Questioning Neoendogeneity: Cases of Community Economic Development Practice from Atlantic Canada


  • Tamara Antonia Krawchenko Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development



Atlantic Canada, Community development, Economic development, Neoendogenous development, New rural paradigm / Canada atlantique, Développement communautaire, Développement économique, Développement néo-endogène, Nouveau paradigme rural


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.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Tamara Antonia Krawchenko, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

I'm a public policy researcher and educator with a passion for governance. I’m interested in how societies collectively make decisions, allocate resources and structure authority and action. My work examines politics and policy at different scales—international, national and local—bridging qualitative and quantitative methods in the process. I'm committed to producing meaningful and useful policy research that has both theoretical and practical applications. I have taught courses in public policy/administration, political science and research methods. I am presently an economist/policy anlayst with the Governance and Territorial development division of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris.


Ambrosio-Albala, M., & Bastiaensen, J. (2010). The new territorial paradigm of rural development: Theoretical foundations from systems and institutional theories. Institute of development policy and management: Discussion paper 2010.02, University of Antwerp.

Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency [ACOA]. (2014). Report on plans and priorities: 2014-2015. URL: [July 21, 2015].

Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency [ACOA]. (2009). Evaluation of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency Community Investment, Community Development Resources, Official Language Minority Communities and Aboriginal Communities Program Sub-Activities. Evaluation Unit Finance and Corporate Services Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency. URL: [July 21, 2015].

Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency [ACOA]. (2013). Report on plans and priorities: 2013-2014. URL: July 21, 2015].

Barr, A. (1995). Empowering communities-beyond fashionable rhetoric? Some reflections on Scottish experience. Community Development Journal, 30(2), 121-132.

Boothroyd, P., & Davis, H. C. (1993). Community economic development: Three approaches. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 12(3), 230-240.

Bradford, N. (2005). Place-based Public Policy: Towards a New Urban and Community Agenda for Canada. Canadian Policy Research Networks, Research Report F|51 Family Network. URL: [July 21, 2015].

Brenner, N. (1998). Between fixity and motion: accumulation, territorial organization and the historical geography of spatial scales. Environment and Planning D, 16, 459-482.

Brenner, N., Jessop, B., Jones, M., & Macleod, G. (Eds.). (2008). State/space: A reader. Wiley publishing.

Bridger, J. C. & Luloff, A. E. (1999). Toward an interactional approach to sustainable community development, Journal of Rural Studies, 15(4), 377-387.

Cabus, P., & Vanhaverbeke, W. (2003) ‘Towards a neo-endogenous rural development model for the Flemish countryside’. Paper presented at the Regional Studies Association International Conference, April 12-15 2003. Pisa, Italy.

CBC News (2012, May 22). ACOA cuts regional development funding. CBC News. URL: [July 21, 2015].

Close, D. (2007). The Newfoundland and Labrador Strategic Social Plan: the life cycle of an innovative policy. Memorial University of Newfoundland.

Ellis, F., & Biggs, S. (2001), Evolving Themes in Rural Development 1950s-2000s. Development Policy Review, 19: 437–448.

Gibbs, D., 1994. Towards the sustainable city. Town Planning Review 65(1), 99-109.

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador (1998). People, Partners and Prosperity: A Strategic Social Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John’s NFL.

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador (2013). Annual Report 2012-13: Voluntary and Nonprofit Secretariat and Rural Secretariat, St. John’s NFL.

Government of PEI (2010). Rural Action Plan: A rural economic development strategy for Prince Edward Island. Department of Fisheries, Aquaculture and Rural Development, Charlottetown, PEI.

Human Resources and Social Development Canada [HRSDC] (1999). The Community development handbook: A tool to build community capacity. URL: [July 21, 2015].

Johnson, D., Hodgett, S., & Royle, S. (2007). Doing development differently: regional development on the Atlantic periphery. University of Cape Breton Press.

Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K., eds. (2010). Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency and Power. New York: Cambridge University Press.

March J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering Institutions. New York: Free Press.

March J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1995). Democratic Governance. New York: Free Press.

March J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (2006), Elaborating the ‘new institutionalism.’ In R. A. W. Rhodes, S. A. Binder & B.A.

Rockman (eds), The Oxford handbook of political institutions. Oxford University Press, 3-20.

McMaster, R. B. & Shepphard, E. (2003). Scale and Geographic Inquiry: Nature, Society and Method. Wiley publishers.

Noya, A., Clarence, E., & Craig, G. (eds.) (2009). Community capacity building: Creating a better future together. Local economic and employment development series. Paris: OECD.

OECD. (2015). New Rural Paradigm: Linking up for Growth. OECD: Paris.

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2006). The New Rural Paradigm: Policies and Governance. OECD Rural Policy Reviews. Paris: OECD.

Ray, C. (1999) ‘Towards a meta-framework of endogenous development: repertoires, paths, democracy and rights’, Sociologia Ruralis, 39(4), 521-37.

Ray, C. (2001). Culture economies: A perspective on local rural development in Europe. Centre for Rural Economy. Newcastle upon Tyne.

Rees, W.E., & Roseland, M., 1991. Sustainable communities: planning for the 21st century. Plan Canada 31(3), 15-26.

Ryser, L., & Halseth, G. (2014). On the edge in rural Canada: The changing capacity and role of the voluntary sector. Canadian journal of nonprofit and social economy research, 5(1).

Shucksmith, M. (2010). Disintegrated Rural Development? Neo‐endogenous Rural Development, Planning and Place‐Shaping in Diffused Power Contexts. Sociologia ruralis, 50(1), 1-14.

Steinmo, S. (2001). The New Institutionalism. In B. Clack & J. Foweraker Foweraker (eds.), The Encyclopedia of Democratic Thought. London: Routledge

Steinmo, S., K. Thelen, et al., Eds. (1992). Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. New York, Cambridge University Press.

Swyngedouw, E. (1997). Excluding the other: the production of scale and scaled politics. Geographies of economies, 167-176.

Thelen, K. (2000). Timing and Temporality in the Analysis of Institutional Evolution and Change. Studies in American Political Development 14 (Spring): 101-8.

Thelen, K. (2003). How Institutions Evolve: Insights from Comparative-Historical Analysis. In J. Mahoney & D.

Rueschemeyer (eds.), Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Thelen, K. (1999) Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics. Annual Review of political science 2:369-414.

Thelen, K. (2002). The explanatory power of historical institutionalism. Mayntz, Renate (Hg.): Akteure-Mechanismen–Modelle. Zur Theoriefähigkeit makro-sozialer Analysen. Frankfurt, New York, 91-107.

Ward, N. Atterton, J. Kim, T. Lowe, P. Phillipson, J., &

Thompson, N. (2005) ‘Universities, the Knowledge Economy and “Neo-Endogenous Rural Development”’, Centre for Rural Economy Discussion, Paper Series No. 1.

Wilson-Forsberg, S. (2013). The adaptation of rural communities to socio- economic change: Theoretical insights from Atlantic Canada. Journal of Rural and Community Development, 8(1), 160-177.