This thematic issue of Studies in Agricultural Economics is composed of papers that examine human and social capital in rural development. The idea behind this choice of topic is to get a picture of the kind of research currently being undertaken in this field, how this research covers the important issue of rural development, in a world where there is “a shift toward a service orientated and knowledge-based economy based on individuals creativity in using accessible information to benefit and create values for themselves and others” (Salenbacher, 2015, p46), where there are “changes brought by technology, connectivity” (ibid. p.44), and an added challenge: climate change. Luthans et al. (2004) also underline that “The rising recognition of human resources as a competitive advantage in today’s global economy, human capital and, more recently, social capital are being touted in both theory, research, and practice” (p.45). There are many different definitions of human and social capitals, concepts that are sometimes hard to measure but essential to success. Human capital is most often described by indicators such as age, gender, education and health, but there are other factors such as experience, different skills, knowledge and ideas which determine this capital. According to the World...

The involvement of disadvantaged groups in European Union neo-endogenous rural development programmes, such as the LEADER programme, must be a high priority. In this paper we study the profiles of the beneficiaries of LEADER and PRODER, the main Spanish example of mainstreaming the LEADER method, in the NUTS 2 region of Andalucía, Spain in the period 2002-2008, and of the decision makers in the Local Action Groups (LAGs). Using quantitative information provided by the regional administration and a questionnaire survey of managers of the LAGs, we show that there has been continuing underrepresentation of previously disadvantaged groups and territories, so contributing to uneven and selective empowerment and governance that favours the emergence of a project class. The groups that have benefited the most from LEADER investments have been entrepreneurs and ‘town halls’, in this order. Interviewed LAG managers felt that many mistakes had been made in the application of LEADER: excessive bureaucracy and interventionism by the regional administration, loss of the original philosophy, low participation of disadvantaged groups and lack of strategic vision. As was noted by one of the LAG managers, “LEADER has been a victim of its own success; the universalisation of its method has led to the...