Networks and Spatial Economics

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 717–729 | Cite as

New Technological Knowledge, Rural and Urban Agriculture, and Steady State Economic Growth

  • Amitrajeet A. BatabyalEmail author
  • Karima Kourtit
  • Peter Nijkamp


We analyze the growth effects over space arising from the adoption of new agricultural technology in a rural-urban setting. We use a dynamic model to study the impacts of technology and learning on the steady state growth rates of rural and urban regions that produce agricultural goods. New applications of agricultural technologies are tested and adopted in the rural region and they are gradually learned by the urban region. Our analysis leads to four results. First, we determine the steady state growth rate of agricultural output per worker in the rural region. Second, we define an urban to rural region agricultural technology knowledge ratio, analyze its stability properties, and then use this ratio to compute the steady state growth rate of agricultural output per worker in the urban region. Third, for specific parameter values, we study the ratio of agricultural output per worker in the urban to the rural region when both regions have converged to their balanced growth paths. Finally, we discuss the policy implications of our analysis.


Economic growth Learning Rural region Technology Urban region 

JEL Codes

O18 Q16 R11 


  1. Acemoglu D (2009) Introduction to modern economic growth. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. Alberto AF, Glaeser EL (1995) Trade and circuses: explaining urban giants. Q J Econ 110:195–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barthel S, Isendahl C (2013) Urban gardens, agriculture, and water management: sources of resilience for long-term food security in cities. Ecol Econ 86:224–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Batabyal AA, Beladi H (2017) Patent protection in a model of economic growth in multiple regions. Netw Spatial Econ 17:255–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Batabyal AA, Nijkamp P (2014) Technology, learning, and long run economic growth in leading and lagging regions. Econ Polit Wkly 49:92–96Google Scholar
  6. Bettencourt LMA (2013) The origins of scaling in cities. Science 340:1438–1441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bucur SL (2015) Characteristics and temporal gaps of the rural space. Agric Econ R Dev 12:223–235Google Scholar
  8. Capitanio F, Adinolfi F, Malorgio G (2011) What explains farmers’ participation in rural development policy in Italian southern region? An empirical analysis. New Medit: Med J Econ Agric Environ 10:19–24Google Scholar
  9. Christaller W (1933) Central places in southern Germany. Fischer, JenaGoogle Scholar
  10. Dasgupta P (1996) The economics of the environment. Environ Dev Econ 1:387–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Draus P, Roddy J, McDuffie A (2014) We don’t have no neighborhood’: advanced marginality and urban agriculture in Detroit. Urban Stud 51:2523–2538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fieldsend AF (2013) Facilitating innovation in agriculture: lessons from a European perspective. Agric Econ R Dev 10:177–190Google Scholar
  13. Garcia Alvarez-Coque JM, Lopez-Garcia Usach T, Sanchez Garcia M (2013) Territory and innovative behavior in Agri-food firms: does rurality matter? New Medit: Med J Econ Agric Environ 12:2–10Google Scholar
  14. Glasser R (2018) The farm in the city in the recent past: thoughts on a more inclusive urban historiography. J Urban Hist 44:501–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grebitus C, Printezis I, Printezis A (2017) Relationship between consumer behavior and success of urban agriculture. Ecol Econ 136:189–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grossman GM, Helpman E (1991) Endogenous product cycles. Econ J 101:1214–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hall SA, Kaufman JS, Ricketts TC (2006) Defining urban and rural areas in U. S. Epidemiological studies. J Urban Health 83:162–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hodge I, Midmore P (2008) Models of rural development and approaches to analysis evaluation and decision-making. Econ R 5:23–28Google Scholar
  19. Irwin EG, Isserman AM, Kilkenny M, Partridge MD (2010) A century of research on rural development and regional issues. Am J Agric Econ 92:522–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jordan MM, Chapman D, Wrobel SL (2014) Rich districts, poor districts: the property tax equity impact of Arkansas school finance equalization. Publ Fin Manag 14:399–415Google Scholar
  21. Korpela K, Ylen M, Tyrvainen L, Silvennoinen H (2010) Favorite green, waterside and urban environments, restorative experiences and perceived health in Finland. Health Promot Int 25:200–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kourtit K, Nijkamp P, Stough R (eds) (2015) The rise of the City. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  23. Krugman P (1979) A model of innovation, technology transfer, and the world distribution of income. J Polit Econ 87:253–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Losch A (1954) Economics of location. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  25. Mayer H, Habersetzer A, Meili R (2016) Rural-urban linkages and sustainable regional development: the role of entrepreneurs in linking peripheries and centers. Sustainability 8:745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Meijer SS, Catacutan D, Ajayi GOC, Sileshi W, Nieuwenhuis M (2015) The role of knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions in the uptake of agricultural and agroforestry innovations among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. Int J Agric Sustain 13:40–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nemeth I (2004) Hungarian agriculture at the dawn of EU accession. Euro Choice 3:6–11Google Scholar
  28. OECD. 2007. Innovative Rural Regions. Accessed on 20 June 2018
  29. OECD. 2010. Agricultural Policies and Rural Development: A Synthesis of Recent OECD Work. Accessed on 21 June 2018
  30. OECD. 2018. Rural 3.0: A Framework for Rural Development. Accessed on 21 June 2018
  31. Opitz I, Berges R, Piorr A, Krisker T (2016) Contributing to food security in urban areas: differences between urban agriculture and peri-urban agriculture in the global north. Agric Hum Values 33:341–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Romer D (2012) Advanced macroeconomics, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill Irwin, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Skelhorn C, Lindley S, Levermore G (2014) The impact of vegetation types on air and surface temperatures in a temperate city: a fine scale assessment in ManchesterUK. Landsc Urban Plan 121:129–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tacoli C (2003) The links between urban and rural development. Environ Urban 15:3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ward N, Brown DL (2009) Placing the rural in regional development. Reg Stud 43:1237–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yamamoto D (2008) Scales of regional income disparities in the USA, 1955-2003. J Econ Geogr 8:79–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsRochester Institute of TechnologyRochesterUSA
  2. 2.JADS‘s-HertogenboschThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsA. Mickiewicz UniversityPoznanPoland

Personalised recommendations