250

6COTT. P. (1957): The agricultureal regions of Tasmania: a statistical definition; &on. Geogr. 33,169-l 21.

SCOTT, P. (1961): Farming-type regions of Tasmania; N8w .?eeland 080~. 17,165-l 76.

SHANTZ, H.L. (19461943): Agricultural regions of Africa; &on. Geog: 17,147; 2, 122-I 61; 4,341~369; 16, 217-249; 4,353-379; 19,229-246; 2677-169; 3,217-269.

SIMPSON, ES. ed., (1965): AgricultureI Geography. IGU Symposium Liverpool Dept. of Geography. Univ. of Liverpool Resserch Papers 3.

SBMME, A. (1951): Types and regions of Norwegian agriculture. In Comp@s rendus du XVI Congrks lnternetionel & G&k@aphie. Lisbonne 1949. Travaux de la section IV, 485-494.

S@MME, A. (1954): Jordburkets geogafi i Norp (Geography of Norwegian agriculture). Bergen.

SPENCER, J.E. and N.R. STEWART (1973): The Nature of agricultural systems; Ann. Ass. Am. Geogr. 63,529-544.

STOLA, W. (I 970): Pr& typologii rolnictwe Ponidzia (An attempt at an agricultural typology of Ponidzie, Central Poland). Warszawa, lnstytut Geografii PAN, Prace Geograf iczna No 81.

STUDENSKY, G. (1927): Die Grundideen und Methoden der landwirtschaftlichen Geographie; ~8ltwirtsch8ftlicher Archiv 26,179-l 97.

TAYLOR, G. (1930): Agricultural regions of Australia; &on. Geogr. 6, 199-I 34; 3,213-242.

VAN VALKENBURG, S. (1931-1936): Agricultural regions of Asia; Econ. G8os 7,217-237; 6,199133; 9, l-l 6; 2, 104133; 10.1434; 11.227-246; 4.325-337; 12,2744; 3.231-249.

VANZETTI, C. Ed., (1972). Agricultunrl Typologyend Land Udlilation. Proceadings of the Fourth Meeting of the Commission on Agricultural Typology. Verona, Center of Agricultural Geography.

WAIBEL, L (1933). Probl8ms d8r Landwirercheftsgeogmphie. Flirt, Breslau.

WEAVER J.C. (1954). Crop combination regions in the Middle East. G8Ogr. Rev. 44,175-266.

WHITTLESEY, D. (1936). Major agricultural regions of the Earth. Ann. Ass. Am. Geog. 26,194240.

Rural Research for Rural Development

G. ENYEDI, Budapest*

1. The Importance of Rural Researches

Rural research is rather neglected by geographers and regional economists. Most of their attention is attracted by urban- ization processes and the development of urban agglomer- ations. Rural areas mainly appear in a passive way in regional

l Prof. Dr. Gvbgv ENYEDI. President, IGU Working Group for l&ii Planning and Development, PF. 64, 1366 Budepast, Hungary.

GeoforumlVolume 7INumber 311976

plans and are on the decline, subordinated to the developing towns. Regional plans are based on the development of the urban system.

Undoubtedly, the most dynamic functions of modern economies are linked with urban agglomerations, but this does not mean that the importance of rural areas ceases. The following facts must be remembered: The overwhelming majority of the earth’s inhabited lands

consist of rural areas. That is where the larger proportion of mankind lives and the foodstuffs for the whole human race ara produced.

Foodstuffs and raw materials produced in rural areas are a primary condition of the existence of towns.

Rural areas are not simply dependent of towns; there is a close interrelationship between them. The physical, demographic and other resources of rural areas them- selves exercise a considerable influence on their centrally located town.

The urban growth models of past decades can hardly be projected into the future. North Americah and West Europsbn urban development has characteristic historical roots that do not exist elsewhere. Urban growth in the most developed countries fed on the rural areas of quite rt?mote developing countries and on their prominent role in world trade. As urban growth reaches its second wave, it can only rely on dornaetic resources in the mOd8rately or poorly developed countries. A slowdown in urban growth may be reckoned with also in the most advanced economies.

Economic level, living conditions and the population’s income are generally lower in rural areas than in towns. Poverty and backwardness, however, are not necessarily regular criteria of such areas but rather a political consequence: political power is traditionally urban. Nor can this ba regarded as an irrefutable rule in the long run.

One of the sources of economic underdevelopment in rural areas is the subordination and defencelessness of primary producing regions to the centres of processing industry and, in general, of consumption. This state of affairs prevails both within the single countries and on world scale. The production of some raw materials is known to have assumed radically different trends recently.

It followa from the above that rural areas are important elements of regional economic development and under- standing them is as important es the investigation of urban agglomerations.

To understand this, one must think of economic develop- ment as a phenomenon having a whole series of equilibrium conditions. These include the creation of an equilibrium between villages and towns. Should the desirable equilibrium be upset,excess expenditure will be incurred, the resources will not be fully utilized and economic growth will consequently be retarded. Such disturbances may also give rise to strained political relations.

Equilibrium between villeges and towns may be interpreted in a variety of ways. It is certainly not understood to mean a general equality, for urban population and growth and territorial extension are expected to increase also in the future. One should not, therefore, try to prevent rural-to- urban migration or to protect rural lands from urban

.l Geoforum/Volumr 7INumher 3/1976

lpmwl at any price. It should, on the other hand, he an Objective to level out urhen and rum1 living condltionr and to create equality In tha polltical sense. We shoukl abo set ourselves the task of cmeting the conditions under which migmtlon from vilbges will brmothmted hy the rum1 population’s improving qualifications and the wider choice of rmploymant awribbb In tonrns and not by unemploy- ment or heckrnerd IMng conditions. Between villages and towns such dbtrlhution of population and bnd use b desired as-under rnorehelanced living conditions- ensures the operation of urbn functions and does not leave rum1 resources unutilized either.

Rural planning must he so acccrnplbhed as to king shout this equilibrium. obviously, it will only he capabb of doing this if It Is harmonized with urhen pbnning. Rural end urhen pbnning am s&systems of the comprehensive hwtionalj pbnning.

Ruml wphicel researches may provide a scientific heckground fcr rum1 planning. Thb is only one of the possible tasks of rum1 geography hut, in our opinion, the most important one.

2. Objectives and Paths of Rural Geographical

Rssaarch

Basic geographical research conducted for rural planning may incorporate the following steps: (a) delimifatlon of rural areas and lnvestlgetion or rural

functions; fbj explcratlon of rum1 resources; (cj typology for rural areas; (dj elahoretion of develcpment concepts for various types

of ruml areas The individual stq~ may In themselves mpresent separate scbntlfic projects or form part of e unified planning resaarch process.

Those mseerch tasks Ibted under (a) end (bj are alrmdy traditional in geography and have heen dealt with in a vest number of mbvant specialized publbetionr But integrated

(non-sactomlj rural research, devoted to develcpment, hes heen introduced as a novel Idea in this kind of investigation. (a) For the krlimimtion ofrumlamas and the intigstlon of rural functions the following inltial hypotheses were aaUmed: Rural areas are defined to he the utilized lands lying outside

urbsn agglomemtiom. They am sepamted from urban egglomemtions hy transitional zones. Rural areas am chamcterized by the presence of special rural functions whkhmpresent extenshre lend use end hy the bck of the central pbce functions.

The definition of villages and towns Is therefom hased on functions, end in accordance with this lnterpmtatlon the differencse between vllleges and towns will survive even after the preseneday technicel and social differences have dlwred end the varying Iwel of llvlng standards have imen equalized.

Rum1 functions are c&fined to he all those found In rural erees. 6orne of there am specbl rural functions: agrkulture. forestry, rater storage and neture ccnserve-

f

tion areas. Others may he found both In vilbges and towns hut in different proportions:lndustry, services, resldentbl function, tourbm and transport.

In our view it ls Important to stmss the multifunctional cherecter of rum1 emas. To express rum1 functions, bnd use structure and the rural

population’s occupational structum may, ahove all, he used.

(bj Exphrmtion of rum! mmruua. Rum1 resources may he divided into three parts: (1 j natuml raourcee, (2) demo- 9aphk resources, and (3) other economk and sock1 resources Bocation of an area relative to urhen cantra or to forelgn markets; standard of lnfmstructum, etc.)

Exploration of resourcas masns not only a pure description hut also an economic evaluation. The raacurces influence the selection of rural functions to he developed. An expedient utilizatlcn of natural resources lncludss protective elements, too. kj The typology of rum1 emas Is besad on the structure and dynamism of rural functions. To express the functions and their dynamism, a brge number of varbbbs mey he applbd. Depending on the bvel of econcmk development, the sccpe of pcsslhle varbbbs IS qulte varbd in the different mgions of the earth. It b not at all certain that a rum1 typological criterion system epplicabb for the whole world ten he wcrked out; thb will he decided by further research. It is necessary to express the alterb of functions In a quantifbd way, and It Is vary impormnt to describe each rum1 type in the form of a dynamic model in order to enhance its applicahility.in pbnnlng. This presuppcsas e knowbdge of the regular processas of ruml wansfcrmation (to which we shall revert later). (dj An ebhomtion of &vdopment comrapts for the nriou types of rural amw pwvidm the dimct hesis for rural pbnnlng. Develcprnent concepts must, first of all, rely on an optimal dbtrihution of rural resources among dynamic rural functions in the interest of ensuring an effkient economk development end improving the popubtbn’s way of living. They must be so formubted as to concern the whole country and not only e small an8 or a narrow group of the population.

The development concepts must ccmprbe the main trends of rural transfcrmatlon. For this, attentlon must air0 he peld to the influence of urhen agglcmenltions. In order to make a cberr sweep of rural bcknmrdness and mise the standard of living in vllbges, one must, ahove all, develop the dynemk rural functions.

3. The Main Trends in Rural Tnnsformtion

Rum1 gmgmphicel msarches must explcm the trends of ruml transformation and the social end economk processes Oomnlng It Only with full knowbdge of theea procesees an cne predbt what course the transformation will mke, and thb knowbdge b abo a praroquidta of ruml planning.

Rum1 tranformation on a weld rab Is so significant that It has aroused many schobrs’ Interat The number of comprehenslve and systmwtic studbs aiming at outllnlng the mgional modeb of tmnsformetion Is very few. Borne

‘51

252 Geoforum/Volume 7INumber 3/1976

manifestations of the transformation-such as the expansion of rural functions, relative or absolute diminution of the role of agriculture, rural-to-u&n migration, etc.-are well known, particularly in the highly developed countries. An isolated investigation of singular phenomena, however, will often lead to erroneous or imperfact conclusions. It is a mistake, for example, to think of rural transformation as being solely the consequence of urbanization (and to under- rate the importance of the development of rural functions); to designate the simple technical modernization of villages as urbanization, end so forth. It is also a mistake to anticipate that the rural trensformetion models of the most advanced countries will also be applicable in the moderately or poorly developed countries. There are several possible ways for rural transformation to take place, even in countries with identical level of economic development.

At present no adequately systematized picture is available on the rural transformation which is in progress throughout the world. This transformation forms part of social and economic changes and is therefore subject to many external influences, primarily to urban development. Important external influences may be the regional development, rural or agrarian policies of a country, tiich may withdraw, or direct, capital into rural areas, and may accelerate or retard rural-to-urban migration. Also important external factors are the state of development of an area’s industry, the labour attraction and the sprawling or concentrated location of that industry, etc. Of the internal factors of the transformation, the alteration of rural functions, e.g. the vertical integration of agriculture, is to be mentioned first. Other internal factors are the rural settlement system, the social and occupational structure of rural population, the population’s way of living and traditions, the changing value of rural natural resources, etc.

(a) In the highly developed indusmk+l countries rural trans- formation is characterized by a decrease in rural population, by the rapid regession of agrarian population and by the non-agricultural functions becoming prevalent in employing the population. Agriculture generally maintalns its leading role in rural land use. Rural and urban technical infrastructure1 levels become equalized, and this is why urbanists often speak of a general urbanization in the areas where different degrees of the process of urbanization may be observed and villages in the strict sense no longer exist /as I have already mentioned, I cb not accept this view/. The process outlined attained varying degrees of advancement else withtn the highly developed industrial countries but, apart from this, shows important regional characteristics, too.

In North Anwrice (and in other highly developed overseas countries which have gone through a similar development) rural spatial organization emerged later than urban spetiel organization The first generation of the American urban system adapted itself to transport, i.e. to the coast line and river network, and was supported by long distance trade and transport. A great majority of the United States’ rural ereas became populated only from the middle of the last century and were capable of establishing comparatively small urban centres only (mainly in the Mid-West). These areas were thinly populated already at the outset, and rural settlements occurred almost always fragmen- tarily. An extraordinary technical development in American agriculture during the past decades has decreased the agrarian population to a minimum (4% of the earnersj but, owing to the

peculiarities of the settlement system (scattered farmsteads) and the vast distances, nonagricultural functions could be added to rural space only in the vicinity of urban agglomerations. A large part of American rural areas therefore remained agri- cultural lands but were almost completely depopulated. The structure of the American urban system and the population’s regional structure ere tremendously polarized and hardly likely to change. Large city agglomerations may be territori- ally loosened but rural depopulation cannot be reversed.

In Europe most of the cities emerged from the densely populated rural areas with intensive lend use, preserving their relationship with the rural hinterland. Rural depopulation was wide-spread also in Europe but it assumed grave proportions only in a few isolated, mostly mountainous districts. Greater mobility made it possible for the population to maintain their rural residence even in the case of getting work in a town. A significant pert of the agrarian population became commuters, and a part of city-dwellers moved out to near-by rural areas. Urban population assumed the habit of periodically invading rural areas (tourism, country cottages). Although villages and towns in Europe still have conspicuously differing infra- structural standards, the population relations between the two kinds of settlement are quite intensive. Most of the rural areas in this thickly populated continent patterned with a dense urban system have become part of regions intensively attracted to urban agglomerations. This process exhibits various degrees of advancement, the traditional country life having remained most intact in Southern Europe.

In Western Europe one of the reasons for rural depopulation was that agriculture was temporarily driven into the background (mostly during the inter-war period). With the exception of high quality animal products, Western Europe mostly relied on external sources of food supply. Since the Second World War, many attempts have been made to establish an autarchic food supply system within the continent (and such plans are still pressed), which served to strengthen the agrarian functions of rural areas. (This hgs not, of course, stopped the decrease in agrarian population.)

Rural development in the Europeen socialist countries shows many characteristic features. These do not, on the whole, originate from the fact thet industrial-urban development commenced much later in Eastern Europe than it did in the western part of the continent and thus the rural world had a chance to preserve several traditional features. It is essential to understand that the transformation trend itself differs from that experienced in Western European models. The principle factors of the differences are es follows:

faj The greater importance and differing social and economic organization of agriculture, the main rural function. Most of the socialist countries practise large-scale collective farming. Large agricultural enterprises often play the role of the integrator in vertical integration, linking a whole body of persons of non- agrarian occupation with agriculture. Collective farms represent the greatest economic power in villages, and are the chief organizing agents of country life. Their multi-faceted functions -e.g. agriculture, food processing, servicing+ney make all rural functions more dynamic. The rapid transformation of rural functions, therefore, play an important part in the moderniza- tion of Eastern European villages.

Geoforum/Voluma 7INumber 311976 253

fbj Rural settlement system in Eastern Europe is characterized by clustrred%ettlements; in the lowlands (i.e. in the most densely populated parts of rural areas) large rum1 settlements (numbering several thousand inhabitants) am found. Their size is well suited to the efficient adaptation of initial urban functions (which is not possible in the case of scattered settlement) and to the location of industry. Thus, rural settlements with partial urban functions may emerge, which- owing to the varied employment opportunities-can retain their population. Although in Eastern Europa considerable rural-to-urban migmtion has bean recorded, one cannot speak of rural depopulation.

(cl The relationship between villages and towns is also characteristic. Income differences are either slight or hew ceased. Territorial urban sprawl to the detriment of rural arws is of a smaller extent and the importance of suburbanization moderate. This can k explained bv the restrictions relating to landad property, the iarga-rcsls construction of housing estates which is in progress in towns, income Irwl and other masons.

In the d8vdoping countries, rural tmnsformation is a very complex process. The integml, hierarchic relationship of villages and towns is mostly lacking or imperfect in these lands. Their towns tend to fulfil functions of foreign trade or of politiwl power rather than provide urban services for a surrounding rural attmction area. Researchers, tharefore, prefer to distinguish peripheral and central areas in the regional development of these countrias. The relevant litemtum oftan mgards peripheral areas as being identical wfth ruml aras, whom traditional s&al and economic firms prevail, while it doscribes the central arws as towns which accomodate and mdiate technical and social innovations and am linked with world economy. Rural areas in developing countries are, howawr, by no means homogeneous not only because of agricultural property mlations and the extra- ordinarily wide variety of rural settlement and production procedums but alsobecause of the rural areas themselves containing parts of centml character undergoing modernization. Agricultuml innovations spread in (and possibly further mdiate from) these areas, transforming not only production but also the whole economic and social organization. Such

modernization breaks up the traditional structure of social organization, often entailing grave negative consequences, such as mass unemployment in villager, multitudes of migrants swooping down on cities (and becoming super- fluous there), and a crisis in tha production of traditional foodstuffs.

There dynamic amas of developing countries have baen formed partly bv external relations and partly by internal cbvalopmant. The influenca of external relations is of old standing; it bagan in the early period of colonization. More novel was the introduction of food and industrial crops to supply the homeland market. From tha point of view of the transformation of rural societv it represented a fundamental differenca that the new culturas and modern production proceduras ware introducrtd in uninhabited for vacated) areas, with the aid of settled labour (e.g. the plantations in Latin America) or bv imposing the industrial plants on native peasant farms (e.g. the Gulf of Guinaa countries). Bared on their origin, the dynamic rural areas may ba divided

into three groups: (a) plantations, fb)agriculture of colonists of Europaan origin, and (cl natiw paasant farms producing for export. It should be noted that the dynamic rural areas warn the first to represent modern economy in the third world foutrivalling both mining and industry) and it was often the export of their products that prepared the way to urbanization.

After 9sining independence, the dawloping countrias retained their relation with external markets; the colonizing country’s role in this respect continuad to be important but not nacessarily definitive. The separation of the araas under consideration from the country’s traditional rural zones is, in ganeral, coming to an end. Property relations have changed in many p1acar-a.g. as a result of nationlization or land reforms-and attempts hava baen made to alleviate the unilateral export orientation, helping to slowly integrate dynamic rural areas into tha expanding regional structure of the national economy.

Those dynamic rural areas which come into baing in the course of internal development also spread in the developing countries. Urban and industrial dewlopment involves in- creasing foodstuff mquirements but the individual rural areas themsalves are in need of gatting their population’s food supply from other regions. Intern/ dswbpment may exert an influence automatically, following a market rx~nsion, but systematic developmant, too, may often be @ied. In some cases rural dsvelopmant plans only aim at technical improve- ments, while in others they also set themselves the task of transforming the existing rural social organization. Commodity production growth and the expansion of spatial relations between villages and towns bring about social changes in each case (whether they are planned or not).

Nor is the zone characterized bv a traditional autarchic agriculture stationary or hornoganeous. This zone constitutes the larw part of rum1 areas and mploys the rnsjority of the population. Consequently it exercises a considerable influsnca on the development potentials and trends of dynamic areas. The influence of these areas is also evident; their mere existence was enough to uhbalance the centuries old- stagnating-equilibrium of autarchy. These tmditional rural areas may be dividad into three group: (1) fully self- sufficient regions, which am nawadeys mm enough and slowly disappaaring; (b) predominantly autarchic economy, with the pmsenca of market and monetary rystams; and (cl mingled self-sufficient and market economy.

4. Conclusions

The tasks of rural rasearch outlined comply with the inter- national research program to be accomplished within the framework of the IGU. The principle methodological tasks to be tackled am summarized balow:

-

-

methods of the determination of rumi functions (criteria, measurement possibilities);

determination of the proportions of rural functions;

measummrmt of the temporal changas in rural functions;

criteria and methods of rural spatial typology;

methods for the elaboration of development concepts (plan predictions, simulation modals, etc.)

254 Geoforum/Volurne 7/Number 311976

We should like to launch as large a number of case studies

as possible throughout the world, in countries having different

social systems and being at different levels of development,

in order to acquire methodological experiences through

factual research.

We are convinced that it is the exploration of the develop

ment potentials of the world’s rural areas that represents,

both on domestic and world scales, one of the major methods

applicable for solving the problems of provision and rBw

material supply, for easing the urbanization crisis and for

equalizing regional differences in the population’s living

conditions.

References

BADOUIN, R. (1971): &onom& Rum/e. Colin, Paris.

BONNAMOUR, J. (1971): Gdogmphie Rum/e. Masson, Paris.

BONTRON, J.C. N. MATHIEU, (19681: L’espace rural franmis. Definition et Bvolution B long terme. S.E.G.S.A., Paris.

CLOUT, H.D. (1972): Rural Geogm@hy. Pergamon Press,

Oxford.

CLARK, C., M.R. HASWELL (1964): The Economicof Subsistence Agriculture. McMillan, London.

ENYEDI, Gy. (1975): Rernerch Problems in Rural Geography fmimeo). IGU Working Group on Rural Planning and

Development, Budapest.

GEORGE, P. (1963): P&is de Gdographie Rurale, P.U.F.,

Paris.

GREEN, R.J. (1971): Country Planning. Manchester University

Press, Manchester.

KOSTROWICKI, J. (1966). Agricultural typology. Agricultural

regionalization. Agricultural development; Geogrephia Polonice. No 14. Warszawa.

ROSCISZEWSKI, M. (1974): Essai de typologie des espaces

ruraux dens le Tiers Monde en vue de leur modernisation;

Geogmphia Polonice, No 29, Warstawa. pp.427446

SHINTYAPIN, Yu., B. FRUMKIN (1975): Agrarno-

promushlenniy kompleks v europeiskyh stranach SEV;

Voprosy Ekonomiky, No 2, pp.Bl-91.

WIBBERLEY, G.P. (1959): Agricultureend Urban Growth: A $tudv of the Competion for Rural Land. Michael Joseph,

London.

Geographical Terminology concerning Rural Landscape (Report on the progress of the International Working Group for the Terminology of the Agricultural Landscape)

Cay LI ENAU, Miinster’

The International Working Group for the Terminology of the

Prof. Dr. Cay LIENAU, Inst. of Geogr. sind Underkunda, Robert Koch-Str. 26, D-4466 Miinster, Germany (WI

Agricultural Landscape, in existence since 1964 and aided by

the Stiftung VolkswaQnwerk with Prof. H. UHLIG/Germany (W)

acting as chairman, officially terminated most of its work in

1974. This is a brief report on the problems coped with and the

results achieved.

Geography, like any other science, has a technical language of

its own. The terminology employed in cultural geography, in

particular draws heavily from the vernacular and is thus closely

related with it. There is a great number of regional phenomena

which has been described by geographers in terms varying from

one region to another. This is further complicated by differences

in the meaning of words according to place and time. From this

the necessity arises to sort out and clarify terms and bring them

into an univowl terminologiwl frame.

This undertaking has primarily aimed at assembling of current

terms and definitions in English, German and French; soon,

however, the efforts have focused on the establishing of so-called

terminologiwl frames. It was thought that only through these

frames real improving of communication can be achieved

between scientists of different languages. Traditional geographiwl

terms are often hard to translate correctly, in many instances

the same term comprising more meaning in one language than

in the other (cf. the different scope of meaning in German

“Weiler” and English “hamlet”).

A terminologiwl frame in the sense used here, is made up of

clearly stated characteristics which are (were1 important for the

comprehension of, and discrimination between, established

geographical objects, processes, etc. The various characteristics

are not simply “listed”, but are compared and contrasted with

one another so that the whole of the frame-material is structured

at the same time. The characteristics relevant for the frame are

gained by analysing those terms and objects that are (were) in

current use in geographical writing.

Priority is given to those characteristics that crop up again and

again in many different existing terms.

The characteristics which are finally yielded represent, on the

whole, simply-structured concepts. They are as univowl in

meaning as they can be. To put them into a system, which

proves to be indispensable various existing relationships are used

between one characteristic and the other. There are hierarchical

systems (i.e. logical subdivisions of concepts or terms) and others

basedan similarity, Both may be combined in structuring a

terminologiwl frame.

There exist no strictly objective criteria for the selection of

characteristics, consequently the terminologiwl frames may be

subjective in character as they are dependent on the theoretical

approach of therespective scientist. In spite of these shortcomings

the terminologiwl frames offer a lot in the way of

a.

b.

C.

d.

e.

univowl identifying of a given geographical object in different

languages,

ordering and defining the wide selection of existing terms and

concepts (thus reducing the number of misunderstandings

and contradictions),

showing gaps or blind spots in the existing terminology,

making explicit relationships between concepts and terms,

thus yielding structured knowledge,

contributing towards a homogeneous technical language,