Contemporary Thoughts on Responsibilities Devoted to Economic and Social Development between Public and Private Sector

• Autorzy: Andrea Čapkovičová

Warianty tytułu

Aktualne uwagi na temat odpowiedzialności za ekonomiczny i społeczny rozwój obszarów wiejskich w podziale na sektor prywatny i publiczny

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Article deals with the problem of rural development from the perspective of service provision with an emphasis on core/basic services. It identifies roles of sectors in service delivery and conceptualizes devolution of responsibilities between them. Based on identified roles and responsibilties, article presents different forms of partnerships between sectors. Discussion leads to construction of typology table for services according to activity type, consumer contact, service market, profit orientation of a partner, service urgency and contract arrangements. The use of the table is demonstrated by practical examples of selected services. (original abstract)

Artykuł dotyczy zagadnienia rozwoju obszarów wiejskich z punktu widzenia dostarczania usług, ze szczególnym naciskiem na usługi podstawowe. Określono w nim rolę sektora publicznego i prywatnego w dostarczaniu usług oraz dokonano konceptualizacji odpowiedniego podziału odpowiedzialności pomiędzy sektorami. Na tej podstawie zaproponowano różne formy współpracy i partnerstwa pomiędzy sektorami, a następnie przygotowano typologię usług według rodzaju aktywności, kontaktu z konsumentem, rynku usług, nastawienia oferenta na zysk, niezbędności danej usługi oraz sposobu kontraktowania. Tabele zilustrowano przykładami wybranych usług. (abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Rural areas; Societal policy; Public-Private Partnerships (PPP)

PL

Obszary wiejskie; Polityka społeczna; Partnerstwo publiczno-prywatne (PPP)

• Czasopismo: Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Oeconomia
• Rocznik: 12 (2013)
• Numer: nr 4
• Strony: 41--56

Twórcy

autor

Andrea Čapkovičová

• Charles University in Prague

Bibliografia

• Cavaye J., 2001. Rural Community Development - New Challenges and Enduring Dilemmas. The Journal of Regional Analysis & Policy 31 (2), 109-124.
• Escalona-Orcao A.I., Diez-Cornago C., 2007. Accessibility to basic services in one of the most sparsely populated areas in Europe: the province of Teruel (Spain). Area. 39 (3), 295-309.
• Doheny S., Milbourne P., 2012. Modernization and Devolution: Delivering Services for Older People in Rural Areas of England and Wales. Social Policy & Administration 47(5), 501-519.
• Fuduric N., 2008. Entrepreneurship in the Periphery: Geography and Resources. Aalborg University, Aalborg.
• Girth A.M., Hefetz A., Johnston J.M., Warner M.E., 2012. Outsourcing Public Service Delivery: Management Responses in Noncompetitive Markets. Public Administration Review 72 (6), 887-900.
• Gutierrez M., Belanger K., Clark V., Friedman J., Forrest Redfern J., Weber B., Fluharty Ch., Richgels J., 2010. Rethinkinh Rural Human Service Delivery in Challenging Times: The Case for Service Integration. Report. RUPRI Rural Human Services Panel, Rural Policy Research Institute (RUPRI), February.
• Haugen K., Holm E., Strömgren M., Vilhelmson B., Westin K., 2012. Proximity, accessibility and choice: A matter of taste or condition? Papers in Regional Science 91(1), 65-85.
• Hulst R., van Montfort A., Haveri A., Airaksinen J., Kelly J., 2009. Institutional Shifts in Inter-Municipal Service Delivery. An analysis of developments in eight Western European countries. Public Organiz. Rev. 9, 263-285.
• Kodrzycki Y.K., 1994. Privatization of local public services: lessons for New England. New England Economic Review. May, 31-46.
• Marini M.B., Mooney P.H., 2006. Rural economies. In: Handbook of rural studies. Cloke et al. (Eds.). SAGE, London.
• McVittie A., Moran D., Hall C., 2007. The Non-Market Benefits Of Rural Service Provision. Proc. The Agricultural Economics Society's 81st Annual Conference, University of Reading, 2-4.04.2007.
• Mohr R., Deller S.C., Halstead J.M., 2010. Alternative Methods of Service Delivery in Small and Rural Municipalities. Public Administration Review 70(6), 894-905.
• OECD, 2006. The New Rural Paradigm. Policies and Governance. OECD Publishing, Paris.
• OECD, 2010. Governance and Public Service Delivery in Rural Areas. In: OECD Rural Policy Reviews: Strategies to Improve Rural Service Delivery. OECD Publishing, Paris.
• OECD, 2011A. New forms of partnership with citizens for public service delivery. In: Together for Better Public Services: Partnering with Citizens and Civil Society. OECD Publishing, Paris.
• OECD, 2011B. Success factors and challenges in partnering with citizens for public service delivery. In: Together for Better Public Services: Partnering with Citizens and Civil Society. OECD Publishing, Paris.
• Rowe F., 2007. Innovation in Rural Public Services. In: Rural Innovation. S. Mahroum et al. (Eds.). NESTA, London.
• Spellerberg A., Huschka D., Habich R., 2007. Quality of Life in Rural Areas: Processes of Divergence and Convergence. Social Indicators Research 83, 283-307.
• Torres L., Pina V., 2002. Changes in Public Service Delivery in the EU Countries. Public Money and Management 22, 41-48.
• Williams A.S., Youmans R.C., Sorensen D.M., 1975. Providing rural public services: Leadership and Organizational Considerations. WRDC Special Report No. 1/Special Report No. 449. Western Rural Development Center/Oregon State University Agricultural Experiment Station.
• Woods M., 2005. Rural Geography. SAGE, London.