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. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    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. Vallury, Sechindra & Abbott, Joshua K. & Shin, Hoon C. & Anderies, John M., 2020. "Sustaining Coupled Irrigation Infrastructures: Multiple Instruments for Multiple Dilemmas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    3. Meilin Ma & Richard J. Sexton, 2021. "Modern agricultural value chains and the future of smallholder farming systems," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(4), pages 591-606, July.
    4. Luis Bauluz & Yajna Govind & Filip Novokmet, 2020. "Global Land Inequality," PSE Working Papers halshs-03022318, HAL.
    5. W. A. M. A. N. Illankoon & Chiara Milanese & Anurudda Karunarathna Karunarathna & A. M. Y. W. Alahakoon & Puhulwella G. Rathnasiri & Maria Medina-Llamas & Maria Cristina Collivignarelli & Sabrina Sorl, 2023. "Development of a Dual-Chamber Pyrolizer for Biochar Production from Agricultural Waste in Sri Lanka," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-20, February.
    6. Yan Liu & Zhu Qian & Han Kong & Ran Wu & Pengfei Zheng & Wenyi Qin, 2023. "Impacts of Eco-Poverty Alleviation Policies on Farmer Livelihood Changes and Response Mechanisms in a Karst Area of China from a Sustainable Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, February.
    7. Kornher, Lukas & Kubik, Zaneta & Chichaibelu, Bezawit Beyene & Torero, Maximo, 2021. "The Aid–Nutrition Link: Can Targeted Development Assistance to the Agricultural Sector Reduce Hunger?," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315179, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Alex Boakye, 2023. "Estimating agriculture technologies’ impact on maize yield in rural South Africa," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(8), pages 1-17, August.
    9. Jarisch, Isabelle & Bödeker, Kai & Bingham, Logan Robert & Friedrich, Stefan & Kindu, Mengistie & Knoke, Thomas, 2022. "The influence of discounting ecosystem services in robust multi-objective optimization – An application to a forestry-avocado land-use portfolio," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    10. Agarwal, Bina, 2018. "Can group farms outperform individual family farms? Empirical insights from India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 57-73.
    11. 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).
    12. Czyżewski, Bazyli & Kryszak, Łukasz, 2023. "Can a pursuit of productivity be reconciled with sustainable practices in small-scale farming? – Evidence from central and eastern Europe," MPRA Paper 117642, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 31 May 2023.
    13. Daniel Kpienbaareh & Kamaldeen Mohammed & Isaac Luginaah & Jinfei Wang & Rachel Bezner Kerr & Esther Lupafya & Laifolo Dakishoni, 2022. "Estimating Groundnut Yield in Smallholder Agriculture Systems Using PlanetScope Data," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-19, October.
    14. 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.
    15. Junquera, Victoria & Rubenstein, Daniel I. & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne & Knaus, Florian, 2022. "Structural change in agriculture and farmers' social contacts: Insights from a Swiss mountain region," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    16. Anne Jerneck, 2018. "What about Gender in Climate Change? Twelve Feminist Lessons from Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, February.
    17. Raúl Córdova & Nicholas J. Hogarth & Markku Kanninen, 2018. "Sustainability of Smallholder Livelihoods in the Ecuadorian Highlands: A Comparison of Agroforestry and Conventional Agriculture Systems in the Indigenous Territory of Kayambi People," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-31, April.
    18. Cosimo Rota & Patrizia Pugliese & Mai Elnady & Cesare Zanasi, 2021. "Measuring Egyptian Farmers’ Attitude towards Staying Organic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-23, July.
    19. Pierre Nguimkeu & Cedric Okou, 2021. "Leveraging digital technologies to boost productivity in the informal sector in Sub‐Saharan Africa," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(6), pages 707-731, November.
    20. Tambo, Justice A. & Uzayisenga, Bellancile & Mugambi, Idah & Bundi, Mary & Silvestri, Silvia, 2020. "Plant clinics, farm performance and poverty alleviation: Panel data evidence from Rwanda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).

    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.