外文翻译波罗的海农村多元化一个地方的透视Word文件下载.docx

1、原文：Rural diversication in the Baltic countryside: a local perspectiveAbstract Today rural diversification is high on the agenda in rural development. This article analyses rural diversification under conditions of post-socialist economic transition using case areas in Latvia and Estonia. The study s

2、hows that transition from centrally planned economy to market economy has had an enormous impact in the rural areas. Agricultural production and employment has decreased dramatically and rural unemployment is high. The conditions for rural diversification the first years after independence depended

3、a lot on the local presence of non-farm activities before the split up of collective farming, in both production facilities but also in the skills and relations people had. Since independence, markets for traditional rural services and products have decreased. The extent to which local businesses fi

4、nd markets outside the local area and people have been able to integrate into the new labour market of service and construction jobs often in urban areas are essential for the diversification of the rural economy. Most rural inhabitants only have skills in large-scale agriculture and limited contact

5、s to outside the local area which makes exploiting new opportunities difficult. The local capacity for withholding, developing and inducing new activities is weak. The challenge for rural development policy is to extend the possibilities of the rural inhabitants to exploit new opportunities.Introduc

6、tionDecreasing employment opportunities in agriculture is an all-European problem. In Western Europe the proportion of the rural population during most of the twentieth century has fallen steadily. In Eastern Europe this fall has been more dramatic. About 20% of the populations were employed in agri

7、culture in the Baltic States 10 years ago, only 5% are employed today. This is similar to the EU average. However, still 30% of the population lives in rural areas （Rural Development Programmes 2004a, b）.In Latvia and Estonia many rural areas suffer from persisting unemployment and poverty （Alanen 2

8、004; Tisenkopfs 1999）. Rural diversification seems essentialto avoid increasing poverty and is high on the agenda for rural development in the years to come. The EU Common Agricultural Policy 20072013 focuses on three thematic axes laid down in the new rural development regulation of which diversifi

9、cation of the rural economy is one of them （European Commission 2005）.This article analyses the rural diversification under conditions of post-socialist economic transition and discusses opportunities and constraints for rural diversification. The project is an exploratory study into how people make

10、 a living and rural business development in two study regions in Latvia and Estonia respectively.Theoretical background and approachIn diversification studies the centre of attention is dominantly the farm household and its abilities for finding new activities and employment. There are two types of

11、activities; farm diversification which are on-farm activities like tourism activities or alternative farm production and employment diversification which is employment away from the farm （Bryden et al. 1992; Chaplin et al. 2004）. Policy makers assume that farm diversification makes a significant con

12、tribution to rural development. Alternative activities on farms are expected to help absorbing some of the excess farm labour, alleviate poverty and contribute to the development of employment in rural areas （e.g. Council Regulation 1999）. The funding for diversification within the EU focuses domina

13、ntly on farm diversification stimulating tourism activities and alternative farm products at individual farms.However, most empirical studies still shows that farm diversification are small-scale activities related to conventional agriculture such as machinery services and add little incomes. Employ

14、ment diversification is much more widespread （e.g. McNally 2001）.As my focus is rural development, my working definition of rural diversification and the nonfarm economy also includes the broader rural economy not confined to agriculture and the farm household. Some rural areas in Western Europe, pa

15、rticularly around cities and popular resorts, have experienced an increase in population and economic activities not involved or related to the farm sector. It has often been connected to an increasing movement of people, tourists and investments from urban to rural areas. This observed trend has be

16、en described asthe urban-rural shift or the rural turn around （e.g. Murdoch et al. 2003; North 1998）.The transition and diversificationResearch into rural issues in post-socialist countries has mainly focused on agricultural restructuring. The following part examines the emerging research on post-so

17、cialist rural change and tries to point to features that characterise the rural areas in transition and are important for the understanding of diversification.The farm householdMany small farms are a common feature in the Eastern European countryside today. The socialist agricultural system comprise

18、d of large-scale agricultural enterprises and small household plots that farm workers cultivated. During the transition land has been restituted to former owners and privatised by farm workers. The aim of the restitution of land was in the Baltic countries based on the idea of creating family farms

19、similar to the traditional Western European model, however, the family farms, are today, uncommon. A dual structure of farms has re-emerged; large-scale privatised, often corresponding to the former socialist farms, and small household farms dominatingly oriented towards self-subsistence . Also many

20、 urban dwellers received land back in restitution which most often is left to grow wild （Baldock et al. 2001）.The rural businessIn the post-socialist countryside, the rural business activities other than farming can be divided into privatised enterprises and self employed service businesses. Non-agr

21、icultural production like processing plants, distilleries and bakeries were connected to the large farms. Such units have been called the resilient units （Andor 1997） because while the large farms have closed, they have often continued their operations, although at a much lower level of activity tha

22、n before （Nikula 2004）.The rural populationCharacteristic for the post-socialist countries is that a larger share of the population lives in rural areas than in Western Europe. Underurbanisation is often emphasised as a central feature of socialist rural urban relations （Szelenyi 1996）. Underurbanis

23、ation means that housing construction in urban areas did not keep pace with industrial development. Workers continued to live in villages where they also could benefit from plot farming while commuting to work. This group of people has been called the worker peasants （Andor 1997）. The rural areas ha

24、d, however, a population that was almost entirely made up of local farmers and workers and there did not exist an ex-urban middleclass group. The regional differencesA distinction in CEEC-literature is often made between former agricultural regions and industrial regions （Raagmaa 1997; Swain 2000）.

25、In traditionally heavily industrialised regions industries have often closed and there are few employment opportunities. Agricultural regions were often specialized producing for large markets in the Soviet Union and other Eastern European countries. Since their traditional markets often have disapp

26、eared such regions also suffer from unemployment. Raagmaa （1997） argues that there are no real peripheral areas in the Baltic States as the countries are small and people can commute by car to the urban centres from anywhere in the country and therefore all rural areas have the possibility of becomi

27、ng a recreational regions where people recreate and live.Approaching diversificationthe local perspectiveThe Baltic countries are no longer part of the Soviet Union but are reintegrating with the European and global economy. The frame conditions for rural areas have changed dramatically. Transition

28、research has largely been written in terms of the marketisation of economic relations and the privatisation of property. The level of research has mainly been macro-scale. The perspective of this research project is from the micro-scale exploring the activities, experiences and capacities of rural i

29、nhabitants within the changing rural locale. In the transition context a bottom-up approach seems increasingly important as the local transition is not a straightforward expression of new frame conditions and macrostructures as the collapse of the system have made change even more dependent on the s

30、pecific area and on individual capacities.MethodsThe local areas and their populations are focused on with the help of case studies exploring the situation of the rural inhabitants and the local business activities in two specific regions. The typology of post-socialist rural regions discussed in th

31、e theoretical background; agricultural regions and industrial regions formed the basis for the selection of the study regions. The intention was not to select representative cases for the average rural area in the Baltic States, and the intention is not to make generalisations for the whole countrie

32、s or for all rural areas. However, the case studies represent different types of areas and the results should have high relevance for rural development and diversification in similar areas and situations. The case studies are in different countries because the initial set-up of the research project involved partners from all Baltic States including Lithuania. In Estonia Viljandi county was selected as an agricultural region. Rezekne county was selected as an industrial region. In connection with bot