Rethinking the European countryside—can we learn from the South?

A new paradigm of multi-dimensional rural development has emerged which advocates a broader conception of the rurality where the rural is no longer the monopoly of the farmer. This new, broader paradigm needs to be reflected in the methodology of social scientific research, both generic and applied....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of rural studies 2006-07, Vol.22 (3), p.278-289
Main Authors: Korf, Benedikt, Oughton, Elizabeth
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Agricultural Occupations
Comparative Analysis
Countryside
Development studies
Europe
Farmers
Foreign Countries
Methodology
Occupations
Research Methodology
research methods
Rural areas
Rural Development
Rurality
Social Science Research
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:A new paradigm of multi-dimensional rural development has emerged which advocates a broader conception of the rurality where the rural is no longer the monopoly of the farmer. This new, broader paradigm needs to be reflected in the methodology of social scientific research, both generic and applied. In this paper we are primarily concerned with transfer of research methodologies utilised in development studies in the South to explore their usefulness for rethinking the European countryside. Such a transfer of methodology may be helpful, because integrated rural development can build on a long legacy in the South, while it has only recently been advocated in the EU context. The paper reflects upon the application of two such analytical concepts originating from development studies, which we have applied for research on the rural geographies in the European countryside, namely Sen's livelihood capabilities approach and Chambers’ concept of participatory rural appraisal (PRA). Having the sustainable livelihoods approach as overall framework, both methodologies are qualitative in nature and address people's survival strategies and livelihood practices with a focus on micro-level analysis at individual, household (Sen) and community level (PRA), while reflecting their embeddedness in wider social, political and economic structures. Our comparative studies suggest that the prospects for bottom-up development, as orchestrated by PRA or similar approaches, is constrained by structural factors, which define the boundaries for local development. The capabilities approach is useful to detect the capabilities to act and be within which bottom-up approaches may take their—though limited—role in rural development.
ISSN:0743-0167
1873-1392
DOI:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.09.005