Smart Territorial Relationships: A Conceptual Framework to Cope with the Rural-Urban Divide in Mountainous Regions

  • Elisa RavazzoliEmail author
  • Helena Götsch
  • Christian Hoffmann
Conference paper
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)


So far, the literature discussed rural-urban linkages as an instrument that has the capacity to reduce the rural-urban divide and to improve the living conditions of rural and mountainous areas. However, structural changes in the economy and society and advances in transportation and communication technology, as well as transformations in the cities’ functions and structures, have significantly modified the dynamics between rural and urban areas from a unidirectional relationships to multidimensional ones. Interactions today happen in non-contiguous spaces; they occur in a broad territorial space that is no longer limited to geographical boundaries. In order to understand the new types of relationships that are occurring today between various territories and to comprehend their nature we believe it is necessary to develop a new conceptual framework. A new conceptual framework, based on the concept of “smart-territorial relationships”, will enable planners to re-frame, adapt, explain and describe linkages and interactions as they currently appear in our society.


Smart territorial relationships Rural-urban divide Proximity Rural mountainous area Spatial justice 


  1. ARL Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (Ed.). (2016). Daseinsvorsorge und gleichwertige Lebensverhältnisse neu denken–Perspektiven und Handlungsfelder. Positionspapier ARL 105: Hannover.Google Scholar
  2. Arvanitakis, J. (2010). Anthony Giddens (1991) The consequences of modernity. Polity Press.Google Scholar
  3. Auclair, E., & Vanoni, D. (2004). The attractiveness of rural areas for young people. In B. Jentsch & M. Shucksmith (Eds.), Young people in rural areas of Europe (pp. 74–104) Ashgate: Aldershot.Google Scholar
  4. Bausch, T., Koch, M., & Veser, A. (2014). Coping with demographic change in the alpine regions: Actions and strategies for spatial and regional development. Munich: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Berner, H. (2015). Handeln bei Pierre Bourdieu—Implikationen für die Sozialraumforschung. In (7) Ausgabe 1/2015. Accessed at 07 April 2017.
  6. Bourdieu, P. (1993). Sozialer Sinn. Suhrkamp Verlag: Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
  7. Bourdieu, P. (1989). Sozialer Raum, symbolischer Raum. In J. Dünne & S. Günzel (Eds.) (2006), Raumtheorie–Grundlagentexte aus Philosophie und Kulturwissenschaften. Suhrkamp Verlag: Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1985). Sozialer Raum und Klassen. Lecon sur la lecon. Ffm.Google Scholar
  9. Bourdieu, P. (1979). Entwurf einer Theorie der Praxis auf der Grundlage der kabylischen Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp Verlag: Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
  10. Camagni, R., & Capello, R. (2013). Regional competitiveness and territorial capital: A conceptual approach and empirical evidence from the European union. Regional Studies, 47(9), 1383–1402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Castle, E. N., Wu, J., & Weber, B. A. (2011). Place orientation and rural–urban interdependence. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 33(2), 179–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Copus, A. (2013). Urban-rural relationships in the new century: Clarifying and updating the intervention logic. In New Paradigm in action—on successful partnerships (pp. 7–29). Ministry of Regional Development: Warsaw.Google Scholar
  13. Copus, A., Psaltopoulos, D., Skuras, D., Terluin, I., Weingarten, P., Giray, F., (Ed.) et al. (2008). Approaches to rural typology in the European union. JRC Scientific and Technical Reports, European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies: Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  14. Courtney, P., Psaltopoulos, D., & Skuras, D. (2009). Rural-urban Interactions. EDORA (European Development Opportunities for Rural Areas), ESPON.Google Scholar
  15. Coutard, O., Finnveden, G., Kabisch, S., Kitchin, R., Matos, R., Nijkamp, P., et al. (2014). Urban megatrends: Towards a European research agenda. Urban Europe, Joint Programming Initiative Urban Europe.Google Scholar
  16. Dangschat, J. (2009). Symbolische Macht und Habitus des Ortes. Die „Architektur der Gesellschaft“ aus Sicht der Theorie(n) sozialer Ungleichheit von Pierre Bourdieu. In J. Fischer & H. Delitz (Ed.), Die Architektur der Gesellschaft. Transcript Verlag: Bielefeld.Google Scholar
  17. Davoudi, S., & Stead, D. (2002) Urban-rural relationships: An introduction and a brief history. Built Environment, 28(4), 269–277.Google Scholar
  18. Dower, M. (2013). Rural development in the New Paradigm. In M. Kolczyński (Ed.), New Paradigm in action successful partnerships. Polish Ministry of Regional Development: Warsaw.Google Scholar
  19. Dutta, S., & Bilbao-Osorio, B. (2012). The global information technology report 2012. World Economic Forum and INSEAD: Geneva.Google Scholar
  20. European Commission. (2010). Sustainable development of mountain regions and the experience of the Carpathian Mountains. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, Committee on Sustainable Development, 19th Session, Strasbourg.Google Scholar
  21. ESPON. (2007). Polycentric urban development and rural-urban partnership—thematic study of INTERREG and ESPON activities. European Union, INTERACT.Google Scholar
  22. Giddens, A. (1991). The consequences of modernity. Polity Press.Google Scholar
  23. Gill, I. (2010). “Regional development policies: Place-based or people-centered?”, 9 October.Google Scholar
  24. Gløersen, E. (2012). Renewing the theory and practice of European applied territorial research on mountains, islands and sparsely populated areas. Regional Studies, 46, 443–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Honneth, A. (1990). Die zerrissene Welt des Sozialen. Sozialphilosophische Aufsätze. Suhrkamp Verlag: Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  26. Irwin, E. G., Isserman, A. M., Kilkenny, M., & Partridge, M. D. (2010). A century of research on rural development and regional issues. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 92(2), 522–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jacobs, J. (1969). The economy of the city. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  28. Khanna, P. (2016). Connectography: Mapping the future of global civilization. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  29. Lichter, D. T., & Brown, D. W. (2011). Rural America in an urban society: Changing spatial and social boundaries. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 565–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Löw, M. (2001). Raumsoziologie. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  31. Lutz, W. (2006). „Vom „Containerraum “zur „entgrenzten “Welt–Raumbilder als sozialwissenschaftliche Leitbilder.” Social Geography Discussions, 2.1, 179–214.Google Scholar
  32. Masnavi, M. R. (2007). Measuring urban sustainability: Developing a conceptual framework for bridging the gap between theoretical levels and the operational levels, International Journal of Environmental Research, 1(2), 188–197.Google Scholar
  33. 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, 745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Miosga, M. (2016). Gleichwertige Lebensverhältnisse und Arbeitsbedingungen in allen Landesteilen. Die Suche nach neuen Wegen zur Umsetzung des Verfassungsauftrags in Bayern. In Daseinsvorsorge und Zusammenhalt. Vorbereitender Bericht zur Jahrestagung 2016 in Hannover.Google Scholar
  35. OECD. (2006). The new rural paradigm: Policies and governance. OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  36. OECD. (2009). How regions grow: Trends and analysis. OECD Publishing: Paris. Accessed at 03 April 2017.
  37. OECD. (2013). Rural-urban partnerships: An integrated approach to economic development. OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  38. OECD. (2014). OECD regional outlook, regions and cities: Where policies and people meet. OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  39. Perlik, M. (2006). The specifics of amenity migration in the European Alps. In L. A. G. Moss (Ed.), The amenity migrants: Seeking and sustaining mountains and their cultures (pp. 215–231). Cambridge, MA, S.Google Scholar
  40. Permanent Secretariat of Alpine Convention—PSAC. (2015). Demographic changes in the Alps, report on the state of the Alps. Alpine Signals—Special Edition 5.Google Scholar
  41. Puga, D. (2010). The magnitude and causes of agglomeration economies. Journal of Regional Science, 50, 203–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rees, P., Van Der Gaag, N., De Beer, J., & Heins, F. (2012). European regional populations: Current trends, future pathways, and policy options. European Journal of Population, 28, 385–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Repp, A., Zscheischler, J., Weith, T., Strauß, C., Gaasch, N., & Müller, K. (2012). Urban-rurale Verflechtungen. Analytische Zugänge und Governance-Diskurs. Diskussionspapier Nr. 4, December 2012. Leibniz-Zentrum für Agrarlandschaftsforschung (ZALF), Institut für Sozioökonomie.Google Scholar
  44. Simmel, G. (1992). Soziologie. Untersuchungen über die Formen der Vergesellschaftung. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  45. Smith, I. & Courtney, P. (2009). Preparatory study for a seminar on rural-urban linkages fostering social cohesion. Discussion Paper. DG Regional Policy, European Commission.Google Scholar
  46. Stockdale, A. (2006). Migration: Pre-requisite for rural economic regeneration? Journal of Rural Studies, 22, 354–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stoetzer, S. (2008, April). Space thinks? Soziologische Raumkonzepte. Speech Berlin 18.Google Scholar
  48. Torre, A., & Rallet, A. (2005). Proximity and localization. Regional Studies, 39(1), 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Van Rheenen, T. & Mengistu, T. (2009). Rural areas in transition: A developing world perspective. In Multifunctional rural land management: Economics and policies 319.Google Scholar
  50. Wacquant, L. J. D. (1996). Auf dem Wege zu einer Sozialpraxeologie. In P. Bourdieu & L. J. D. Wacquant (Eds.), Reflexive Antrophologie. Suhrkamp Verlag: Frankfurt.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisa Ravazzoli
    • 1
    Email author
  • Helena Götsch
    • 1
  • Christian Hoffmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Eurac Research, Institute for Regional DevelopmentBolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations