Advertisement

Rural-Urban Policies: Changing Conceptions of the Human-Environment Relationship

  • E. Carina H. Keskitalo
  • Svante Karlsson
  • Urban Lindgren
  • Örjan Pettersson
  • Linda Lundmark
  • Bill Slee
  • Mariann Villa
  • Diana Feliciano
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter describes how understandings of the “rural” have progressed from a focus on either decline or amenity, whereby these more simplified understandings can be seen to have had an impact on rural policy development. The chapter argues that rural areas, including forests, need to be understood in relation to both production and integration with urban landscapes. It thus illustrates the role of both historical processes and policy in creating current understandings of the rural: drawing upon an example from the Swedish case, it amongst others shows that a redistributive tax system has played a larger and more crucial role than rural policy in retaining active rural areas in Sweden.

References

  1. Almås, R. (2016). Omstart. Forslag til ein ny landbrukspolitikk. Melhus: Snøfugl forlag.Google Scholar
  2. Almstedt, Å., Brouder, P., Karlsson, S., & Lundmark, L. (2014). Beyond post-productivism: From rural policy discourse to rural diversity. European Countryside, 6, 297–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Almstedt, Å., Lundmark, L., & Pettersson, Ö. (2016). Public spending on rural tourism in Sweden. Fennia, 194(1), 18–31.Google Scholar
  4. Antonsson, H., & Jansson, U. (2011). Introduction. Agriculture and forestry in a century of change. In H. Antonsson & U. Jansson (Eds.), Agriculture and forestry in Sweden since 1900. Stockholm: The Royal Swedish Academy of Agriculture and Forestry.Google Scholar
  5. Bliss, J. C. (2008). Family forest owners. In E. M. Donoghue & V. E. Sturtevant (Eds.), Community and forest connections (pp. 205–218). Washington, DC: Resources for the future.Google Scholar
  6. Bliss, J. C., & Kelly, E. C. (2008). Comparative advantages of small-scale forestry among emerging forestland tenures. Small-Scale Forestry, 7(1), 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blunden, J., & Curry, N. (1993). A future for our countryside. London: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Boyle, P., Halfacree, K., & Robinson, V. (1998). Exploring contemporary migration. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  9. Brouder, P., Karlsson, S., & Lundmark, L. (2015). Hyper-production: A new metric of multifunctionality. European Countryside, 3, 134–143.Google Scholar
  10. Copus, A. K., Psaltopoulos, D., Skuras, D., Terluin, I., & Weingarten, P. (2008). Approaches to rural typology in the European Union. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  11. Ds. (1999). Regionalpolitiken—En ESO-rapport om tro och vetande. Stockholm: Expertgruppen för Studier i Offentlig ekonomi.Google Scholar
  12. Edlin, H. (1949). Woodland crafts in Britain: An account of the traditional uses of trees and timbers in the British countryside. London: Batsford.Google Scholar
  13. Elands, B. H. M., & Praestholm, S. (2008). Landowners’ perspectives on the rural future and the role of forests across Europe. Journal of Rural Studies, 24, 72–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eskilsson, A. (2009). Natur och kultur i förening? Verksamheten i hembygdsföreningar. In Kultur-Natur: Konferens för kulturstudier i Sverige: Conference in Sweden, June 15–17 (p. 143).Google Scholar
  15. Flygare, I., & Isacson, M. (2003). Jordbruket i välfärdssamhället: 1945–2000. Det svenska jordbrukets historia. Natur och Kultur i samarbete med Nordiska museet och Stift. Stockholm.Google Scholar
  16. Forsberg, G. (2005). Landsbygder i omvandling. In G. Forsberg (Ed.), Planeringens utmaningar och tillämpningar (pp. 203–214). Uppsala: Uppsala Publishing House.Google Scholar
  17. Fothergill, S., & Gudgin, G. (1982). Unequal growth: Urban and regional employment in the United Kingdom. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  18. Frisvoll, S., Storstad, O., Villa, M., Flø, B. E., & Almås, R. (2015). Kommunereformen og øykommuner uten landfast forbindelse. Rapport 1. Trondheim: Norsk senter for bygdeforskning.Google Scholar
  19. Halfacree, K. (1993). Locality and social representation: Space, discourse and alternative definitions of rural. Journal of Rural Studies, 9(1), 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hedberg, C., & Haandrikman, K. (2014). Repopulation of the Swedish countryside: Globalisation by international migration. Journal of Rural Studies, 34, 128–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hedlund, M. (2016). Mapping the socioeconomic landscape of rural Sweden: Developing a typology of rural areas. Regional Studies, 50(3), 460–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hidle, K., Cruickshank, J., & Nesje, L. M. (2006). Market, commodity, resource, and strength: Logics of Norwegian rurality. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift [Norwegian Journal of Geography], 60(3), 189–198.Google Scholar
  23. Hjort, S. (2009). Socio-economic differentiation and selective migration in rural and urban Sweden. Report GERUM, Umeå University, p. 1.Google Scholar
  24. Hodge, I., & Monk, S. (2004). The economic diversity of rural England: Stylised fallacies and uncertain evidence. Journal of Rural Studies, 20(3), 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hoggart, K. (1990). Let’s do away with rural. Journal of Rural Studies, 6(3), 245–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Horlings, L. G., & Marsden, T. K. (2014). Exploring the ‘new rural paradigm’ in Europe: Eco-economic strategies as a counterforce to the global competitiveness agenda. European Urban and Regional Studies, 21(1), 4–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ilbery, B. (Ed.). (1998). The geography of rural change. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  28. Johansen, P. H., & Nielsen, N. C. (2012). Bridging between the regional degree and the community approaches to rurality—A suggestion for a definition of rurality for everyday use. Land Use Policy, 29(4), 781–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kay, R., Shubin, S., & Thelen, T. (2012). Editorial: Rural realities in the post-socialist space. Journal of Rural Studies, 28, 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Keskitalo, E. C. H. (2004). Negotiating the Arctic. The construction of an international region. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Keskitalo, E. C. H., Malmberg, G., Westin, K., Wiberg, U., Müller, D., & Pettersson, Ö. (2013). Contrasting Arctic and mainstream Swedish descriptions of Northern Sweden: The view from established domestic research. Arctic, 66(3), 351–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Keskitalo, E. C. H., & Southcott, C. (2015). Globalisation. In J. Nymand Larsen & G. Fondahl (Eds.), Arctic human development report. Regional processes and global linkages. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers.Google Scholar
  33. Knutsen, H. (Ed.). (2014). Utsyn over norsk landbruk. Tilstand og utviklingstrekk 2014. Oslo: Norsk institutt for landbruksøkonomisk forskning.Google Scholar
  34. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Lazlo Ambjörnsson, E., Keskitalo, E. C. H., & Karlsson, S. (2016). Forest discourses and the role of planning-related perspectives: The case of Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 31(1), 111–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Madureira, L., Koehnen, T., Pires, M., Baptista, A., Cristovão, A., & Ferreira, D. (2014, September). The effectiveness of advisory services to respond to demands of diverse types of small-scale farmers: New small-scale farmers in the small fruits sector in Portugal. Report for AKIS on the ground: Focusing knowledge flow systems (WP4) of the PRO AKIS project. Retrieved from www.proakis.eu/publicationsandevents/pubs
  37. del Mármol, C., & Vaccaro, I. (2015). Changing ruralities: Between abandonment and redefinition in the Catalan Pyrenees. Anthropological Forum: A Journal of Social Anthropology and Comparative Sociology, 25(1), 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Marsden, T. (1998). New rural territories: Regulating the differentiated rural spaces. Journal of Rural Studies, 14(1), 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marsden, T., Murdoch, J., Lowe, P., Munton, R., & Flynn, A. (1993). Constructing the countryside. Restructuring rural areas 1. London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  40. Morell, M. (1997). Family farms and agricultural mechanization in Sweden before world war II. In L. Jonung & R. Ohlsson (Eds.), The economic development of Sweden since 1870 (The economic development of Modern Europe since 1870) (pp. 67–86). London: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  41. Morrison, T. H., Lane, M. B., & Hibbard, M. (2015). Planning, governance and rural futures in Australia and the USA: Revisiting the case for rural regional planning. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58(9), 1601–1616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Neal, S. (2013). Transition culture: Politics, localities and ruralities. Journal of Rural Studies, 32, 60–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nelson, P. B., Oberg, A., & Nelson, L. (2010). Rural gentrification and linked migration in the United States. Journal of Rural Studies, 26, 343–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Orwell, G. (1947). The English people. London: Collins.Google Scholar
  45. Paniagua, A. (2014). Rurality, identity and morality in remote rural areas in Northern Spain. Journal of Rural Studies, 35, 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pettersson, Ö. (2001). Microregional fragmentation in a Swedish county. Papers in Regional Science, 80(4), 389–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pettersson, Ö. (2002). Socio-economic dynamics in sparse regional structures. Report GERUM kulturgeografi. Umeå: Kulturgeografiska institutionen/SMC, Umeå University, p. 2.Google Scholar
  48. Pettersson, Ö., & Westholm, E. (1998). Gräddhyllor och fattigfickor. En mikroregional analys av välfärdens geografiska fördelning i Dalarna. Dfr-rapport 1998:1. Dalarnas forskningsråd, Falun.Google Scholar
  49. Risku-Norja, H., Voutilainen, O., & Yli-Viikari, A. (2010). Rural development in Finland: Revival of a natural resource sectors perspective. Society and Natural Resources, 24(1), 75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rye, J. F. (2011). Conflicts and contestations. Rural populations’ perspectives on the second homes phenomenon. Journal of Rural Studies, 27, 263–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rye, J. F., & Gunnerud Berg, N. (2011). The second home phenomenon and Norwegian rurality. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift [Norwegian Journal of Geography], 65(3), 126–136.Google Scholar
  52. Scott, M. (2006). Strategic spatial planning and contested ruralities: Insights from the republic of Ireland. European Planning Studies, 14(6), 811–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Scott, M. (2008). Managing rural change and competing rationalities: Insights from conflicting rural storylines and local policy making in Ireland. Planning Theory & Practice, 9(1), 9–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Slätmo, E. (2014). Agricultural land use change in Sweden and Norway. An analysis of driving forces and the potential to influence change through policy. Publications edited by the Departments of Geography, University of Gothenburg, Series B, no. 125. (Dissertation) Department of Economy and Society, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.Google Scholar
  55. Slee, R. W. (2005). From countrysides of production to countrysides of consumption? Journal of Agricultural Science (Centenary Review), 143, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Slee, B. (2015). Is there a case for community-based equity participation in Scottish on-shore wind energy production? Gaps in evidence and research needs. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41, 540–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Slee, W., Evans, R., & Roberts, D. (2004). Forestry in the rural economy: A new approach to assessing the impact of forestry on rural development. Forestry, 77(5), 441–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. SOU. (2015). Demografins regional utmaningar. Bilaga 7 till Långtidsutredningen 2015, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  59. Statistics Norway. (2013). Mer regional spredning av arbeidsinnvandring. Retrieved September 26, 2016, from https://www.ssb.no/forskning/demografi-og-levekaar/befolkningsutvikling-flytting-og-dodelighet/mer-regional-spredning-av-arbeidsinnvandring
  60. Statistics Norway. (2015). Flyttinger, 2015. Retrieved September 26, 2016, from https://www.ssb.no/befolkning/statistikker/flytting
  61. Statistics Sweden (SCB). (2016a). Statistics Sweden. Retrieved January 21, 2016, from http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__OE__OE0115/KomEkUtj/?rxid=e6fafc7e-b416-455e-8356-ccf600df1577
  62. Statskontoret. (2014). Det kommunala utjämningssystemet—En beskrivning av systemet från 2014. Stockholm, p. 2.Google Scholar
  63. Stjernström, O., Karlsson, S., & Pettersson, P. (2013). Skogen och den kommunala planeringen [The forest and municipal comprehensive planning] PLAN, Nr. 1. 2013.Google Scholar
  64. Stjernström, O., & Lundmark, L. (2009). Environmental protection: An instrument for regional development? National ambitions versus local realities in the case of tourism. Scandinavian Journal of Tourism and Hospitality, 9(4), 387–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Storstad, O., & Rønning, L. (2014). Trender i norsk landbruk 2014. Med utviklingstrekk fra 2002 til 2014. Rapport 6. Trondheim: Norsk senter for bygdeforskning.Google Scholar
  66. Tillväxtanalys. (2012). Från aktiv lokaliseringspolitik till regional politik. Working Paper 2012:18.Google Scholar
  67. Törnqvist, G. (1963). Studier i industrilokalisering. Meddelanden från geografiska institutionen vid Stockholms universitet Nr. 153. Stockholm.Google Scholar
  68. Wallander, J. (1948). Flykten från Skogsbygden. Stockholm: Industriens Utredningsinstitut.Google Scholar
  69. Ward, N., & Brown, D. L. (2009). Placing the rural in regional development. Regional Studies, 43(10), 1237–1244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Westlund, H. (2004). Regionala effekter av högre utbildning, högskolor och universitet—En kunskapsöversikt. ITPS A2004:002, Östersund.Google Scholar
  71. Wibberley, G. (1981). Strong agricultures but weak rural economies—The undue emphasis on agriculture in European rural development. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 8(2–3), 155–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wiest, K. (2016). Migration and everyday discourses: Peripheralisation in rural Saxony-Anhalt from a gender perspective. Journal of Rural Studies, 43, 280–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Woods, M. (2005). Rural geography. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  74. Woods, M. (2011). Rural. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Carina H. Keskitalo
    • 1
  • Svante Karlsson
    • 1
  • Urban Lindgren
    • 1
  • Örjan Pettersson
    • 1
  • Linda Lundmark
    • 1
  • Bill Slee
    • 2
  • Mariann Villa
    • 3
  • Diana Feliciano
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Geography and Economic HistoryUmeå UniversityUmeåSweden
  2. 2.James Hutton InstituteAberdeenUK
  3. 3.NTNUTrondheimNorway
  4. 4.University of AberdeenAberdeenUK

Personalised recommendations