Typology of rural areas in the CEE new Member States /доклад на 87 семинаре ЕААЕ, Assessing Rural Development Policies of the CAP, Vienna, Austria, 21-23 April 2004
Опубликовано на портале: 29-03-2005
Despite some common features, rural areas cannot be considered homogeneous. They are much more heterogeneous than a generalised comparison with urban areas might indicate. Rather, they have specific characteristics which can differ within a country and even more across countries. This paper provides a typology of CEEC-10 NUTS-3 regions according to demographic and socio-economic criteria. The cluster analysis carried out revealed five different types of regions as the most adequate result: three are largely rural, one includes both rural, and especially industrialised urban areas, and one covers only large cities. To provide insight on the similarities of, and differences between rural areas in all of Europe, an additional cluster analysis on NUTS-2 level, including the EU-15 Member States (except for the UK) alongside the CEEC, was carried out. The result of the last cluster analysis reveals large differences in development between the regions of the European Union and the CEECs. Two of the nine clusters cover only CEE regions, another two only EU-15 regions. Of the remaining five, four are dominated by current EU regions and only one cluster is rather mixed. In order to design concrete policy measures adapted to the peculiarities of the specific regions, more detailed cluster analyses – on a more disaggregated regional level including additional variables – proved to be necessary. Given the restricted data availability, this requires focussing on single countries. As a first step, a typology of rural areas in Bulgaria is elaborated in this paper.
аграрная экономика кластерный анализ общая аграрная политика сельское хозяйство сельскохозяйственный регион типология Центральная и Восточная Европа
Экономические науки. 2010. Т. 64. № 3. С. 135-138.
Социология: теория, методы, маркетинг. 2004. No. 1. P. 182-183.
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics. 1998. Vol. 30. No. 1. P. 21-33.