Questioning Neoendogeneity
Cases of Community Economic Development Practice from Atlantic Canada
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12969415 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Tamara Krawchenko (0000-0002-1401-0475, Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 7 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Publication date | 2017-01-25 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Canadian journal of nonprofit and social economy research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1920-9355 • E-ISSN: 1920-9355 |
| Publisher | University of Alberta Libraries (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.22230/cjnser.2016v7n2a202 |
| OpenAlex | W2585248680 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 19 |
Neoendogenous approaches to community economic development have risen to prominence in recent years. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has described such approaches as nothing less than “the new rural paradigm.” But is this paradigm reflected in practice? This research examines the community economic development landscape—from the perspectives of federal and provincial funders to that of community-based groups—through two Atlantic Canadian case studies (Marystown, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Montague, Prince Edward Island). Governmental funders are found to prioritize economic and business development objectives above social, cultural, and community-oriented ones. These preferences shape the types of projects that are funded and the community groups that propel them, undermining the adoption of truly neoendogenous, community-driven practices. Dans les dernières années, les approches néo-endogènes envers le développement économique communautaire ont cru en importance. L’Organisation de coopération et de développement économiques (OECD) a décrit ces approches comme entraînant ni plus ni moins qu’un « nouveau paradigme rural ». Mais la pratique reflète-t-elle ce paradigme? Cette étude examine le contexte pour le développement communautaire économique—du point de vue des subventionneurs fédéraux et provinciaux et de celui des groupes communautaires—au moyen de deux études de cas menées dans deux villes des provinces de l’Atlantique (c’est-à-dire Marystown, Terre-Neuve et Labrador, et Montague, Île-du-Prince-Édouard). Il se trouve que les subventionneurs gouvernementaux donnent la priorité aux objectifs de développement économique et commercial aux dépens des objectifs sociaux, culturels et communautaires. Cette priorité a un impact sur les types de projets subventionnés et sur les groupes communautaires qui les appuient, entravant ainsi l’adoption de pratiques véritablement néo-endogènes dans les communautés
Art · Economics · Geography · Humanities · Political science · Rural development · Welfare economics · Cooperative Studies and Economics · Rural development and sustainability · Social Sciences and Governance
Elaborating the “New Institutionalism”
Scale and Geographic Inquiry
Evolving Themes in Rural Development 1950s‐2000s
The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions
How Institutions Evolve
The History of Community Power
Historical institutionalism in comparative politics
On the Edge in Rural Canada
Toward an interactional approach to sustainable community development
Community Economic Development
Community Power and Decision Making
Timing and Temporality in the Analysis of Institutional Evolution and Change
Disintegrated Rural Development? Neo-endogenous Rural Development, Planning and Place-Shaping in Diffused Power Contexts
Between Fixity and Motion
Towards a Meta-Framework of Endogenous Development
Is There a 'New Community Power' and Why Should We Need One
My Paradigm or Yours? Alternative Development, Post-Development, Reflexive Development
The New Institutionalism
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,5 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2025 (4) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |