IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i18p8288-d1749996.html

Analysis of Factors Influencing the Formation of Bioregions

Author

Listed:
  • Kaspars Naglis-Liepa

    (Institute of Economics and Finances, Faculty of Economics and Social Development, Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, LV3001 Jelgava, Latvia)

  • Inga Megne

    (Institute of Economics and Finances, Faculty of Economics and Social Development, Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, LV3001 Jelgava, Latvia)

  • Liga Proskina

    (Institute of Economics and Finances, Faculty of Economics and Social Development, Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, LV3001 Jelgava, Latvia)

  • Liga Paula

    (Institute of Social Sciences and Humanities, Faculty of Economics and Social Development, Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, LV3001 Jelgava, Latvia)

  • Dace Kaufmane

    (Institute of Social Sciences and Humanities, Faculty of Economics and Social Development, Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, LV3001 Jelgava, Latvia)

  • Modrite Pelse

    (Institute of Economics and Finances, Faculty of Economics and Social Development, Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, LV3001 Jelgava, Latvia)

Abstract

Bioregions are examples of true sustainable development. The desire for sustainability within local communities leads to agreements and the formation of bioregions in which sustainable development is based on practical action. This paper analyzes the concept of bioregions, emphasizing holistic approaches applied to, and relationships with, economic, environmental and social factors in pathways and the pace of specialization for the development of territories, thereby complementing the agricultural dimension and paying special attention to the application of organic farming techniques. The formation of bioregions is based on the desires of local communities, but at the same time, we believe that there are objective factors that influence the development of bioregions. Thirteen factors that could affect the creation of bioregions were selected using factors referred to in research papers, as well as by adding original ones. These factors can be divided into the sustainable agriculture and tourism groups, in which high values indicate a high potential for the formation of bioregions, as well as the intensive agriculture factor group, where high values indicate the benefits of large-scale economies that hinder the formation of bioregions. Cluster analysis identified six potential bioregions in Latvia, each with distinct socio-economic, environmental, and agricultural characteristics: the metropolitan region (dominant indicator-PIT per capita, value 890 EUR), the tourism cluster (dominant indicator—tourists served as a % of the total population, value 28%), the extensive agriculture cluster (dominant indicator—organically certified UAA, value 14,645 ha), the nature and education cluster (dominant indicator—protected areas, value 7587 ha), the intensive agriculture cluster (dominant indicator—profit from productive land, value 278 EUR ha −1 ), as well as a non-specialized cluster (no strongly dominant indicators). This paper describes each cluster and discusses its potential for bioregion development.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaspars Naglis-Liepa & Inga Megne & Liga Proskina & Liga Paula & Dace Kaufmane & Modrite Pelse, 2025. "Analysis of Factors Influencing the Formation of Bioregions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-20, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8288-:d:1749996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8288/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8288/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pascual Fernández Martínez & Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Víctor Martín Barroso & João C. Azevedo, 2020. "Assessing Sustainable Rural Development Based on Ecosystem Services Vulnerability," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-23, July.
    2. Mamen Cuéllar-Padilla & Isabel Haro-Pérez & Mirene Begiristain-Zubillaga, 2022. "Participatory Guarantee Systems: When People Want to Take Part," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, March.
    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. Wing-Fung Lo & Li-Pei Peng, 2025. "Synergistic effect of relational values in a participatory guarantee system: a case study of an ecoagriculture initiative in Taiwan," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 42(2), pages 803-824, June.
    2. Marina Nazir & Muhammad Qamar Rasheed & Xiao Hong Yu & Zahoor Ahmed, 2025. "Can Computer Technology, Semiconductors, and Artificial Intelligence Shape a Sustainable Future? Evidence From Leading Semiconductor‐Producing Countries," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(4), pages 5214-5233, August.
    3. repec:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:3:p:560-575 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Spatial dynamics of biophysical trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services in the Himalayas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    5. Liqi Hu & Aijun Li & Yunming Kuang & Tuzhi Lin, 2025. "Advancing urban sustainability assessment: a novel DEA-based framework for multidimensional analysis in Chinese cities," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Zongxiang Wang & Tianhao Chen & Wei Li & Kai Zhang & Jianwu Qi, 2023. "Construction and Demonstration of the Evaluation System of Public Participation Level in Urban Planning Based on the Participatory Video of ‘General Will—Particular Will’," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-17, January.
    7. Mamen Cuéllar-Padilla & Isabel Haro Pérez & Marina Masso Tarditti & Lara P. Román Bermejo & José Ramón Mauleón, 2025. "Socioeconomic and political-cultural criteria for Agroecology: learnings from Participatory Guarantee Systems," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 42(2), pages 1027-1043, June.
    8. Kuat Saparov & Miroslava Omirzakova & Aigul Yeginbayeva & Aigul Sergeyeva & Kairat Saginov & Gulnash Askarova, 2024. "Assessment for the Sustainable Development of Components of the Tourism and Recreational Potential of Rural Areas of the Aktobe Oblast of the Republic of Kazakhstan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-21, May.
    9. Piotr Dynowski & Anna Zrobek-Sokolnik & Izabela Jablonska-Barna, 2021. "Determining the Range of Influence of Tourist Trails Users on Naturally Valuable Areas: A Proposal of a Method and a Practical Example," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3 - Part ), pages 560-575.
    10. Yuqian Li & Wei-Ling Hsu & Yuwen Zhang, 2022. "Evaluation Study on the Ecosystem Governance of Industry–Education Integration Platform in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-15, October.
    11. de Castro-Pardo, Mónica & Martín Martín, José María & Azevedo, João C., 2022. "A new composite indicator to assess and monitor performance and drawbacks of the implementation of Aichi Biodiversity Targets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    12. Xiaojuan Zhang & Zhengxi Yang, 2022. "Individual and Village Level Factors Affect Farmers’ Satisfaction with Sustainable Rural Development Practices: Evidence from Guangdong Province in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-18, October.
    13. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & João C. Azevedo, 2021. "A Goal Programming Model to Guide Decision-Making Processes towards Conservation Consensuses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    14. Romulus Iagăru & Nicolae Concioiu & Anca Șipoș & Pompilica Iagăru & Achim Daniel Băluță & Andrei Vasile, 2025. "Strategic Approaches to Sustainable Rural Development by Harnessing Endogenous Resources to Improve Residents’ Quality of Life," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-23, February.
    15. Lingyu Kong & Xiaodong Xu & Wei Wang & Jinxiu Wu & Meiying Zhang, 2021. "Comprehensive Evaluation and Quantitative Research on the Living Protection of Traditional Villages from the Perspective of “Production–Living–Ecology”," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-25, May.
    16. Xiaoyu Wang & Minyi Zhang & Siying Jie & Mu Zhang & Zhan Zhang, 2023. "Exploring the Coordinated Evolution Mechanism of Regional Sustainable Development and Tourism in China’s “Beautiful China” Initiative," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-24, May.
    17. Dariusz Gozdowski & Jan Žukovskis & Artūras Razinkovas-Baziukas & Elżbieta Wójcik-Gront, 2022. "Land Cover Changes in Selected Areas Next to Lagoons Located on the Southern Coast of the Baltic Sea, 1984–2021," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-13, February.
    18. Alena Harbiankova & Lora Gertsberg, 2022. "Information Model for Sustainable Rural Development," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, May.
    19. Ana Nieto Masot & José Luis Gurría Gascón, 2021. "Sustainable Rural Development: Strategies, Good Practices and Opportunities," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-5, April.
    20. Pilar Laguna-Sánchez & Jesús Palomo & Concepción de la Fuente-Cabrero & Mónica de Castro-Pardo, 2020. "A Multiple Criteria Decision Making Approach to Designing Teaching Plans in Higher Education Institutions," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, December.
    21. Guangyu Li & Shaoyao He & Wei Ma & Zhenrong Huang & Yiyan Peng & Guosheng Ding, 2025. "Assessing Rural Development Vulnerability Index: A Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Post-Poverty Alleviation Areas in Hunan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-29, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8288-:d:1749996. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.