Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

European Countryside

The Journal of Mendel University in Brno

4 Issues per year


CiteScore 2016: 0.69

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.190
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.896

Open Access
Online
ISSN
1803-8417
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 6, Issue 4 (Dec 2014)

Issues

Beyond Post-Productivism: From Rural Policy Discourse To Rural Diversity

Åsa Almstedt / Patrick Brouder / Svante Karlsson / Linda Lundmark
Published Online: 2014-12-30 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/euco-2014-0016

Abstract

There has been a strong discourse in public policy aimed at transforming rural places from venues of primary production into truly diverse socioeconomic landscapes. Yet conceptualisations of the rural as envisioned in the policy and politics of the ‘new economy’ often prove to be elusive on the ground. However, post-productive activity in rural areas has become a major focus for rural studies scholars. This paper investigates the ideas of post-productivism in the existing literature, and argues for a holistic understanding of post-productivism as an idea and political ambition rather than an imperative and irreversible change of rural economic activity. The purpose of the study is to make clear the division between post-productivism and the related concepts of post-production and post-productive activities in order to better understand processes of rural change in relation to different geographical contexts. It is argued that post-productivism as a concept stands apart from de facto post-production and alternative concepts such as multifunctionality and should be regarded as part of broader regional development discourses. The paper outlines several important fields in which post-productivism is a necessary component for rural transformation and development. While it is not always easily captured in indicators or empirical studies in rural locations, postproductivism exists at the level of discourse and planning and thus has real effects on the ground. The paper concludes by offering suggestions on how to apply the concepts of post-productivism, post-production and multifunctionality in future studies.

Abstrakt

De senaste årens landsbygdspolitik kännetecknas av en stark diskurs för att omvandla platser från dominerande primärproduktion till skiftande socioekonomiska aktiviteter där inte minst turism förväntas inta en stark ställning. Omvandlingsambitionen framträder särskilt starkt i styrdokument och projektverksamhet, samtidigt som tydliga och omfattande reella avtryck ofta lyser med sin frånvaro. Däremot har post-produktiva verksamheter på landsbygden blivit

Keywords: change; multifunctionality; policy; post-productivism; production; rural

References

  • [1] Argent, N. (2002). From pillar to post? In search of the post-productivist countryside in Australia. Australian Geographer, 33(1), 97-114. DOI: 10.1080/00049180220125033.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [2] Bergstrom, J. C. (2001). Postproductivism and rural land values. Faculty series. Athens, GA: University of Georgia.Google Scholar

  • [3] Bjørkhaug, H. & Richards, C. A. (2008). Multifunctional agriculture in policy and practice? A comparative analysis of Norway and Australia. Journal of Rural Studies, 24(1), 98-111. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.06.003.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [4] Brouder, P. (2012). Creative outposts: Tourism’s place in rural innovation. Tourism Planning & Development, 9(4), 383-396. DOI: 10.1080/21568316.2012.726254.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [5] Brouder, P. (2013). Embedding Arctic tourism innovation in ‘creative outposts’. In Lemelin, R. H., Maher, P. & Liggett, D. (eds.) From talk to action: How tourism is changing the Polar regions (pp. 183-198). Thunder Bay, ON: Centre for Northern Studies Press.Google Scholar

  • [6] Brouder, P. & Eriksson, R. (2013). Staying power: What influences micro-firm survival in tourism? Tourism Geographies, 15(1), 124-143. DOI: 10.1080/14616688.2011.647326.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [7] Burton, R. J. F. & Wilson, G. A. (2006). Injecting social psychology theory into conceptualisations of agricultural agency: Towards a post-productivist farmer self-identity? Journal of Rural Studies, 22(1), 95-115. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.07.004.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [8] 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(1), 72-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.02.002.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [9] Evans, N., Morris, C. & Winter, M. (2002). Conceptualizing agriculture: Acritique of postproductivism as the new orthodoxy. Progress in Human Geography, 26(3), 313-332. DOI: 10.1191/0309132502ph372ra.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [10] Hedlund, M. (2014). Mapping the socio-economic landscape of rural Sweden: Towards a typology of rural areas. Regional Studies. DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2014.924618.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [11] Holmes. J. (2002). Diversity and change in Australia’s rangelands: A postproductivist transition with a difference? Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 27(3), 362-384. DOI: 10.1111/1475-5661.00059.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [12] Holmes, J. (2006). Impulses towards a multifunctional transition in rural Australia: Gaps in the research agenda. Journal of Rural Studies, 22(2), 142-160. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.08.006.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [13] Holmes, J. (2008). Impulses towards a multifunctional transition in rural Australia: Interpreting regional dynamics in landscapes, lifestyles and livelihoods. Landscape Research, 33(2), 211-223. DOI: 10.1080/01426390801912089.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [14] Hoogendoorn, G. (2010). Second homes and local economic impacts in the South African post-productivist countryside. (Doctoral dissertation). Faculty of Humanities, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa.Google Scholar

  • [15] Hoogendoorn, G. & Visser, G. (2011). Tourism, second homes and an emerging South African post-productivist countryside. Tourism Review International, 15(1-2), 183-197. DOI: 10.3727/154427211X13139345020651.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [16] Ilbery, B. & Kneafsey, M. (1997). Regional images and the promotion of quality products and services in the lagging regions of the European Union. Paper presented to the Third Anglo-French Rural Geography Symposium, Université de Nantes, 11-14 September.Google Scholar

  • [17] Ilbery, B. & Bowler, I. (1998). From agricultural productivism to post-productivism. In Ilbery, B. (ed.). The geography of rural change (pp. 57-84). Harlow, UK: Longman.Google Scholar

  • [18] Jack, L. (2007). Accounting, post-productivism and corporate power in UK food and agriculture.Google Scholar

  • [19] Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 18(8), 905-931. DOI: 10.1016/j.cpa.2006.04.004.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [20] Jansson, U. & Wästfelt, A. (2010). Rural landscape changes from a long-term perspective: Farming, policy, economy and society from 1750 to today. In Ymer 2010, Placing human geography. Sweden through time and space (pp. 113-141). Stockholm: Svenska Sällskapet för Antropologi och Geografi.Google Scholar

  • [21] Kapferer, J. L. (1990). Rural myths and urban ideologies. Journal of Sociology, 26(1), 87-106. DOI: 10.1177/144078339002600105.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [22] Keskitalo, C. E. & Lundmark, L. (2010). The controversy over protected areas and forestsector employment in Norrbotten, Sweden: Forest stakeholder perceptions and statistics. Society & Natural Resources, 23(2), 146-164. DOI: 10.1080/08941920802688543.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [23] Kristensen, L. (2001). Agricultural change in Denmark between 1982 and 1989: The appearance of post-productivist farming? Geografisk Tidsskrift, 101(1), 77-86. DOI:10.1080/00167223.2001.10649452.Google Scholar

  • [24] Lane, B. (2009). Rural tourism: An overview. In Jamal, T. & Robinson, M. (eds.), Handbook of Tourism Studies (pp. 354-370). London, UK: SAGE.Google Scholar

  • [25] Lundmark, L. (2006). Restructuring and employment change in sparsely populated areas: Examples from northern Sweden and Finland. (Doctoral dissertation). Department of Social and Economic Geography, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.Google Scholar

  • [26] Lundmark, L. (2010). Mobilising the rural: Post-productivism and the new economy. Proposal for Formas grant Research leaders of the future in the area rural development. Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.Google Scholar

  • [27] Lundmark, L. & Stjernström, O. (2009). Environmental protection: An instrument for regional development? National ambitions versus local realities in the case of tourism. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 9(4), 387-405. DOI: 10.1080/15022250903273780.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [28] Macken-Walsch, Á. (2009). Barriers to change: A sociological study of rural development in Ireland. Galway, Ireland: Teagasc Rural Economy Research Centre. Accessed from http://www.teagasc.ie/research/reports/ruraldevelopment/5574/eopr-5574.pdf [2014-09-05].Google Scholar

  • [29] Markey, S., Halseth, G. & Manson, D. (2008). Challenging the inevitability of rural decline: Advancing the policy of place in northern British Columbia. Journal of Rural Studies, 24(4), 409-421. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2008.03.012.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [30] Martin, R. (1994). Economic theory and human geography. In Gregory, D., Martin, R. & Smith, G. (eds.), Human geography. Society, space and social science (pp. 21-53). London, UK: Macmillan Press. Google Scholar

  • [31] Mather, A. S., Hill, G. & Nijnik, M. (2006). Post-productivism and rural land use: Cul de sac or challenge for theorization? Journal of Rural Studies, 22(4), 441-455. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2006.01.004.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [32] McCarthy, J. (2005). Rural geography: Multifunctional rural geographies - reactionary or radical? Progress in Human Geography, 29(6), 773-782. DOI: 10.1191/0309132505ph584pr.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [33] Müller, D. K. (2011) Second homes in Sweden: Between common heritage and exclusive commodity. In Placing Human Geography in Sweden Through Time and Space (pp. 185-207). Stockholm, Sweden: Svenska Sällskapet för Antropologi och Geografi.Google Scholar

  • [34] Müller, D. K. & Brouder, P. (2014). Dynamic development or destined to decline? The case of Arctic tourism businesses and local labour markets in Jokkmokk, Sweden. In Viken, A., & Granås, B. (eds.) Tourism destination development: Turns and tactics (pp. 227-244). Farnham, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar

  • [35] Müller, D. K. & Ulrich, P. (2007). Tourism development and the rural labour market in Sweden, 1960-1999. In Müller, D. K. & Jansson, B. (eds.), Tourism in peripheries. Perspectives from the far north and south (pp. 85-105). Wallingford, UK: CABI.Google Scholar

  • [36] OECD (2006). The new rural paradigm: Policies and governance. Paris: OECD publications.Google Scholar

  • [37] Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2010). Economic geographers and the limelight: The reaction to the World Development Report 2009. Economic Geography, 86(4), 361-370. DOI: 10.1111/j.1944-8287.2010.01094.x.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [38] Smith, M. D. & Krannich, R. S. (2000). “Culture clash” revisited: Newcomer and longer-term residents’ attitudes toward land use, development, and environmental issues in rural communities in the Rocky Mountain West. Rural Sociology, 65(3), 396-421. DOI: 10.1111/j.1549-0831.2000.tb00036.x.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [39] Svensson, E. (2009). Consuming nature-producing heritage: Aspects on conservation, economical growth and community participation in a forested, sparsely populated area in Sweden. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 15(6), 540-559. DOI: 10.1080/13527250903210837.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [40] van der Ploeg, J. D., Renting, H., Brunori, G., Knickel, K., Mannion, J., Marsden, T., de Roest, K., Sevilla-Guzmán, E. & Ventura, F. (2000). Rural development: From practices and policies towards theory. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(4), 391-408. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9523.00156.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [41] Vepsäläinen, M. & Pitkänen, K. (2010). Second home countryside. Representations of the rural in Finnish popular discourses. Journal of Rural Studies, 26(2), 194-204. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2009.07.002.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [42] Wilson, G. A. (2001). From productivism to post-productivism ... and back again? Exploring the (un)changed natural and mental landscapes of European agriculture. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 26(1), 77-102. DOI: 10.1111/1475-5661.00007.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [43] Wilson, G. A. (2007). Multifunctional agriculture: A transition theory perspective. Wallingford, UK: CABI International.Google Scholar

  • [44] Wilson, G. A. & Rigg, J. (2003). ‘Post-productivist’ agricultural regimes and the South: Discordant concepts? Progress in Human Geography, 27(6), 681-707. DOI: 10.1191/0309132503ph450oa.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [45] Woods, M. (2011). Rural. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar

About the article

Received: 2014-03-14

Accepted: 2014-09-26

Published Online: 2014-12-30

Published in Print: 2014-12-01


Citation Information: European Countryside, ISSN (Online) 1803-8417, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/euco-2014-0016.

Export Citation

© by Åsa Almsted. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[3]
Patrick Brouder, Svante Karlsson, and Linda Lundmark
European Countryside, 2015, Volume 7, Number 3

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in