IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Analysing The Rural Vitality Argument For Residential Development: Linking Discourses And Actual Spatial Developments


In the heated debate on new residential development in the countryside, rural vitality is used in three different discourses: the agri-rural, utilitarian and hedonist. Discussions on the future of the Dutch countryside in general and a designated National Landscape north of Amsterdam in particular illustrate how the term rural vitality, depending on the discourse, is used to either support or oppose residential development. As in the region studied, the utilitarian discourse is increasingly important and its consequences – residential development in a highly valued landscape – are most controversial, we chose to evaluate its validity. This quantitative evaluation makes use of a geographical information system (GIS) and highly detailed spatial data. The results show no clear relationship between the construction of houses and different indicators of rural vitality such as employment and facility levels. Therefore, we question the validity of the utilitarian discourses' argument for supporting residential development.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG in its journal Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie.

Volume (Year): 101 (2010)
Issue (Month): 5 (December)
Pages: 583-595

in new window

Handle: RePEc:bla:tvecsg:v:101:y:2010:i:5:p:583-595
Contact details of provider: Web page:

Order Information: Web:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:tvecsg:v:101:y:2010:i:5:p:583-595. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.