sustainability-logo

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Sustainable Rural Development Practices and Results: Learnings and Results from Policies and Initiatives—2nd Edition

A special issue of Sustainability (ISSN 2071-1050). This special issue belongs to the section "Sustainable Urban and Rural Development".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 15 July 2024 | Viewed by 4990

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website1 Website2
Guest Editor
Department of Human Geography, University of Granada, 18011 Granada, Spain
Interests: analysis of the implementation of rural development policies and initiatives; governance and rural development; social innovation and rural development; rural development and depopulation; rural tourism and valorization of local heritage; LEADER approach and neo-endogenous rural development
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website1 Website2
Guest Editor
Department of Human Geography, University of Granada, 18011 Granada, Spain
Interests: depopulation processes in rural areas of Spain and Europe; social and territorial effects of Common Agrarian Policy; LEADER approach and its impacts
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Economics, Università degli studi di Foggia, 71121 Foggia, Italy
Interests: economic geography; rural development; strategic planning; agricultural landscapes and quality; the LEADER approach; and the evaluation of policies aiming to develop the green economy with particular attention to inner areas; the development of a dynamic geo-digital model of agricultural and rural landscapes through the use of geographic information systems, agri-food supply chains, and renewable resources
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The practice of rural development at macro- and micro-levels shows interesting learnings and reflections that must be framed, analyzed, and systematized to conform to relevant theories to improve the level of knowledge and, at the same time, the implementation of practices, policies and initiatives.

Some elements of rural areas play a crucial role in local development, rural and agricultural landscapes, local heritage, territorial quality marks and food, human and social capital, and traditional and rural assets. The implementation of rural development practices has interesting interpretations when assessing territorial impacts and local governance dynamics.

The analysis of emblematic rural development practices, considering the recent theories of neo-endogenous rural development, highlights some elements of interest: networking, the territorial perspective, integrated and multisectoral actions, local decision-making, economic diversification, bottom-up approaches, social innovation, and public–private partnerships.

Common and specific topics emerging from recent international debates have pointed to the necessity to foster participatory and endogenous local development (Ploeg et al., 2000); the role of community empowerment and the renewal of social capital (Farrel and Thirion, 2005); the support from public–private partnerships in resilient areas; the relevance of social innovation as new forms of civic involvement, participation, democratization, and social life change (Moulaert et al., 2005; Vercher, 2022); the added value of the implementation of neo-endogenous rural development practices in terms of democratization and bottom-up decision-making (Thuessen and Nielsen, 2014); the strategic combinations of external and internal knowledge and actors (Esparcia, 2014); food quality and territorial marks for generating added value  (Enthoven and Van den Broeck, 2021); the role of social innovations and the adoption of a visionary, strategic approach in rural development initiatives (Labianca, 2021); improvements in the human and social capital of rural youth for innovation and local development (García-Arias et al., 2021); and finally, the lack of attention being paid to depopulation problems by the practice of rural development, which are areas that are left with no solution in place (Navarro-Valverde et al., 2021).

Different research methods using qualitative and quantitative analyses and study cases on these themes will help us to understand the effects, impacts, and future scenarios of policies and initiatives aiming to promote rural development.

Multidisciplinary and global perspectives will contribute to an understanding of the proposed themes. Therefore, we encourage researchers to submit their contributions to the following priority areas to this Special Issue of Sustainability:

  • Strategies to tackle depopulation of rural areas;
  • Social innovation and rural changes;
  • Networks of actors and governance in rural development;
  • The added value of projects and initiatives;
  • Youth and gender perspectives in rural development;
  • Neo-endogenous rural development as a tool to enhance agricultural landscapes, quality productions, and agri-foods chains;
  • Agricultural landscapes and quality productions in rural areas;
  • Tools, digital innovations, and virtual and augmented reality for the study, interpretation, and enhancement of local resources, agricultural landscapes, and future scenarios;
  • Learnings from successful and failed initiatives in the practice of rural development;
  • Natural and cultural heritage as tools for rural development;
  • The impact of the out-migration of young people in rural areas—irregular vs. circular experiences;
  • Rural extension and small farmers' ability to innovate and adapt to market and climate change;
  • Ageing, loneliness, and rural contexts;
  • Links between rural development, food security, and migration intentions in the Central American context.

References:

Van Der Ploeg, J.D., Renting, H., Brunori, G., Knickel, K., Mannion, J., Marsden, T., De Roest, K., Sevilla-Guzmán, E. and Ventura, F. (2000). Rural Development: From Practices and Policies towards Theory. Sociologia Ruralis, 40: 391-408. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00156.

Farrel, G., & Thirion, S. (2005). Social capital and rural development: from win-lose to win-win with the LEADER initiative. En D. Schmied, (Ed.), Winning and Losing: The Changing Geography of Europe's Rural Area. Ashgate Publishing Ltd: Aldershot, UK, pp. 45-61.

Moulaert, F., Martinelli,F. and Swyngedouw, E. (2005) Social innovation and governance in local communities. Final SINGOCOM report to the EC (FP6). Lille: IFRESI.

Vercher, N. (2022). The Role of Actors in Social Innovation in Rural Areas. Land, 11, 710. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11050710.

Thuessen, Annette Aagaard and Nielsen, Niels Christian. (2014). A Territorial Perspective On Eu´S Leader Approach In Denmark: The Added Value Of Community-Led Local Development Of Rural And Coastal Areas In A Multi-Level Governance Settings, vol.6, no.4, Pages 307-326. https://doi.org/10.2478/euco-2014-0017.

Esparcia, J. (2014). Innovation and networks in rural areas. An analysis from European innovative projects. J. Rural Stud., 34 (2014), Pages 1-14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.12.004.

Enthoven, L. & Van den Broeck, G. (2021). Local food systems: Reviewing two decades of research. Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 193(C). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103226.

Labianca, M. (2021). Towards a visionary approach for rural areas. From the key features to planning tue future of LEADER. Perspectives on rural development - Vol. 5 Università del Salento. https://doi.org/10.1285/i26113775n5.

García-Arias, M.A., Tolón-Becerra, A., Lastra-Bravo, X., Torres-Parejo, U. (2021). The out-migration of young people from a region of the “Empty Spain”: Between a constant slump cycle and a pending innovation spiral, Journal of Rural Studies, Volume 87, Pages 314-326, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.09.008.

Navarro-Valverde, F., Cejudo-García, E. and Cañete-Pérez, J.A.(2021). The Lack of Attention Given by Neoendogenous Rural Development Practice to Areas Highly Affected by Depopulation. The Case of Andalusia (Spain) in 2015–2020 Period. European Countryside, vol.13, no.2, Pages 352-367. https://doi.org/10.2478/euco-2021-0022.

The first volume of the Special Issue, "Sustainable Rural Development Practices and Results: Learnings and Results from Policies and Initiatives", can be found at:

https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/special_issues/sustainable_rural_development_practices_and_results

Prof. Dr. Francisco Navarro Valverde
Prof. Dr. Eugenio Cejudo García
Dr. Marilena Labianca
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sustainability is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • rural depopulation
  • social innovation in rural areas
  • territorial quality marks of food
  • learnings from the implementation of the LEADER approach
  • multifunctionality of rural landscapes
  • successful and failed initiatives
  • rural governance
  • networks of actors in rural development
  • youth and gender perspectives
  • impacts and added value of rural development initiatives

Published Papers (6 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

29 pages, 3576 KiB  
Article
Research on Sustainable Urban–Rural Integration Development: Measuring Levels, Influencing Factors, and Exploring Driving Mechanisms—Taking Eight Cities in the Greater Bay Area as Examples
by Jing Xu, Zhenjian Zeng, Zhenhua Xi, Zhencong Peng, Gangheng Chen, Xiting Zhu and Xinjia Chen
Sustainability 2024, 16(8), 3357; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083357 - 17 Apr 2024
Viewed by 405
Abstract
Urban–rural integration is a top priority in social development and an urgent requirement for vigorously promoting rural revitalization. However, the current development of urban–rural integration in China still faces issues such as an unreasonable urban–rural industrial structure, unidirectional flow of rural population, and [...] Read more.
Urban–rural integration is a top priority in social development and an urgent requirement for vigorously promoting rural revitalization. However, the current development of urban–rural integration in China still faces issues such as an unreasonable urban–rural industrial structure, unidirectional flow of rural population, and low sense of belonging among rural residents. Based on this, this paper selects eight cities from the Greater Bay Area as examples, organizing urban–rural integration development data from 1986 to 2022. It employs principal component analysis to quantitatively evaluate the evolutionary trend of urban–rural integration, constructs a fixed-effect panel quantile regression model to explore the factors influencing urban–rural integration and its spatiotemporal evolution, and uses threshold effects and interaction effects to test the threshold and application requirements for maximizing the benefits of urban–rural integration driving mechanisms, drawing empirical insights from comparisons with other bay areas around the world. The research found the following: First, between 1986 and 2022, the development of urban–rural integration in the Greater Bay Area steadily progressed, with gradually emerging effects, and industrial integration and population integration made significant contributions to the development of urban–rural integration. Second, the driving mechanisms of market economics, government intervention, and social fusion significantly impact urban–rural integration, with the influence of market economics being the most significant. Third, the impacts of the three driving mechanisms on urban–rural integration show temporal and spatial differences. In terms of time, market economics and government intervention always have a positive impact, while social fusion shows a “suppressing-promoting” trend, with a lower impact coefficient. Spatially, there are differences in strategies and priorities for promoting urban–rural integration in each region. Fourth, all three driving mechanisms exhibit threshold effects, and the explanatory power of any two interacting driving mechanisms for urban–rural integration development is stronger than that of any single mechanism. Notably, the combined interaction effect of the three driving mechanisms has the highest impact coefficient. The driving mechanisms should be implemented according to the principles of “synchronization, heterogeneity, and categorization”. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

23 pages, 10209 KiB  
Article
The Impact of LEADER Funding in Romania
by Monica Elena Crunțeanu, Mircea Comșa and Gina Fîntîneru
Sustainability 2024, 16(4), 1503; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16041503 - 09 Feb 2024
Viewed by 555
Abstract
Established in 1991 as a European initiative to enhance innovation in rural areas, the LEADER programme became an important tool for the spread of sustainable local development actions in almost all regions of the EU. In Romania, although the programme has generated the [...] Read more.
Established in 1991 as a European initiative to enhance innovation in rural areas, the LEADER programme became an important tool for the spread of sustainable local development actions in almost all regions of the EU. In Romania, although the programme has generated the implementation of many successful local projects since 2007, quantitative evaluations of its socio-economic impact are extremely limited. The aim of this paper is to evaluate whether LEADER funding has had any effect on the eligible territory of Romania, using multiple linear regression analysis with the evolution of demographic and socio-economic indicators for the 2017–2023 period. The results show that, over a certain amount of euros/capita absorbed from LEADER at the administrative level (UAT), the positive dynamics of the statistical indicators is confirmed. This analysis represents quantitative proof of the LEADER programme’s added value, maintaining or increasing its European role in the future as a sustainable policy directed towards communities. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

27 pages, 6048 KiB  
Article
The Spatial–Temporal Characteristics and Driving Forces of the Coupled and Coordinated Development between New Urbanization and Rural Revitalization
by Guofu Li and Xiue Zhang
Sustainability 2023, 15(23), 16487; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316487 - 01 Dec 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1043
Abstract
In the 21st century’s global push for sustainable development, strategies for new urbanization and rural revitalization in China have transitioned from traditional geographic expansion to a focus on high-quality integration across ecological, social, and economic dimensions. Employing advanced methods such as the entropy [...] Read more.
In the 21st century’s global push for sustainable development, strategies for new urbanization and rural revitalization in China have transitioned from traditional geographic expansion to a focus on high-quality integration across ecological, social, and economic dimensions. Employing advanced methods such as the entropy weight TOPSIS, coupling coordination model, kernel density estimation, Markov chain, and geographic detector, this study comprehensively explores the spatiotemporal dynamics and driving mechanisms of urban–rural integration in China from 2001 to 2022. Key findings reveal increasing coupling coordination degrees in each province, with significant spatial variations. Notably, during the 15th Five-Year Plan, all regions, including eastern, central, and western areas, exhibited low-level coupling coordination. However, a decreasing ladder-like distribution emerged during the 13th and 14th Five-Year Plans, forming a development pattern centered on eastern coastal regions and spreading inland. The central regions experienced significant changes in development kernel density, while the national eastern and western regions remained relatively stable. Looking ahead, highly coupled regions are expected to maintain leadership, positively influencing neighboring areas and propelling overall urban–rural development towards sustainable goals. Conversely, low-level coupled regions require deeper reforms for leap-frog development. The core driving forces behind spatiotemporal differences in coupling coordination degrees involve innovation within the environment, government capabilities, openness to the outside world, and population agglomeration. Secondary roles are played by factors like non-agricultural industrialization, per capita GDP, government investment, and market conditions, while education, healthcare, transportation, and natural resource levels act as bridges in spatiotemporal differentiation. Overall, this study provides a concise spatiotemporal interpretation and strategic recommendations for urban–rural sustainable integration development, advancing towards a more harmonious, green, and just future in alignment with the core principles of sustainable development. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 2118 KiB  
Article
Does Participation in the “Grain for Green Program” Change the Status of Rural Men and Women? An Empirical Study of Northeast China
by Yifei Zhu and Keshav Lall Maharjan
Sustainability 2023, 15(23), 16447; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316447 - 30 Nov 2023
Viewed by 702
Abstract
The Grain for Green (GfG) program is an afforestation project created by the Chinese Government to protect the environment. Farmers who participate in GfG return farmland to forest. Losing arable land means losing an income source, so farmers have to reorient their livelihood [...] Read more.
The Grain for Green (GfG) program is an afforestation project created by the Chinese Government to protect the environment. Farmers who participate in GfG return farmland to forest. Losing arable land means losing an income source, so farmers have to reorient their livelihood strategies, leading to potential changes in the gender division of labor. To assess gender differences in the impact of policies, we use indicators from the Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI), which measures the status of women relative to that of men. Using sex-disaggregated data from farmers in mountainous areas of northeast China and applying the inverse probability weighted regression adjustment (IPWRA) estimator, we found that the status of men and women had increased with GfG participation, but women’s status had improved more than men’s. However, this was not because of their smooth participation in the program, but because of its challenges. Their decision-making skills improved unexpectedly due to pressure to protect their interests. Rural women worried about their families’ livelihoods, so they tried to improve their family welfare and diversified their income sources. In this process, women had more interactions with outside communities. Our results underline the strong need to continuously monitor the gender impacts of environmental policies. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 11322 KiB  
Article
Spatial–Temporal Characteristics of Carbon Emissions in Mixed-Use Villages: A Sustainable Development Study of the Yangtze River Delta, China
by Yiqun Wu, Yuan Sun, Congyue Zhou, Yonghua Li, Xuanli Wang and Huifang Yu
Sustainability 2023, 15(20), 15060; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152015060 - 19 Oct 2023
Viewed by 838
Abstract
With the progression of novel urbanization, rural regions are increasingly characterized by mixed-use features, where work and living activities intersect, resulting in a significant surge in per capita carbon emissions. This research article aims to elucidate the spatio-temporal relationship of carbon emissions in [...] Read more.
With the progression of novel urbanization, rural regions are increasingly characterized by mixed-use features, where work and living activities intersect, resulting in a significant surge in per capita carbon emissions. This research article aims to elucidate the spatio-temporal relationship of carbon emissions in rural areas and their association with mixed-use intensity from a sustainable development perspective. For the study, we selected four of the most representative mixed-use village types in the Yangtze River Delta region. Using the STING method, each rural space was delineated into micro-level mixed-use units. Subsequently, a quantitative evaluation model was constructed to gauge the relationship between mixed-use intensity and carbon emissions. This was complemented by employing GIS simulations to analyze the spatio-temporal attributes of carbon emissions in mixed-use villages. Our findings indicate that (1) different types of villages display considerable disparities in mixed-use intensity and carbon emissions. Their correlation also varies significantly, with traditional agricultural villages exhibiting the lowest values of 0.338 and 0.356, while E-commerce-centric villages recorded the highest at 0.674 and 0.653. (2) The carbon emissions of rural units manifest diverse patterns that include dispersed distribution, core aggregation, linear decay, and dissipative fragmentation. These correspond to traditional agriculture, industrial production, tourism service, and E-commerce villages, respectively. (3) The carbon emissions of mixed-use villages exhibit cyclical fluctuations over time, with different magnitudes observed across villages. Traditional agricultural villages display the smallest fluctuations (within 30%), while those centered around tourism services can experience fluctuations exceeding 150%. Building on these insights, we delved deep into the challenges faced by each village type in enhancing the quality of work and living while concurrently achieving energy conservation and emission reduction. Based on these aspects, we propose a sustainable low-carbon development pathway tailored for mixed-use villages. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

26 pages, 4335 KiB  
Review
Navigating the Nexus between Rural Revitalization and Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Analyses of Current Status, Progress, and Prospects
by Mingjun Cai, Bin Ouyang and Matthew Quayson
Sustainability 2024, 16(3), 1005; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16031005 - 24 Jan 2024
Viewed by 891
Abstract
Achieving sustainable rural development is challenging. However, revitalizing the rural economy is one of the most suitable strategies to overcome sustainable development problems. The rural revitalization strategy aims to create an idealized sustainable development model for rural areas which can avoid the current [...] Read more.
Achieving sustainable rural development is challenging. However, revitalizing the rural economy is one of the most suitable strategies to overcome sustainable development problems. The rural revitalization strategy aims to create an idealized sustainable development model for rural areas which can avoid the current crisis and utilize institutional advantages to overcome the survival challenges of mostly small-scale peasant economies. The logic of the rural revitalization strategy lies in its essential value implication and practical orientation for consolidating the foundation in rural areas, including its characteristics and its ability to realize long-term sustainable development. There is growing interest in research on rural revitalization and sustainable development, but the current status, trends, and progress are unknown. This study examines the most recent advancements in research patterns for rural revitalization and the promotion of sustainable development from 1995 to 2023. It accomplishes this by thoroughly evaluating and analyzing published scholarly material. We performed a bibliometric analysis of the literature obtained from the Scopus database using VOS Viewer software version 1.6.15. We examined a total of 403 articles and evaluated them, focusing on the precise terms “Rural Revitalization” and “Sustainable Development”. We found that post-2018, there has been a notable surge in the popularity and acceptance of research related to these topics. China ranks first in terms of publishing the greatest number of research articles. The journal Sustainability has published the most articles on sustainable development and rural revitalization, followed by Land and the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. The Journal of Rural Studies published the most cited document. Exciting research areas include the conservation of natural resources, ecosystem cities, and rural revitalization strategies. The research findings thoroughly evaluate academic output and propose thematic areas for further investigation. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop