IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/areint/322729.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical analysis of socio-economic determinants of development of rural territorial communities

Author

Listed:
  • Pylypenko, Viacheslav
  • Pylypenko, Nadiia
  • Khaminich, Svitlana
  • Sokol, Polina

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to study the influence of socio-economic factors on the assessment of existing problems in the development of rural territorial communities and the choice of directions for their solution from a community perspective. Methodology / approach. The study is based on a comparative analysis of the results of a survey of residents of the Yampil territorial community of the Sumy Region in March-April 2021 (carried out as part of the justification of strategy for the development of the Yampil territorial community for 2022–2027) and similar studies conducted in the Znob-Novgorod territorial community of the Sumy region in 2018. A sociological study was conducted to identify problematic issues in the life of communities and their vision of their further development. Questioning was determined as the method of collecting primary information, and a combined sample was used to select respondents, which took into account the socio-economic and demographic structure of the population. The total number of respondents was 649 people. Of these, 544 were interviewed by interviewers and 105 by google questionnaires over the internet. Results. The comparative empirical analysis of the influence of socio-economic and demographic factors in assessing the current situation, prioritizing development projects, faith in the possibility and willingness to take part in the implementation of socio-economic development projects of local communities showed the existence of certain trends – the most important for residents of rural areas are problems of an economic nature and the functioning of infrastructure This is what determines the choice of economic development projects as the highest priority. Among local residents, pessimistic expectations about the possibilities of implementing development tasks dominate, but at the same time, there is a high willingness to take an active part in their implementation. In both communities, residents consider natural resources and progressive government to be the main resource for development, and only a very small part of the population believes in the entrepreneurial spirit and activity of citizens. At the same time, there is a number of disagreements regarding the influence of individual factors (education, social status, income level) on the assessment of the current state and development opportunities, which requires additional research in this direction. Originality / scientific novelty. The study is based on a comparison of empirical data collected and processed by the authors personally, and the results of a similar study conducted in a neighboring community three years ago. The definition of key factors determining the socio-economic development of territorial communities was further developed. The study revealed a trend towards a decrease in the importance of economic projects for the development of communities and the growth of socio-cultural projects with an increase in the level of received income. It was also found that a higher level of education determines a higher level of optimism about the possibility of implementing the tasks of community development. Practical value / implications. The obtained results can be used by local governments in developing a strategy for the socio-economic development of territorial communities, as well as by government bodies in determining the directions for the implementation of regional policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Pylypenko, Viacheslav & Pylypenko, Nadiia & Khaminich, Svitlana & Sokol, Polina, 2022. "Empirical analysis of socio-economic determinants of development of rural territorial communities," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 8(2), June.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:areint:322729
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.322729
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/322729/files/12_Pylypenko_article.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.322729?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Florin-Constantin Mihai & Corneliu Iatu, 2020. "Sustainable Rural Development under Agenda 2030," Chapters, in: Maria Jose Bastante-Ceca & Jose Luis Fuentes-Bargues & Levente Hufnagel & Florin-Constantin Mihai & (ed.), Sustainability Assessment at the 21st century, IntechOpen.
    2. Stoustrup, Sune Wiingaard, 2021. "The re-coding of rural development rationality: tracing EU Governmentality and Europeanisation at the local level," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar.
    3. Lowder, Sarah K. & Skoet, Jakob & Raney, Terri, 2016. "The Number, Size, and Distribution of Farms, Smallholder Farms, and Family Farms Worldwide," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 16-29.
    4. Niedzielski, Eugeniusz, 2015. "Functions of rural areas and their development," Problems of Agricultural Economics / Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej 240755, Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics - National Research Institute (IAFE-NRI).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Patil, Vikram & Ghosh, Ranjan & Kathuria, Vinish & Farrell, Katharine N., 2020. "Money, Land or self-employment? Understanding preference heterogeneity in landowners’ choices for compensation under land acquisition in India," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Luis Bauluz & Yajna Govind & Filip Novokmet, 2020. "Global Land Inequality," PSE Working Papers halshs-03022318, HAL.
    3. Islam, Md. Mofakkarul & Sarker, Md. Asaduzzaman & Al Mamun, Md. Abdullah & Mamun-ur-Rashid, Md. & Roy, Debashis, 2021. "Stepping Up versus Stepping Out: On the outcomes and drivers of two alternative climate change adaptation strategies of smallholders," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    4. Livia Marchetti & Valentina Cattivelli & Claudia Cocozza & Fabio Salbitano & Marco Marchetti, 2020. "Beyond Sustainability in Food Systems: Perspectives from Agroecology and Social Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-24, September.
    5. Anne Jerneck, 2018. "What about Gender in Climate Change? Twelve Feminist Lessons from Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, February.
    6. SIngh Verma, Juhee & Sharma, Pritee, 2019. "Potential of Organic Farming to Mitigate Climate Change and Increase Small Farmers’ Welfare," MPRA Paper 99994, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Hurley, Mason, 2016. "Re-examining Changes in Farm Size Distributions Worldwide Using a Modified Generalized Method of Moments Approach," Master's Theses and Plan B Papers 249287, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    8. Yuta J. Masuda & Jonathan R.B. Fisher & Wei Zhang & Carolina Castilla & Timothy M. Boucher & Genowefa Blundo‐Canto, 2020. "A respondent‐driven method for mapping small agricultural plots using tablets and high resolution imagery," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(5), pages 727-748, July.
    9. Koolwal, Gayatri B., 2021. "Improving the measurement of rural women's employment: Global momentum and survey priorities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    10. Adriana Gómez-Cabrera & Amalia Sanz-Benlloch & Laura Montalban-Domingo & Jose Luis Ponz-Tienda & Eugenio Pellicer, 2020. "Identification of Factors Affecting the Performance of Rural Road Projects in Colombia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-18, September.
    11. Yuewen Huo & Songlin Ye & Zhou Wu & Fusuo Zhang & Guohua Mi, 2022. "Barriers to the Development of Agricultural Mechanization in the North and Northeast China Plains: A Farmer Survey," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-14, February.
    12. Dang, Hai-Anh & Carletto, Calogero, 2022. "Recall Bias Revisited: Measure Farm Labor Using Mixed-Mode Surveys and Multiple Imputation," IZA Discussion Papers 14997, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Ilia Alomía Herrera & Rose Paque & Michiel Maertens & Veerle Vanacker, 2022. "History of Land Cover Change on Santa Cruz Island, Galapagos," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-24, July.
    14. Zhiqi Zheng & Hongbo Zhao & Zhengdao Liu & Jin He & Wenzheng Liu, 2021. "Research Progress and Development of Mechanized Potato Planters: A Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-27, June.
    15. Chang, Hung-Hao & Mishra, Ashok K. & Lee, Tzong-Haw, 2019. "A supply-side analysis of agritourism: Evidence from farm-level agriculture census data in Taiwan," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(3), July.
    16. Mieczysław Adamowicz, 2021. "The Potential for Innovative and Smart Rural Development in the Peripheral Regions of Eastern Poland," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-28, February.
    17. Peipei Yang & Wenxu Dong & Marius Heinen & Wei Qin & Oene Oenema, 2022. "Soil Compaction Prevention, Amelioration and Alleviation Measures Are Effective in Mechanized and Smallholder Agriculture: A Meta-Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, April.
    18. Regan, Courtney M. & Connor, Jeffery D. & Summers, David M. & Settre, Claire & O’Connor, Patrick J. & Cavagnaro, Timothy R., 2020. "The influence of crediting and permanence periods on Australian forest-based carbon offset supply," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    19. Ruth Hill & Carolina Mejia-Mantilla & Kathryn Vasilaky, 2021. "Is the Price Right? Returns to Input Adoption in Uganda," Working Papers 2105, California Polytechnic State University, Department of Economics.
    20. T. S. Amjath-Babu & Pramod K. Aggarwal & Sonja Vermeulen, 2019. "Climate action for food security in South Asia? Analyzing the role of agriculture in nationally determined contributions to the Paris agreement," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 283-298, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Community/Rural/Urban Development;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:areint:322729. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://are-journal.com/are .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.