AbstractThe 2008 fiscal crisis, inflamed by austerity measures, has prompted rural marginalization and societal segmentation across the European Union (EU). The current article investigates how a European rural revival can be materialized, without losing sight of the national and local conditions. Within the contemporary EU governance framework—in which a European institution cannot be categorized as endogenous or exogenous to a sub‐state nation—the concept of neo‐endogenous rural development seems more topical than ever. The term describes a new perspective of governance that reconciles the endogenous to the exogenous dynamics. Along these lines, the present article dwells on the question of how can the neo‐endogenous rural development agenda be disseminated across the EU. By identifying the lack of international comparative research in the field of rural development, the current study explores different European, rural development trajectories and draws meaningful comparisons. A comparative qualitative research was conducted in three rural regions, stratified in terms of economic and governance decentralization: Mühlviertel in Austria, Baixo Alentejo in Portugal, and Phthiotis in Greece. The comparative research indicated the importance of interregional networking and socially innovative governance for the embeddedness of a neo‐endogenous rural development agenda.