Rural Policy in the 2028-2034 EU Budget: Reform or Retreat? A rural-proofing analysis

The proposed EU Multiannual Financial Framework (2028–2034) reshapes rural development by consolidating instruments into a Single Fund and recentralising strategic decisions. Although presented as simplification, the reform risks reinforcing existing biases toward urban, high‑productivity regions. Drawing on rural proofing concepts, EU comparative analyses, and fine‑grained Italian municipal data, the article shows that 2014–2020 Cohesion Policy allocated only a limited share of resources to rural areas, while the EAFRD remained the main—though uneven—source of support. The reform also gives rise concerns about resources and institutional responsibilities for broader rural measures, including diversification, infrastructure, services, and funding for LEADER and cooperation initiatives. Key recommendations include: (i) a mandatory rural chapter in NRPPs; (ii) explicit rural safeguards in Single Fund rules; (iii) clearer rural typologies and better data systems; (iv) stronger multi‑level governance with real local participation; and (v) dedicated resources for capacity‑building and co‑design

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Bio-based and Applied Economics
Published
2026-04-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-20124
Primary Topic
Rural development and sustainability
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rural Policy in the 2028-2034 EU Budget: Reform or Retreat? A rural-proofing analysis

Franco Mantino, Gianluca Asaro, Giovanna De Fano
Bio-based and Applied Economics
Rural development and sustainability
article

Rural Policy in the 2028-2034 EU Budget: Reform or Retreat? A rural-proofing analysis

Franco Mantino, Gianluca Asaro, Giovanna De Fano
article en

Abstract

The proposed EU Multiannual Financial Framework (2028–2034) reshapes rural development by consolidating instruments into a Single Fund and recentralising strategic decisions. Although presented as simplification, the reform risks reinforcing existing biases toward urban, high‑productivity regions. Drawing on rural proofing concepts, EU comparative analyses, and fine‑grained Italian municipal data, the article shows that 2014–2020 Cohesion Policy allocated only a limited share of resources to rural areas, while the EAFRD remained the main—though uneven—source of support. The reform also gives rise concerns about resources and institutional responsibilities for broader rural measures, including diversification, infrastructure, services, and funding for LEADER and cooperation initiatives. Key recommendations include: (i) a mandatory rural chapter in NRPPs; (ii) explicit rural safeguards in Single Fund rules; (iii) clearer rural typologies and better data systems; (iv) stronger multi‑level governance with real local participation; and (v) dedicated resources for capacity‑building and co‑design

Bio-based and Applied Economics
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Rural development and sustainability
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.