Just Accepted Manuscripts
Research Articles

Reaching the margins: Addressing demographic transition through EU Cohesion and Rural Development Policies in Italy

Just Accepted
  • Francesco Mantino,
  • Giovanna De Fano,
  • Gianluca Asaro
Francesco Mantino
CREA
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/rea-16853

Published 2025-12-10

Keywords

  • demographic change,
  • Rural areas,
  • Cohesion policy,
  • Rural development policy,
  • spatial econometric models,
  • impact territorial assessment
    • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

Mantino, F., De Fano, G., & Asaro, G. (2025). Reaching the margins: Addressing demographic transition through EU Cohesion and Rural Development Policies in Italy. Italian Review of Agricultural Economics. https://doi.org/10.36253/rea-16853

Copyright (c) 2025 Francesco Mantino, Giovanna De Fano, Gianluca Asaro

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

The impact of demographic decline on the allocation of policy instruments and public funding across territories has received limited attention. This study therefore identifies the key variables that influence the uptake of EU policies to clarify the conditions that may hinder the participation of declining territories in public programmes. This research is the first to jointly consider EU cohesion policy – through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund (ESF) – and rural development policy, financed by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). A territorial typology of municipalities was adopted based on the EUROSTAT degree of urbanisation (DEGURBA) classification of urban–rural boundaries, combined with long-term demographic trends. This typology makes it possible to capture the differences between urban and rural areas, as well as the heterogeneity within each group. We examined the influence of territorial typology and other explanatory variables on per capita spending under ERDF, ESF and EAFRD using spatial autoregressive models. The results reveal that demographic decline significantly undermines the capacity of rural areas to attract EU policies, as it progressively erodes the institutional strength of local authorities and the entrepreneurial ability of private actors to undertake investments and safeguard territorial capital over time.

Just Accepted

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Anselin L. (2002). Under the hood issues in the specification and interpretation of spatial regression models. Agricultural Economics, 27: 247-267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2002.tb00120.x.
  2. Bartolini F., Raggi M., Viaggi D. (2012). A spatial analysis of participation in RDP measures: A case study in Emilia Romagna Region. In Proceedings of the 1st AIEAA Conference ‘Towards a Sustainable Bio-Economy: Economic Issues and Policy Challenges’, Trento, Italy, 4-5 June 2012; Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), Trento, Italy, 2012. DOI: https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aieacp/124103.html.
  3. Brezzi M., Dijkstra, L., Ruiz V. (2011). OECD extended regional typology: The economic performance of remote rural regions, OECD Regional Development Working Papers, 2011/06, OECD Publishing. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kg6z83tw7f4-en.
  4. Charron N., Dijkstra L., Lapuente V. (2015). Mapping the regional divide in Europe: A measure for assessing quality of government in 206 European regions. Social Indicators Research, 122: 315-346. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0702-y.
  5. Colantoni A., Halbac-Cotoara-Zamfir R., Halbac-Cotoara-Zamfir C., Cudlin P., Salvati L., Gimenez Morera A. (2020). Demo-graphic resilience in local systems: An empirical approach with census data. Systems, 8: 34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/systems8030034.
  6. Copus A., Kahila P., Fritsch M., Dax T., Kovács K., Tagai G., Weber R., Grunfelder J., Löfving, L., Moodie J., Ortega-Reig M., Ferrandis A., Piras S., Meredith D. (2020). ESCAPE European shrinking rural areas: Challenges, actions and perspectives for territorial governance, Final Report. https://www.espon.eu/sites/default/files/attachments/ESPON%20ESCAPE%20Main%20Final%20Report.pdf.
  7. Crescenzi R., Giua M. (2016). The EU cohesion policy in context: Does a bottom-up approach work in all regions? Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 48(11): 2340-2357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X16658291.
  8. Defrancesco E., Gatto P., Runge F., Trestini S. (2008). Factors affecting farmers’ participation in agri-environmental measures: A northern Italian perspective. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59: 114-131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2007.00134.x.
  9. European Commission (2020). Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the impact of demographic change, COM/2020/241 Final, Brussels.
  10. European Commission (2023). The impact of demographic change in a changing environment, Commission Staff Working Document, SWD 21 Final, Brussels.
  11. European Commission (2025a). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A dynamic EU Budget for the priorities of the future – The Multiannual Financial Framework 2028–2034, COM/2025/570, Brussels, final/2,
  12. European Commission (2025b). Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European fund for economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security for the period 2028–2034 and amending Regulation (EU) 2023/955 and Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, COM/2025/565 final/2, Brussels.
  13. European Commission (2025c). A vision for agriculture and food shaping together an attractive farming and agri-food sector for future generations, COM(2025) 75 final, Brussels.
  14. European Parliament (2019). Effectiveness of cohesion policy: Learning from the project characteristics that produce the best results, Policy Department D for Budgetary Affairs Directorate General for Internal Policies of the Union, Brussels.
  15. EUROSTAT (2021). Applying the degree of urbanisation. A methodological manual to define cities, towns and rural areas for international comparisons, European Union/FAO/UN-Habitat/OECD/The World Bank, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
  16. FAO (2020). The state of food and agriculture 2020. Overcoming water challenges in agriculture, FAO, Rome. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4060/cb1447en.
  17. ISTAT (2024). La Demografia delle Aree Interne: Dinamiche Recenti e Prospettive Future, Roma, 29 luglio. https://www.istat.it/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/STATISTICA-FOCUS-DEMOGRAFIA-DELLE-AREE-INTERNE_26_07.pdf.
  18. Kah S., Martinos H., Budzich-Tabor U. (2023). CLLD in the 2014–2020 EU programming period: An innovative framework for local development. World, 4: 122-139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/world4010009.
  19. Kline P., Moretti E. (2014). People, places, and public policy: Some simple welfare. economics of local economic development programs. Annual Review of Economics, 6: 629-62. https://eml.berkeley.edu/~pkline/papers/KM_ARE_2014.pdf.
  20. LeSage J.P. (1997). Regression analysis of spatial data. Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, 27: 83-94.
  21. Mantino F., De Fano G., Asaro G. (2022). Analysing how the policy delivery system can affect territorial disparities in Italy: The case of investment support in rural areas. Land, 11, 1883. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/land11111883.
  22. Mantino F., De Fano G., Asaro G. (2024). Evaluating the impact of long-term demographic changes on local participation in Italian rural policies (2014–2020): A spatial autoregressive econometric model. Land, 13, 1581. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/land13101581.
  23. Marconi V., Raggi M., Viaggi D. (2015). Assessing the impact of RDP agri-environment measures on the use of nitrogen-based mineral fertilizers through spatial econometrics: The case study of Emilia-Romagna (Italy). Ecological Indicators, 59: 27-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.02.037.
  24. Matthews A. (2025). Fitting the CAP into the next MFF long-term budget. https://capreform.eu/fitting-the-cap-into-the-next-mff-long-term-budget/
  25. Münch A., Gorny H., Badouix M., Gaugitsch R., Dwyer J., Kubinakova K., Beck M., Van Bunnen P., Mantino F., Brkanovic S. (2024). Study on funding for EU rural areas–final report, European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2762/901111.
  26. OECD (2025). Shrinking smartly and sustainably: Strategies for action, OECD Rural Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/f91693e3-en.
  27. Öir Gmbh, CCRI, ADE S.A. (2020). Impact of the CAP on territorial development of rural areas: Socioeconomic aspects evaluation support study final report, European Commission B-1049, Publications Office of the European Union, Brussels.
  28. Pascucci S., de-Magistris T., Dries L., Adinolfi F., Capitanio F. (2013). Participation of Italian farmers in rural development policy. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 40: 605-631. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbt005.
  29. Perpiña Castillo C., Ribeiro Barranco R., Curtale R., Kompil M., Jacobs-Crisioni C., Vallecillo Rodriguez S., Aurambout J.P., Batista e Silva F., Sulis P., Auteri D. (2024). Are remote rural areas in Europe remarkable? Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Rural Studies, 105(January): 1-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2023.103180.
  30. Rodríguez-Pose A., Di Cataldo M. (2015). Quality of government and innovative performance in the regions of Europe. Journal of Economic Geography, 15: 673-706. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbu023.
  31. Rodríguez-Pose A., Garcilazo E. (2015). Quality of government and the returns of investment: Examining the impact of cohesion expenditure in European regions. Regional Studies. 49: 1274-1290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2015.1007933.
  32. Rosina A., Impicciatore R. (2022). Storia demografica d’Italia. Crescita, crisi e sfide. Carocci editore, Roma.
  33. StataCorp (2023). Stata 18 spatial autoregressive models reference manual. Stata Press: College Station, TX, USA, 2023. https://www.stata.com/manuals/sp.pdf.
  34. Yang A., Rounsevell M., Haggett C., Piorr A., Wilson R. (2015). The use of spatial econometrics, stakeholder analysis and qualitative methodologies in the evaluation of rural development policy. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 17(02), 1550023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S1464333215500234.
  35. Yang A.L., Rounsevell M.D.A., Wilson R.M., Haggett C. (2014). Spatial analysis of agri-environmental policy uptake and expenditure in Scotland. Journal of Environmental Management, 133: 104-115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.11.038.
  36. Zasada I., Piorr A. (2015). The role of local framework conditions for the adoption of rural development policy: An example of di-versification, tourism development and village renewal in Brandenburg, Germany. Ecological Indicators, 59: 82-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.02.002.