Basic values of local good governance in rural areas in Poland

• Autorzy: Marks-Krzyszkowska Małgorzata , Rudolf Wawrzyniec

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.29119/1641-3466.2024.193.5

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Purpose: This article contributes to the discussion on local good governance (LGG) by proposing an indicator that takes into account the main values of LGG, measures its level, and considers selected determinants. The considerations were based on an assessment of the actions of local authorities from the perspective of residents in rural areas in Poland. Design/methodology/approach: A bibliometric analysis of works dedicated to LGG and its main principles was conducted. Additionally, a quantitative data analysis was carried out based on a survey using the Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI) method among 700 residents of rural areas in Poland. Findings: The bibliometric analysis revealed a research gap in the issues addressed. The empirical study provides evidence of a moderately positive assessment of actions in terms of credibility, transparency, participatory readiness, willingness to share power, responsiveness, and efficiency. Psychosocial factors significantly influenced the evaluation of LGG. Sociodemographic variables did not significantly differentiate the assessments. Research limitations/implications: Quantitative research has a general nature. It would be valuable to also apply qualitative methods to deepen the understanding of the interpretation of individual LGG values by both rural and urban communities, taking into account the local context. Practical implications: The relatively poor assessment of local authorities’ activities from the perspective of LGG principles suggests the need to reconsider the introduction of changes in this sphere of public governance. Social implications: The discussion of the role of LGG values can contribute to greater awareness and solidify these principles among both the authorities and citizens. Originality/value: The contribution to the development of knowledge includes the characterisation of the dynamics and trends in the international scientific discourse on local governance. It also constructs and empirically verifies the LGG indicator (based on statistical analyses).

Słowa kluczowe

EN

local good governance; value of governance; rural areas; Poland

PL

dobre zarządzanie na szczeblu lokalnym; wartość zarządzania; obszary wiejskie; Polska

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej
• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie / Politechnika Śląska
• Rocznik: 2024
• Tom: z. 193
• Strony: 77--97
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 31 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Marks-Krzyszkowska Małgorzata

• Uniwersytet Łódzki, Wydział Ekonomiczno-Socjologiczny, Katedra Socjologii Wsi i Miasta

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9430-8476

autor

Rudolf Wawrzyniec

• Uniwersytet Łódzki, Wydział Zarządzania, Katedra Zarządzania Miastem i Regionem

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0729-7823

Bibliografia

• 1. Anders-Morawska, J., Rudolf, W. (2015). Orientacja rynkowa we współrządzeniu miastem. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
• 2. Beshi, T.D., Kaur, R. (2020). Public Trust in Local Government: Explaining the Role of Good Governance Practices. Public Organization Review, 20(2), 337-350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-019-00444-6
• 3. Bloom, E., Sunseri, A., Leonard, A. (2007). Measuring and Strengthening Local Governance Capacity: The Local Governance Barometer.
• 4. Council of Europe (2007). In pursuit of good administration. European Conference, DA/ba/Conf (2007) 4 e.
• 5. Czyż, P. (2009). Wskaźniki pomiaru dobrego współrządzenia. In: A. Rogut (ed.), Governance - Współczesne trendy zarządzania regionem (pp. 29-114). Łódź: SWSPiZ.
• 6. European Commission (2001). Communication from the Commission of 25 July 2001 “European governance - A white paper”. COM(2001) 428 final - Official Journal C 287 of 12.10.2001.
• 7. Fałkowski, J. (2013). Political accountability and governance in rural areas: Some evidence from the Pilot Programme LEADER+ in Poland [Article]. Journal of Rural Studies, 32, 70-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.04.008
• 8. Farazmand, A. (2004). Sound governance: Policy and administrative innovations. Greenwood Publishing Group.
• 9. Furmankiewicz, M., Macken-Walsh, Á. (2016). Government within governance? Polish rural development partnerships through the lens of functional representation. Journal of Rural Studies, 46, 12-22.
• 10. Goodwin, M. (2017). The governance of rural areas: Some emerging research issues and agendas. In: The Rural: Critical Essays in Human Geography (pp. 403-410). https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85079540391&partnerID= 40&md5=eea389b84e39f7bebaa10959bed4d6a8
• 11. Houston, D.J., Harding, L.H. (2013). Public Trust in Government Administrators: Explaining Citizen Perceptions of Trustworthiness and Competence [Article]. Public Integrity, 16(1), 53-76. https://doi.org/10.2753/PIN1099-9922160103
• 12. Jonard, F., Lambotte, M., Ramos, F., Terres, J.-M., Bamps, C. (2009). Delimitations of rural areas in Europe using criteria of population density, remoteness and land cover. JRC Scientific Report, EUR, 23757.
• 13. Kalisiak-Mędelska, M. (2012). Partycypacja społeczna i jej znaczenie w działalności władz. Wyniki badań. Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Bankowej w Poznaniu, No. 42, pp. 101-116.
• 14. Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., Mastruzzi, M. (2009). Governance matters VIII: aggregate and individual governance indicators, 1996-2008. World Bank policy research working paper, 4978.
• 15. Marks-Krzyszkowska, M. (2017). Uczestnictwo mieszkańców wsi we współzarządzaniu gminą–w opiniach wójtów. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, No. 477, pp. 144-153.
• 16. Marks-Krzyszkowska, M. (2021). Mieszkanki wsi wobec zarządzania gminą. Kultura Współczesna. Teoria. Interpretacje. Praktyka, Vol. 116(4), pp. 75-89.
• 17. Marks-Krzyszkowska, M., Dzwonkowska-Godula, K., Miklaszewska, A. (2022). Types of Rural Residents in Central Poland in Terms of Their Local Participation: The Perspectives of the Local Authorities and the Inhabitants. Sustainability, Vol. 14(20), 13512.
• 18. Martin, P., Halpin, D. (1998). Landcare as a politically relevant new social movement? [Article]. Journal of Rural Studies, 14(4), 445-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(98)00014-X
• 19. Mattson, G.A. (1997). Redefining the American small town: Community governance [Review]. Journal of Rural Studies, 13(1), 121-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(96)00039-3
• 20. Miessen, M., Choptiany, M. (2016). Koszmar partycypacji. Fundacja Nowej Kultury Bęc Zmiana.
• 21. Oceny działalności instytucji publicznych (2022). Komunikat z badań nr 50/2022, Warszawa: CBOS.
• 22. Oceny władz samorządowych oraz ich kompetencji (2018). Komunikat z badań nr 82/2018. Warszawa: CBOS.
• 23. Pawłowska, A. (2016). Governance jako podejście teoretyczne–kilka kwestii spornych. Polityka i Społeczeństwo, 14(03), 5-17.
• 24. Pawłowska, A., Radzik-Maruszak, K. (2022). From Advice and Consultation to Local Co-governance. The Case of Advisory Councils in Polish Cities [Article]. Lex Localis, 20(1), 55-76. https://doi.org/10.4335/20.1.55-76(2022)
• 25. Perry, M., Le Heron, R., Hayward, D.J., Cooper, I. (1997). Growing discipline through total quality management in a New Zealand horticulture region [Article]. Journal of Rural Studies, 13(3), 289-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(97)00016-8
• 26. Soós, G. (2001). The indicators of local democratic governance project: concepts and hypotheses.
• 27. Śpiewak, R., Jasiński, J. (2020). Organic Farming as a Rural Development Factor in Poland – the Role of Good Governance and Local Policies [Article]. Internatioal Journal of Food System Dynamics, 11(1), 52-71.
• 28. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) (2008). Methodological Guidelines for Local Governance in Latin America, report.
• 29. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) (2009). A users’ Guide to Measuring Local Governance, UNDP Oslo Governance Centre.
• 30. UN-HABITAT (2005). Urban Governance Index: Conceptual Foundation and Field Test Report: Global Urban Observatory. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT.
• 31. Wybory samorządowe - znaczenie, gotowość uczestnictwa oraz zainteresowanie decyzjami władz różnych szczebli (2018). Komunikat z badań, nr 23/2018. Warszawa: CBOS.