Rethinking the European countryside - can we learn from the South?
Rethinking the European countryside - can we learn from the South?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.09.005
复制
发表时间：
2006-07-01
影响因子：
5.1
通讯作者：
Oughton, Elizabeth
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Korf, Benedikt;Oughton, Elizabeth
多维乡村发展的新范式已经出现，它倡导更广泛的乡村概念，使乡村不再是农民的垄断。这种新的、更广泛的范式需要反映在社会科学研究的方法论中，无论是通用的还是应用的。在本文中，我们主要关注南方发展研究中使用的研究方法的转移，以探索它们对于重新思考欧洲乡村的有用性。这种方法的转移可能会有所帮助，因为农村综合发展可以建立在南方的长期遗产的基础上，而它最近才在欧盟背景下得到倡导。本文反思了源自发展研究的两个分析概念的应用，我们已将其应用于欧洲农村的农村地理学研究，即森的生计能力方法和钱伯斯的参与式农村评估（PRA）概念。以可持续生计方法作为总体框架，这两种方法本质上都是定性的，关注人们的生存策略和生计实践，重点关注个人、家庭（Sen）和社区（PRA）层面的微观层面分析，同时反映其对更广泛的社会、政治和经济结构的嵌入。我们的比较研究表明，通过 PRA 或类似方法精心策划的自下而上的发展前景受到结构性因素的限制，结构性因素界定了当地发展的边界。能力方法对于检测行动能力和自下而上方法在农村发展中可能发挥其有限作用的能力很有用。 (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. 保留所有权利。
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. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.