context of the US.

Philomena de Lima Philomena de Lima Bruce Weber (OSU) Bobby Weber (OSU) Karen Refsgaard

11.15-11.45 Lunch 11:45-

13:45 Local enterprise financing and provision of risk capital.

Kjersti Nordskog / Helene Lie

Heather Broomfield, Innovation Norway. Wilhelm Tangerud, Sogn Næring (Enterprise development) Falkeblikk, local enterprise

14:00-15:30

Renewable Energy as a Rural Policy Option

All students Matteo Vittuari Raffaele Trapasso OECD John Bryden

RT: About the OECD transnational action research project on this topic with Canada, UK, USA, Nordic Countries, Spain and Italy.

15:30-17:00

Nature-based tourism, sustainable tourism in rural contexts, and policy issues: Focus on Norway with input from comparative contexts

• Rural tourism, sustainable tourism, nature-based tourism, eco-tourism. Challenges, conflicts, and policy issues

Sjur Baardsen

Lourdes Viladomiu Jan Vidar Haukeland

18:00 Dinner 19:30-

21:30 Evening work on group project


Day 10: Tuesday 5th July Field Experience: Economy, Society and Environment in Western Norway Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Presenters Notes 7:00-8:15 Breakfast 8:30-9:00-

Briefing for Field Visits

Helene Lie

09:00-19:00

Field visits around Sogn og Fjordane. Fish farming in Norway. The impact on local economic growth and challenges facing the sector. Local development Small-scale renewable energy, and local rural development projects.

9.00-11.30 Sogndal fish farm Presentation at the folk high school and visit to the fish farm 11.30 Drive to Solvorn to catch the ferry at 12.00 Luster ‘South side’ Ornes Boat builders Vetle-Kroen farm organic vegetables etc. 15.30 Ferry from Urnes and drive to Geisdøla in Jostedalen Micro hydro power plant

Helene Lie Peter Hovgaarden, director Fjord Forsk AS Marianne Bugge, Project Leader Luster South Side Ornes boat builders Vetle-Kroken farm Terje Engvik, Project leader ’Project small-scale hydro power plant’, Norwegian farmer’s Union Landowners

19:30/20.00 Evening meal at Sogndal Folk High School


Day 11: Wednesday 6th July (Sogndal ) (Rural policy, renewable energy, sustainability, and economic challenges) Time Theme Topic Co-

ordinator Presenters Notes

7:30:8:15 Breakfast

8:30-10:00 Rural Services – An OECD perspective

All students Willi Meyers Betty-Ann Bryce from the OECD

10:00-11:45

Contemporary policy challenges: rural economies

Rural economic policy: • The changing natures of rural economies in Europe and N

America • Impact of funding shifts from agricultural to rural

development • Political economy of tourism development The debate between agricultural and rural approaches in the CAP

Sjur Baardsen

Tom Johnson Lourdes Viladomiu Matteo Vittuari John Bryden

With a coffe break

11:45-12:45

Local Government in Norway

Norwegian rural, regional and districts policy: The importance of schools and pre-schools to implement changes in rural communities.

Karen Refsgaard

Claus Røynesdal, project leader Sogn Regional Council

9:00 – 11:00am

Year 2 students Sessions on research and analysis techniques Tom Johnson

12:45-13:45

Lunch

14:00-15:30 Field Experience

Debriefing, collating, and synthesizing data from field experience

John Bryden

15.30-17.00 Group Work

18:00 Dinner

19:30-21:30 Group work for final project presentations


Day 12: Thursday 7th July ( Sogndal) Food Security Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Presenters Notes 8:00-9:00 Breakfast 9:15-10:30 Food security

Biofuels vs Food Land Tenure and regulation Land grabbing Economic and Social impacts of high food prices

Food security, Global and Local Issues,; Land Grabbing, who, where, why, economic and social impacts, policies. Regulation of land – ownership, tenure etc

John Bryden

Willi Meyers Christian Rekkedal (Ag director at the County Governor Sogn and Fjordane) John Bryden

New topic for all students

10:30-12:00 Willie Meyers Matteo Vittuari

12:00-13:00 13:00-15:00 Territorial Capital,

Place based development

Sustainable placebased development

Matteo Vitturai Betty Ann Bryce Lumina Horlings and ..

15-evening Group Work Evening Group work on presentations


Day 13: Friday 8th July (Sogn and Fjordane Seminar) Project presentation for Sogn and Fjordane and student projects Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Presenters Notes 8:00-9:00 Breakfast 09:00 – 13:00 Summer Institute

Conference Student group project presentations Selected Second year Student Papers presented as agreed with faculty.

Betty Ann Bryce (chair) Arezoo Soltani

Local Invited Decision Makers

Students as appropriate

All faculty to participate in discussion

This is where we present the results of the project undertaken for the County of Sogn og Fjordane and get feedback to finalise the project report. We will engage with local decision makers on key topics. Dissemination in combination between NILF, UMB and County

13:00-14:30 Lunch with guests 14:00 –17.00

Individual Project presentations

First and Second year students presenting projects and with feedback from both guests, faculty, other students

Arezoo Soltani Student fieldwork groups All faculty to participate in discussion

18:00 Dinner Day 14: Saturday 9th July ( ) Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Presenters Notes 8:00-9:00 Breakfast 9:00-10:30

Policies for sustainability: summary

What have we learned about sustainable rural communities: group discussion

Bill Reimer, Facilitator

10:30-11:00 Coffee 11:00:1230 Work on finalising the report of the group project for the County 12:30- 13:30 Lunch 13:30-15:00 Work on finalising the report of the group project for the County 15:00-17:00 Debriefing: written and oral assessment of programme;

planning for next year: Presentation of Quebec Tom Johnson, Facilitator

BBQ - Dinner / Social event


Day 15: Sunday 10th July Sightseeing Sogn and Fjordane Time Theme Topic Co-ordinator Presenters Notes 7:30-8:30 Breakfast

9:00-17:00 Hiking in the Local Mountains or Boat trip on Sognefjorden or visit the Glacier Museum and glacier hike or Old Settlement museum (options)

Rural Tourism, Fjord Life, Nordic recreation

Helene Lie There will be a number of options offered beforehand, depending on numbers.

19:00 Bus departs for Bergen and Oslo (overnight trip for those returning to Oslo)

Students and Faculty may wish to continue their stay in W Norway, or return home by plane from Forde or Bergen airports, or come in the bus home to Oslo airport and town, or to Ås.

Day 16: Monday, 11th July (Departures) Arrive Oslo with overnight-bus


Annex: ICRPS Partners and Academic Faculty ICRPS Partner Institutions Norwegian Agricultural Economics research Institute (NILF) Oslo University of Life Sciences, Aas, Norway Brandon University, Manitoba, Canada El Colegio de Mexico, Mexico El Colegio de Postgraduados, Mexico Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Norwegian Agricultural Economics Research Institute (NILF), Norway Oregon State University, Oregon, USA

The Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania, USA Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Università di Bologna, Italy University of the Highlands & Islands Millennium Institute (UHI),

Scotland, UK Université de Québec à Rimouski, Québec, Canada University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada University of Missouri, Missouri, USA

2011 Teaching Faculty Academic staff from ICRPS partner institutions and invited Faculty so far participating in the 2010 Summer School are: Annis, Robert C.: Brandon University, Canada (2 weeks) Baardsen, Sjur: University of Life Sciences, Norway. (2 weeks) Bryce, Betty-Ann: OECD, Paris. Dept. of Territorial Development and Public Governance (week 2) Bryden, John: Norwegian Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Norway (2 weeks) de Lima, Philomena: UHI, Scotland (29 June to 6 July) Devlin, John: University of Guelph, Canada (2 weeks) Haukeland, Jan-Vidar: University of Life Sciences, Norway. (3 days week 2) Hefflin, Colleen: University of Missouri, USA (1. week) Jean, Bruno UQAR, Canada (3 days week 1) Johnson, Tom: University of Missouri-Columbia, Rural Policy Research Institute, USA (arrives Oslo on 28 June at 22.55 from Paris) Lach, Denise: Oregon State University, USA (week 1) Meyers, Willi, University of Missouri-Columbia, USA (week 2) Ramsey, Doug, Brandon University (2 weeks) Refsgaard ,Karen: Norwegian Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Norway (2 weeks) Reimer, Bill: Concordia University, Montreal (2 weeks) Steel, Brent: Oregon State University, USA (week 1) Trapasso, Raffaele: OECD, Paris. Dept. of Territorial Development and Public Governance (over weekend) Weber,Bruce: Oregon State University, USA (2 weeks) Weber Bobby: Oregon State University, USA (2 weeks) Viladomiu, Lourdes: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain (week 2)


Vittuari,Matteo: Università di Bologna, Italy (2 weeks) In addition, Several Year 2 students are participating, some of whom have ‘junior faculty’ roles this year, and all of whom play a crucial support role for the Group Project. From Norway, these include Kjersti Norskog, Julie Hval, Helene Lie, Katja Strøm Cappelen, Areezoo Soltani. Please note that Pam Kelrick from Missouri, an ICRPS Alumni, will be based in Norway (placement with NILF) for 2 months this summer and will attend the Summer Institute. She will be undertaking a project on rural development issues, partly or wholly based in Sogn og Fjordane County, and will assist the Group Project by providing data and other inputs which she is gathering.

icrps norway 2011 final programme 22june€¦ · icrps 2011 programme icrps summer institute norway...

Documents