IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/siubul/43188.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tradition Or Innovation – Which Approach Is Better In Rural Development? The Case Of Podlasie Region

Author

Listed:
  • Przygodzka, Renata

Abstract

The article makes an attempt to answer the question, which of the development approaches of rural areas might be better: the one based on tradition, or perhaps the one, which is related with innovations. The conducted studies indicate that rural areas are strongly diversified. Various types of economic and social activity, which takes place in those areas, require a diversified approach. Thus, the answer for the question asked in the title cannot be a simple one. However, one can put forward a theory that the most proper development approach of rural areas is the concept of their sustainable development, in which tradition should be supplemented with innovation and vice versa. Only then will rural areas retain their heritage and at the same time will be a worthwhile place of living and economic activity.

Suggested Citation

  • Przygodzka, Renata, 2008. "Tradition Or Innovation – Which Approach Is Better In Rural Development? The Case Of Podlasie Region," Bulletin of the Szent Istvan University 43188, Szent Istvan University, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:siubul:43188
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.43188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/43188/files/Bulletin08_I_Przygodzka.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.43188?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. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    2. van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M. & Nijkamp, Peter, 1991. "Operationalizing sustainable development: dynamic ecological economic models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 11-33, October.
    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. Toman, Michael & Pezzey, John C., 2002. "The Economics of Sustainability: A Review of Journal Articles," RFF Working Paper Series dp-02-03, Resources for the Future.
    2. Munda, G. & Nijkamp, P. & Rietveld, P., 1992. "Multicriteria evaluation and fuzzy set theory : applications in planning for sustainability," Serie Research Memoranda 0068, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    3. Britz, Wolfgang & van Ittersum, Martin K. & Oude Lansink, Alfons G.J.M. & Heckelei, Thomas, 2012. "Tools for Integrated Assessment in Agriculture. State of the Art and Challenges," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(2), pages 1-26, August.
    4. Munda, G. & Nijkamp, P. & Rietveld, P., 1992. "Fuzzy multigroup conflict resolution for environmental management," Serie Research Memoranda 0067, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    5. Köhn, Jörg, 1996. "Thinking in Terms of System Hierarchies and Velocites. What makes Development Sustainable?," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 04, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    6. Laurent Umans, 1993. "A discourse on Forestry science," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 10(4), pages 26-40, September.
    7. Jeroen Bergh, 1993. "A framework for modelling economy-environment-development relationships based on dynamic carrying capacity and sustainable development feedback," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 3(4), pages 395-412, August.
    8. Munda, G. & Nijkamp, P. & Rietveld, P., 1995. "Qualitative multicriteria methods for fuzzy evaluation problems: An illustration of economic-ecological evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 79-97, April.
    9. Yiridoe, Emmanuel K. & Weersink, Alfons, 1997. "A review and evaluation of agroecosystem health analysis: The role of economics," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 601-626, December.
    10. Mechthild Donner & Anne Verniquet & Jan Broeze & Katrin Kayser & Hugo de Vries, 2021. "Critical success and risk factors for circular business models valorising agricultural waste and by-products," Post-Print hal-03004851, HAL.
    11. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    12. CHEN, Helen S.Y., 2020. "Designing Sustainable Humanitarian Supply Chains," OSF Preprints m82ar, Center for Open Science.
    13. Jim Butcher, 2006. "The United Nations International Year of Ecotourism: a critical analysis of development implications," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 6(2), pages 146-156, April.
    14. Denise Ravet, 2011. "Lean production: the link between supply chain and sustainable development in an international environment," Post-Print hal-00691666, HAL.
    15. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    16. Megan Devonald & Nicola Jones & Sally Youssef, 2022. "‘We Have No Hope for Anything’: Exploring Interconnected Economic, Social and Environmental Risks to Adolescents in Lebanon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    17. Rigby, Dan & Woodhouse, Phil & Young, Trevor & Burton, Michael, 2001. "Constructing a farm level indicator of sustainable agricultural practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 463-478, December.
    18. Michael Howes & Liana Wortley & Ruth Potts & Aysin Dedekorkut-Howes & Silvia Serrao-Neumann & Julie Davidson & Timothy Smith & Patrick Nunn, 2017. "Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Policy Implementation Failure?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.
    19. Shiferaw, Bekele & Holden, Stein, 1999. "Soil Erosion and Smallholders' Conservation Decisions in the Highlands of Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 739-752, April.
    20. Ibrahim Ari & Muammer Koc, 2018. "Sustainable Financing for Sustainable Development: Understanding the Interrelations between Public Investment and Sovereign Debt," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-25, October.

    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:siubul:43188. 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://www.sziu.hu/Dear_Reader .

    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.