Darmowy fragment publikacji:
CzerOK 9/1/15 1:27 PM Page 1
This publication is an effect of collaboration of the Institute of Regional and Global
Studies of the University of Warsaw with the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru
in Lima and other universities from Latin America, Asia and Europe. A collection
of selected texts is devoted to sustainable development of peripheral regions
in Latin America and some parts of Europe (Albania, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Spain)
and Asia (Nepal). These texts discuss the natural, social and cultural conditions
and possibilities of development of rural regions and peripheral urban areas,
with particular attention to mountainous regions, as well as possibilities of tourism
development in rural areas. They fall within the current discussion carried out
in the academic environment and planning on the opportunities and constraints
to the development of peripheral areas.
* * *
From the 1980s onwards, sustainable development began to be regarded
as one of the main development paradigms, as well as a fundamental component
of regional policy. An exponent pointing to the need for – and means of – introducing
the principles of sustainable development was in turn a famous document published
by the UN in 1987 entitled Our Common Future. […] A challenge for development
policy thus was and remains the means of introducing the sustainability concept
in peripheral regions, in which the key problems to be resolved concerning
nothing less fundamental than the daily existence of resident populations.
The term periphery carries various connotations with it and can be understood
in different ways depending on the function ascribed to thinking on it, and the way
in which it is perceived or conceptualised. It is most frequent for geography to refer
to the location of a given region in respect of the centre of a country, be that
in the geometric, economic or political understanding of the term. To be peripheral
thus relates to both distance and status. In each case, the terms periphery
and peripheral entail a comparative element.
from Introduction
S
U
S
T
A
I
N
A
B
L
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
I
N
P
E
R
I
P
H
E
R
A
L
R
E
G
I
O
N
S
SUSTAINABLE
D E V E L O P M E N T
IN PERIPHERAL REGIONS
Edited by
_
MIROSLAWA CZERNY
WOJCIECH DOROSZEWICZ
www.wuw.pl/ksiegarnia
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
CzerST 8/20/15 11:49 AM Page 1
SUSTAINABLE
D E V E L O P M E N T
IN PERIPHERAL REGIONS
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
CzerST 8/20/15 11:49 AM Page 2
SUSTAINABLE
D E V E L O P M E N T
IN PERIPHERAL REGIONS
Edited by
_
MIROSLAWA CZERNY
WOJCIECH DOROSZEWICZ
Warszawa 2015
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
Reviewer
Prof. Dr. Hildegardo Cordova Aguilar
Pontifical Catholic University of Peru
Editor
Małgorzata Yamazaki
Proofreading
Małgorzata Dehnel-Szyc
English language consultant
Izabela S´lusarek
Layout
Zofia Kosin´ska
Cover design
Wojciech Markiewicz
Cover illustration
Seixal – northern coast of Madeira; Mirosława Czerny
Typesetting
Logoscript
ISBN 978-83-235-2057-3
Niniejsza monografia powstała dzie˛ki badaniom i wspo´łpracy mie˛dzynarodowej
prowadzonych w latach 2012–2015 w ramach mie˛dzynarodowego projektu badawczego
HARMONIA „Strategie wspieraja˛ce zro´wnowaz˙ony rozwo´j obszaro´w wiejskich w regionach
o wysokim poziomie ubo´stwa. Koncepcja metodologii badan´ na przykładzie regionu
go´rskiego w po´łnocno-zachodnim Peru”, finansowanego przez Narodowe Centrum Nauki
2012/04/M/HS4/00317.
This book is founded upon the work carried out within the project entitled: ‘‘Strategies
for promoting sustainable rural development in regions with high levels of poverty.
The concept of research methodology applied to mountain regions in northwestern Peru”
NCN, 2012/04/M/HS4/00317.
# Copyright by Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, Warszawa 2015
Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego
00-497 Warszawa, ul. Nowy S´wiat 4
www.wuw.pl
e-mail: wuw@uw.edu.pl
Internet Bookshop: www.wuw.pl/ksiegarnia
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
CONTENTS
Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1. How to understand sustainable development in peripheral rural regions? . .
17
Mirosława Czerny, Andrzej Czerny
Part A
Questions of rural sustainability
2. Recent changes of ways of life and livelihood in the Spanish rural mountain
areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Carmen Delgado Vin˜as
3. Maynas, an unsustainable territory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nicole Bernex
4. Identification of the relations between socio-geographic space and sustainable
development. Case study: Male¨sia e Madhe in Albania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sokol Axhemi, Resul Hamiti
5. Agroecological sites as expressions of territorial identities and as perspectives
to the traditional marginal populations development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Maria Geralda de Almeida
6. Sustainable development and marginal rural areas in Mexico . . . . . . . . . . .
Guillermo Torres Carral
31
47
67
75
93
7. Generating sustainable development through the alternative treatment of
water for human consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Jhoan Sebastian Jaramillo Peralta, Hildebrando Ramı´rez Arcila
107
Part B
Rural sustainable tourism
8. The family-based agroecological production: a space for sustainable
development of rural tourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cleomar Antonio Zocholini, Eurico de Oliveira Santos
125
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
6
CONTENTS
9. Creative tourism: perspectives and challenges for development of rural
areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Mary Sandra Guerra Ashton, Eurico de Oliveira Santos
137
10. Tourism and gastronomy: opportunities to rural communities .. . . . . . . . .
153
Roslaine Kovalczuk de Oliveira Garcia, Alexandra Marcela Zottis,
Daniel Vicente Bohno
11. Cultural tourism and Nepal
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
167
Kamal Maiya Pradhan
12. The use of biodiversity in the Brazilian tourism promotion: analysis of state
tourism websites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Rosane Maria Lanzer, Leonardo Reichert, Leidh Jeane Sampietro Pinto,
Denise de Souza
181
13. Problems of the development of tourism in the rural area of the region of
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Caminhos de Pedra: Bento Goncalves/RS, Brazil
Camille Bonotto, Eurico de Oliveira Santos
195
Part C
Social, cultural and natural environment
14. A natural environment and cultural landscape approach to community rural
heritage preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alejandro Cabeza
209
15. Environment and sustainability in Sierra de Piura, Peru . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
223
Wojciech Doroszewicz
16. San Gabriel de Azteca cemetery as heritage to save people’s identity . . . . .
237
Rocı´o Lo´pez de Juambelz
17. Problems of sustainable rural development in the highlands of Piura,
Peru . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ana Sabogal Dunin Borkowska
18. Spatiotemporal patterns of agricultural and settlement frontier in the tropical
Andes of Northern Ecuador: a socio-ecological perspective . . . . . . . . . . . .
Maria Fernanda Lo´pez Sandoval, Felipe Valdez
19. Turnover in rural hospitality: the case of family rural properties in the
southern half of Rio Grande do Sul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Paula Carina Mayer da Silva, Ana Roberta Trentin de Bittencourt, Eurico de Oliveira
Santos, Lizbeth Souza-Fuertes
20. On the fringe: tracking and evaluating changes in land use in the areas
surrounding three parks in Spain and Portugal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Marı´a-Jose´ Prados, Marı´a A´ ngeles Barral, Claudia Hurtado, Julia Lourenc¸o
259
265
281
297
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
CONTENTS
7
Part D
Urban periphery from sustainable perspective
21. Sustainable development in 4 fraccionamientos from Fomento Metropolitano
Monterrey (Fomerrey), Nuevo Leo´n, Mexico, 2009–2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diana R. Villarreal Gonza´lez, Johny Morales Basilio
317
22. Environmental impacts of development in Mexico City, Mexico, 1980–2012
331
Felipe Albino Gervacio
23. Health, urbanization and suburbanization in Bogota and neighboring
municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
William H. Alfonso Pina, Clara Ines Pardo Martinez
341
24. The new land use in urban areas: social agriculture in the case study of Rome
359
Carmen Bizzarri
25. Foreign direct investment and environment in the Toluca-Lerma industrial
zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Maria Antonia Correa Serrano
373
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
AUTHORS
Mirosława Czerny
Institute of Regional and Global Studies
Faculty of Geography and Regional Studies
University of Warsaw, Poland
e-mail: mczerny@uw.edu.pl
Andrzej Czerny
Department of Cartography and Geomatic
Faculty of Earth Sciences and Spatial Management
University of Maria Curie-Skłodowska, Lublin, Poland
e-mail: aczerny@poczta.umcs.lublin.pl
Carmen Delgado Vin˜as
Department of Geography, Urban and Regional Planning
University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain
e-mail: delgadoc@unican.es
Nicole Bernex
Applied Geography Research Center (CIGA)
Pontifical Catholic University of Peru, Lima
e-mail: nbernex@pucp.edu.pe
Sokol Axhemi
Department of Geography, Faculty of History and Philology
University of Tirana, Albania
e-mail: saxhemigraphy@yahoo.co.uk
Resul Hamiti
Department of Geography
University of Tetova, FYR Macedonia
Maria Geralda de Almeida
Socio-Environmental Studies Institute (IESA)
Federal University of Goia´s, Goiaˆnia, Brazil
e-mail: mgdealmeida@gmail.com
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
10
AUTHORS
Guillermo Torres Carral
Department of Rural Sociology
Autonomous University of Chapingo, Mexico
e-mail: gatocarr@hotmail.com
Jhoan Sebastian Jaramillo Peralta
Investigation Group AQUA
Cooperative University of Colombia, Ibague´, Colombia
e-mail: jhoan.jaramillo2208@gmail.com
Hildebrando Ramı´rez Arcila
Investigation Group AQUA
Cooperative University of Colombia, Ibague´, Colombia
e-mail: hildebrandoramirez13@yahoo.es
Cleomar Antonio Zocholini
Master’s and Doctoral Program in Tourism and Hospitality
University of Caxias do Sul (UCS), Brazil
e-mail: cleomar_kiko@hotmail.com
Mary Sandra Guerra Ashton
Master’s Program in the Creative Industry
Feevale University, Novo Hamburgo, Brazil
e-mail: marysga@feevale.br
Eurico de Oliveira Santos
Master’s and Doctoral Program in Tourism and Hospitality
University of Caxias do Sul (UCS), Brazil
e-mail: eurico58@terra.com.br
Roslaine Kovalczuk de Oliveira Garcia
Graduate Program in Tourism
Feevale University, Novo Hamburgo, Brazil
e-mail: rgarcia@feevale.br
Alexandra Marcella Zottis
Graduate Program in Tourism
Feevale University, Novo Hamburgo, Brazil
Daniel Vicente Bonho
Graduate Program in Tourism
Feevale University, Novo Hamburgo, Brazil
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
AUTHORS
11
Kamal Maiya Pradhan
Department of Geography, Tri-Chandra College
Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal
e-mail: kamalpradhan1@hotmail.com
Rosane Maria Lanzer
Master’s and Doctoral Program in Tourism and Hospitality
University of Caxias do Sul (UCS), Brazil
e-mail: rlanzer@ucs.br
Leonardo Reichert
Master’s and Doctoral Program in Tourism and Hospitality
University of Caxias do Sul (UCS), Brazil
e-mail: reichertleonardo@gmail.com
Leidh Jeane Sampietro Pinto
Master’s and Doctoral Program in Tourism and Hospitality
University of Caxias do Sul (UCS), Brazil
Denise de Souza
Master’s and Doctoral Program in Tourism and Hospitality
University of Caxias do Sul (UCS), Brazil
Camile Bonotto
Master’s and Doctoral Program in Tourism and Hospitality
University of Caxias do Sul (UCS), Brazil
e-mail: camilebonotto@gmail.com
Alejandro Cabeza Pe´rez
Natural and Cultural Conservation Laboratory
Master’s and PhD Program in Architecture
National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)
e-mail: alejandro.cabeza@gmail.com
Rocı´o Lo´pez de Juambelz
Conservation Laboratory of Natural and Cultural Heritage
National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)
e-mail: rocio.ldej@gmail.com
Wojciech Doroszewicz
Institute of Regional and Global Studies
Faculty of Geography and Regional Studies
University of Warsaw, Poland
e-mail: w.doroszewicz@uw.edu.pl
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
12
AUTHORS
Ana Sabogal Dunin Borkowska
Faculty of Liberal Arts and Humanities
Pontifical Catholic University of Peru, Lima
e-mail: asabogal@pucp.pe
Marı´a F. Lo´pez Sandoval
Department of Development, Environment and Territory
Latin American Faculty of Social Science (FLACSO), Quito, Ecuador
e-mail: maflopez@flacso.edu.ec
Felipe Valdez
School of Geographic Science
Pontifical Catholic University of Ecuador
Marı´a Jose´ Prados Velasco
Department of Human Geography
University of Seville, Spain
e-mail: mjprados@us.es
Marı´a A´ngeles Barral Mun˜oz
Department of History II and Geography
University of Huelva, Spain
e-mail: mabarral@dgf.uhu.es
Claudia Hurtado
Departament of Geography, History and Philosophy
University Pablo de Olavide, Seville, Spain
Julia Lourenc¸o
Centre for Territory, Environment and Construction
University of Minho, Guimara˜es, Portugal
Diana R. Villarreal Gonza´lez
Department of Economic Production
Metropolitan Autonomous University in Xochimilco, Mexico
e-mail: dvillarreal@correo.xoc.uam.mx
Johny J. Morales Basilio
Department of Economic Production
Metropolitan Autonomous University in Xochimilco, Mexico
Felipe Albino Gervacio
Master’s and Doctoral Program in Architecture and Urban Planning,
National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico
e-mail: algefe_puma@yahoo.com.mx
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
AUTHORS
13
William H. Alfonso P.
Faculty of Science Policy and Government
University of Rosario, Bogota´, Colombia
e-mail: william.alfonso@urosario.edu.co
Clara Ine´s Pardo Martinez
Faculty of Administration
University of Rosario, Bogota´, Colombia
e-mail: clara.pardo@urosario.edu.co
Carmen Bizzarri
Department of Human Science
European University of Rome, Italy
e-mail: carmen.bizzarri@gmail.com
Antonia Correa Serrano
Department of Economic Production
Metropolitan Autonomous University in Xochimilco, Mexico
e-mail: acorrea@correo.xoc.uam.mx
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
INTRODUCTION
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
1. HOW TO UNDERSTAND SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT IN PERIPHERAL RURAL
REGIONS?1
Miroslawa Czerny
Andrzej Czerny
Introduction
While it is true to say that the sustainable development concept grew in popularity
in the 1970s, and particularly with the 1992 Earth Summit (World Conference on
the Environment and Development) in Rio de Janeiro, it was, in fact, known still
earlier, since its roots can be traced back to the end of the 19th century, when
foresters began to take note of the irreversible nature of certain ecological processes
arising out of over-exploitative forestry management [Fritz, Huber, Levi 1995]. In
turn, in 1922, the German urban planner Cornelius Gurlitt launched a debate on
‘‘the modern development of the city”, proposing that the implementation of
programs for the development of construction in a city should take account not only
of purely technical matters, but also of social and cultural aspects not only from
a historical point of view, but also by reference to ongoing transformation processes
[Gurlitt, as cited by Petzold 1997: 19]. The postulates put forward by Gurlitt
constitute an inseparable element of today’s definition of sustainable development
[Hauff 1987].
From the 1980s onwards, sustainable development began to be regarded as
one of the main development paradigms, as well as a fundamental component of
regional policy. An exponent pointing to the need for – and means of – introducing
the principles of sustainable development was in turn a famous document
published by the UN in 1987 entitled Our Common Future. The report from the
World Commission on the Environment and Development headed by Gro Harlem
Brundtland accepted that the Earth’s resources were running out to the extent
that the opportunities for future development of the planet and humankind would
depend on wise and rational utilization and management of the said resources.
A further attendant assumption was that the environment should be managed in
such a way as to curtail any further dramatic changes in it and its further
impoverishment. A pointer given here concerned the role of humankind, and
1 This article is founded upon the work carried out within the project entitled: ‘‘Strategies
for promoting sustainable rural development in regions with high levels of poverty”. The
concept of research methodology applied to mountain region in Northwestern Peru: NCN
2012/04/M/HS4/00317.
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
18
MIROSLAWA CZERNY, ANDRZEJ CZERNY
necessary changes in ways of thinking about day-to-day (ad hoc) interests and
investments in the economic sphere.
A challenge for the development policy thus was and remains the means of
introducing the sustainability concept in peripheral regions, in which the key
problems to be resolved concern nothing less fundamental than the daily
existence of resident populations.
The sustainable development idea
Notwithstanding the elaboration and publication over the last half century of
countless official publications invoking a need for sustainable development
principles to be put into effect, a host of scientists, politicians and planners continue
a (heated) debate on the significance of contemporary society’s understanding and
heeding of the principles in question [Petzold 1997]. An idea proposed several
decades ago has become one of the most important paradigms in development
policy, and a key to analyses of directions to development on different spatial
reference levels. Indeed, the theoretical and planning-related discussions on the
subject are participated in by representatives of different scientific disciplines,
notably geographers [Gutry-Korycka 2005]. Therefore, it might seem that the
identity of the issue under discussion is well known and understood, which means
that now we know what sustainable development entails.
It was with such a conviction as to the existence of some broad knowledge of
sustainable development among the inhabitants of today’s world that a decade of
education in its name was launched by UNESCO, with this period in fact coming
to an end officially in 2014. This would logically imply that the last ten years have
already seen a broadening of society’s knowledge on the subject, its objectives and
the effects of its implementation. Indeed, all age groups should have found
themselves brought within an educational process allowing us all to face up to and
address the challenges associated with sustainable development that have been
identified at international fora.
The sustainable development idea in fact assumes that the socioeconomic
development ongoing in the contemporary world will proceed in such a way that
key existing features of our natural (but also our social and cultural) environment,
and hence our ‘‘surroundings” in the broader sense, will remain in such a state of
preservation that the generations coming after us will be in a position to use and
draw benefit from them just as we have. While this relatively well-known
assumption seems clear and obvious, certainly it does not make full reference to
achievements in science and technology which may, as time goes by, alter our
understanding of criteria like durability, persistence and sustainability itself, when
it comes to various elements of the environment – up to and including the
conditions underpinning the development of agriculture.
However, the real truth is that now, as from the outset, the discussion on
sustainable development has entailed many and various conceptualisations and
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
1. HOW TO UNDERSTAND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN PERIPHERAL RURAL REGIONS?
19
ways of understanding the very concept, let alone its manifold aspects, which are
treated differently at both the interpretation stage and when actual procedures or
activities are put into effect. These differences are such as to ensure that quite
disparate directions can be followed as efforts to achieve sustainable development
move forward.
One clear and readily noticeable evolution of the concept has proceeded from
approaches entirely (or almost entirely) focused on the natural environment and
the need to protect or secure its air, waters, soils and natural resources [Czerny
2005] in the direction of approaches that now seek to integrate many different
tiers of life and types of human activity, in particular assigning value to (and hence
encouraging the protection of) elements of our heritage, be this natural, cultural
or even political.
Another division into the approaches of sustainable development entails an
analysis of local and regional potential where the stimulation or continuation of
growth is concerned. What it therefore ushers in is a critical analysis seeking such
means of proceeding and applying techniques and technologies which will cause
the least modification to natural environmental conditions and also (in theory at
least) to existing social and cultural conditioning.
We thus arrive at issues of the dynamics of socioeconomic change, proceeding
in doing so from a priori assumption that a given fragment of territory experiences
such changes constantly, with the result that geographical space also undergoes
a change. A very simple diagram can help show the relationships pertaining in
a territorial system which is defined in this way.
In this understanding the territory and its natural conditions are given, and
they most often change over long periods of time. However, as will be noted later,
the territory involved in given considerations can also be treated as a variable
where development
in the simple model of
development, the two most important factors determining the trajectory,
dynamics and structure of favorable changes in a given region or territory are
seen to be human capital on the one hand, and economic capital on the other.
is concerned.
In any case,
A more complex model of development will bring in a series of further
variables, including those of importance to sustainability, like historical condition-
ing (the tradition of a historic region), psychological and emotional features (not
least prejudices and schemes where ways of thinking are concerned), and cultural
conditioning (within it religious conditioning can be of key importance in
determining, setting or shaping models of living and types of conduct).
The question is whether a return to a simple development model is still
possible, as consideration is given to the structure of sustainable development and
its main actors. In general, yes, though with the proviso that the actions of both
human capital and economic capital should be in line with sustainable
development principles. What should this then entail? Answer:
1. Awareness (among all members of a given society) that any kind of a human
action (or intervention) in whatever geographical space causes change to –
and in extremis the destruction of – the existing natural environment.
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
20
MIROSLAWA CZERNY, ANDRZEJ CZERNY
2. In all kinds of human activity the use of those techniques and technologies
that do least to change the character of the given region, this extending to
its environment, obviously, but also the skills of its inhabitants, customs
and habits, and so on.
3. Financial (economic) capital invested in a given region that first and
foremost takes care of the interests, wellbeing and living environment of
the inhabitants of the said (or any) region.
In the face of the above, can the sustainable development concept be adhered
to as we seek to develop peripheral regions (in which by definition raised income
levels and an improved quality of life are called for)?
Peripheral regions
The term ‘‘periphery” carries various connotations and can be understood in
different ways depending on the function ascribed to thinking on it, and the way
in which it is perceived or conceptualized. It is most frequent for geography to
refer to the location of a given region in respect of the center of a country, be that
in the geometric, economic or political understanding of the term.
‘‘To be
peripheral” thus relates to both distance and status. In each case, the terms
periphery and peripheral entail a comparative element. By definition a periphery
can only exist if there is also a center somewhere else. The geographical
connotations often also link up with psychological matters, in that ‘‘a region lying
at the periphery of a country is poorly developed” (Janicki .... Łopuszna) –
a contention that need not be true, even if it is mostly imagined to be. It is thus
clear that relationships between the center and remaining (more or less peripheral)
regions, or else between a more literally (geographically) defined center and
a periphery indicate unequivocally the situation a given area finds itself in. The
concept of the center and the relationships that make possible its definition have
been written on at length by K. Handke [1993]. According to that author: ‘‘the
center fulfils functions that we conceive of as central, while the region is situated
somewhere beyond the relationships that are thought of in this case. Historically,
what was met with more often was the contradistinction between the capital and
the provinces or the capital and the periphery” [Handke 1993: 105].
Yi-Fu Tuan in turn puts emphasis on the importance of words like ‘‘close” and
‘‘distant”, which attest to relationships between people that also extend in the
directions of friendship or hostility, as well as closeness in the geographical sense
of familiarity with a given area [Tuan 1987].
In the view of Handke [1993], any schematic depiction of what is not the
center, and is thus the periphery, has as its components:
1. Horizontal spatial elements, i.e. a subordinate place in the system (at some
distance from the center or the zero point);
2. Vertical spatial elements, i.e. some position in a hierarchical system, always
lower than the most elevated (below the top on the axis);
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
1. HOW TO UNDERSTAND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN PERIPHERAL RURAL REGIONS?
21
3. Evaluating elements, i.e. subordination to the center, often extensive in
lesser independence or entirely deprived of
spatial
independence, and also with lesser authority and prestige;
terms, but of
4. Such linguistic elements which emphasize subordination [ibidem: 117].
‘‘The very relationship of center versus non-center is universal in nature,
because such a configuration is generated in every social space, if with the process
of delimitation involving the content and nature of the main component parts
(...). In societal practice and looked at from the perspective of history, the system
undergoes many and varied modifications, since the essence of the center is based
first and foremost on authority, strength, prestige and money (...)” [ibidem].
Alongside markedly geographically relationships ! being at the periphery and
being peripheral,
there are also cultural and psychological connotations
influencing the way a given region or part of given territory is perceived. The
term is associated with a presence on the margins of the main currents to
economic political and social life, and hence with features of being weaker, not
taken seriously or underrated.
Analyses carried out in relation to developing countries do not offer an
unequivocal definition of what the periphery might be. In line with the original
concept of the center versus the periphery arising from the discussion on
dependent development taking place among Latin American intellectuals and
economists (with Raul Prebisch to the fore), the world has regions that are highly
developed economically (the center) as well as regions that are only poorly
developed (and hence peripheral), but which do supply the former areas with their
main raw materials [Ros´ciszewski 1974]. Analyzing the situation Latin American
countries find themselves in, Prebisch states that the underdevelopment of the
region is structural in nature, reflecting circumstances first put in place in the
colonial era, and entrenched from the 19th century onwards – i.e. from the time
countries in this part of the world gained their independence and headed off along
the path towards the diversification of international economic relations.
Among the countries whose positions as regards commerce with and
investment in Latin America were highest were: the USA, the UK, France and
(from the end of the 19th century) Italy and Germany. From that day to this, many
countries of South America like Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Chile have
continued to assign a key role to the export sector, whose structure continues to
be dominated by raw materials and primary products, be these mineral, natural or
agricultural. At most these are augmented with articles that have been processed
to a limited degree [Prebisch 1959]. The directions the economic development of
peripheral countries has followed are thus the ones subordinated to the demand
exerted – and the strategies for development pursued – by countries of the
‘‘center.” This means that the center-periphery relationship has been unfavorable
for the countries forming the latter, from the point of view of the development and
diversification of their economies.
However, from the point of view of further research into underdevelopment,
the contribution made by geographers proved to be important, since these
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
22
MIROSLAWA CZERNY, ANDRZEJ CZERNY
workers stressed that the center-periphery scheme repeated itself and had become
entrenched in the spatio-economic and social structure of the South American
countries [Czerny 1980]. Of pioneering significance in this area was the work of
Milton Santos, which inspired a discussion on internal disparities to levels of
development [Santos 1971]. As early as in 1974, M. Ros´ciszewski wrote that ‘‘In
the countries of the Third World, the greater part of the territory, inhabited by
a majority of the population, would need to be assigned to peripheral space.
Matters of the development of the countries under discussion here also mostly
extend to a remodelling of socioeconomic relations of just this peripheral space.
From these points of view, research into the nature, functions and internal
differentiation of peripheral space, and (...) the latter’s linkages with central space
is also of great importance (...)” [Ros´ciszewski 1974: 13].
In the Polish
geographical literature of the 1980s, this train of thought was inter alia developed
by M. Czerny, as she wrote many times on the spatial disparities that characterize
development within given national territories [Czerny 1980, 1985, 1986].
Since the 1980s, disparities in levels of development within given Latin
American states have started to widen. Beginning to appear alongside what are
unambiguously ‘‘central” regions – most often countries’ capital cities – there are
regions that have come within the orbit of world trade thanks to globalization,
their relationships with the external market in turn becoming stronger than those
binding them within the country. Urban centers have also been involved, whether
these be industrial or service-related, or offering their products on the global
market and modernizing rapidly the production process on farms almost entirely
geared to the global market (for example through super-automation of the
production of wine, meat and cheeses, fruit and vegetables designated either
directly for the world market [in the case of avocadoes, apples, melons, pears,
American blueberries, artichokes and so on], or else for processing in the factories
of the large multinationals like Dole, Heinz, Del Monte and others). The
appearance of such enclaves of modern agriculture differing from the large
latifundia from earlier times that were more engaged in extensive than intensive
agricultural production has only served to widen the gap between regions in
which the farming is relatively up-to-date and those in which there is a continued
prevalence of subsistence agriculture to meet farmers’ own needs, with only
limited use made of modern techniques and technologies, to the extent that the
main thrusts to development have somehow passed them altogether. Regions in
which this kind of farm production holds sway may obviously be regarded as
peripheral [Czerny, Co´rdova 2014].
The analysis of the socioeconomic situations of rural regions ought to offer an
answer to a question as to why they have remained peripheral. Of course,
peripherality may be also ascribed to regions where mining is carried on, but
perhaps to a declining extent; or where other kinds of industry from the Ford era
were in place but have since collapsed.
However, it is the purpose of this article to focus on rural areas, and there the
In fact, studies and opinions on the causes of under-
focus will remain.
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
1. HOW TO UNDERSTAND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN PERIPHERAL RURAL REGIONS?
23
development in this sphere are seen to be exceptionally wide-ranging and multi-
faceted. But here the author seeks to engage in the more systematic organization
of causes which have in her view helped determine the peripherality of rural areas
of the Andes, most especially in Peru.
The peripherality of rural areas in the Andes
Several decades of research and analyses devoted to Latin America allow the
author to arrive at certain conclusions regarding underdevelopment, and
especially the marginalization and peripherality of rural areas. While the list is
not exhaustive, and is subjective, it is generated on the basis of what has been
read, as well as interviews carried out.
The causes of uneven development need to be looked for among factors of an
environmental, political, cultural, social and finally also economic (or more
correctly a technical) nature. Beyond that it is clear that it would be difficult to
ascribe disparities to the impact of any one of these factors. There are a host of
possible and actual interactions and feedbacks between the factors mentioned that
ensure each region a unique image in general terms and as regards spatial
management.
The natural environment offers opportunities for development, with condi-
tions different at each location ensuring a diversity of forms of agricultural use
around the world. The inhabitants of rural regions tend to make optimal use of the
environmental conditions they are exposed to as they seek to meet their needs.
From this point of view, the environment may not be regarded as a factor
hindering development – for in those places where human beings make use of
their environment there are by definition conditions in which food may be
produced. Those rather few places that do not allow food to be obtained are
uninhabited. In these circumstances it becomes paradoxical that the natural
environment
is the factor most often invoked as a primary obstacle to
development, though there are of course many recognized reasons why this
should be so. One of these concerns the fact that environmental conditions are
subject to variability that reduces output and sometimes leads to outright hunger.
The climate may vary, as well as soil conditions, conditions as regards water
resources and so on, these all being elements that can determine amounts of food
produced in a very marked way. If issues arise in this sphere, the talk then is of
conditions unfavorable for agriculture. Abrupt, unexpected and in fact unpredict-
able natural events ensure that conditions for human management can become
altered even in an environment that is and has been occupied. Historical
descriptions of situations of this kind characterizing South America are in fact
many in number, and relate to the times of the pre-Columbian civilization (most
notably the well-known fall of the Maya due to far-reaching change in an
environment that had been managed rather intensively), as well as to modern-day
climate change genuinely giving rise to the destruction of crops and places of
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
24
MIROSLAWA CZERNY, ANDRZEJ CZERNY
habitation alike. In such ways an apparently well-rooted socioeconomic structure
in a given area needs to alter as a result of the environmental change. However,
the assigning of value to these changes is not something to be attempted here.
Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that the main causes of developmental
disparities that characterize and have continued to maintain a mosaic of better-
and worse-developed regions are of a political and cultural nature. Since colonial
times complex ethnic relations between indigenous peoples and incomers from
Europe have been giving rise to marginalization, first of the said native peoples,
and later of slaves from Africa and their offspring. Feudal-type relations were
maintained into colonial times, and their non-reform in the newly-independent
states arising in the 19th century has continued to ensure a place on the margins
of socioeconomic life for the greater part of the population in what was previously
Spanish America. Discrimination, usury and disdain for everything of indigenous
origin were for decades markers of the relationships between different social
groups in this part of the world. And it is a sad fact that these problems have come
through to the present day in some areas. Regions inhabited by indigenous
peoples thus remain poorly developed, to the extent that (without state
assistance, at least) they have no chance of joining the global market. Certainly,
things might have been (or still be) different if the state had been (or now is)
interested in the sale of mineral resource concessions to international concerns
(as in the case of the Conga Mine in Peru). However, the effect here is merely to
worsen an already tragic situation faced by local people, with a further fall in
agricultural output in areas encompassed by mining activity, as well as emigration
of the rural population to the cities (this most often ends in the depopulation of
regions in poverty by farmers deprived of the means they need to live, expelled
from their land, or left with no alternative but to sell it).
Further causes of the maintenance of peripheral rural regions are a lack of
structural change in agriculture – not only a lack of effective farm reforms (for
which most countries were not prepared politically when some decided to embark
upon them in the 1960s), but also a failure to create effective legal and financial
mechanisms that would allow small farmers to increase farm sizes, join in with
the commercial production of food, and modernize production. These matters
arose repeatedly as field work was being carried out in the Andean states. Political
clientelism, strong solidarity within groups in society (an origin in the same place,
proximity of residence, affiliation with the same ethnic group, etc.), frequently
occurring corruption and ongoing illiteracy (especially among women) all
combine to ensure a lack of development impulses among the region’s entire
population. Some are even deliberately pushed to the margins of political and
social life in order that they might be left in no position to benefit from any
possible economic attainments, should these eventually arise in the region.
Ultimately, there is nothing more than a small group of inhabitants of each
region that are able to hold sway over each region from the economic point of
view. In Latin America these are the descendants of Creole families whose wealth
arose from the mere fact of the ownership of huge areas of land, as well as the
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
1. HOW TO UNDERSTAND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN PERIPHERAL RURAL REGIONS?
25
possession of large labor forces and access to raw materials and resources. When
Latin America began to experience a modernization associated with the develop-
ment of capitalism, part of the old colonial elite was in a position to invest in the
developing industry. At the same time, new investors from other European
countries (beyond the old colonial metropolises) were able to locate their capital
in the ports or capital cities of the Latin American states. Location policy was then
a reflection of the link between the supplier and the external market. Whole areas
of different countries began to represent some kind of raw-materials-related,
agricultural and livestock-rearing hinterland for the trade with Europe and North
America. The capital cities and ports were in turn bridgeheads for foreign investors,
who bought here the raw materials turned into manufactured goods in the factories
of the north. Relationships between centers and peripheries thus took on the form
of internal dependences and economic links between the main economic center of
the given country and its remaining parts. Thus, for example, in the 1970s, Mexico
City concentrated more than 54 of Mexico’s industrial output, and almost the
same proportion of its entire industrial workforce [Czerny 1985].
A serious obstacle to the reduction of disparities in the level of economic
development between regions was constituted by poorly-developed infrastructure,
most especially roads. For example, in the mid-1970s, Bolivia had just a single hard-
surfaced road some 300 km long, while in Colombia as recently as in the late 1970s
a car could only be taken along two asphalt-covered roads running north-south (i.e.
one that led south from Bogota as well as a little to the north, and a second that
followed the Cauca Valley from Medellin in the north to the border with Ecuador),
as well as one running east-west which linked Bogota with Cali. To this day there is
no section of the Pan-American Highway that would link Panama with Colombia,
and at the same time facilitate the flow of information, not so much about the
resources and opportunities this region has to offer, as about the violence and unjust
treatment meted out to indigenous peoples by the old and new political/military/
economic elites that control the land and the access to all resources.
The peripherality of the Sierra de Piura from the point
of view of environmental, political, cultural, social
and economic-infrastructural factors
The peripheral nature of a given study region manifests itself in terms of various
features. In the case of the region under study here these are both physical
features – a location on the margins of the national territory in northern Peru, and
others of a social or economic nature.
In the case of indicators of social and economic development it is only possible
to compare the existing situation in the area under study with values reported for
the country as a whole. However, it needs to be recalled that many indicators at
national level do not meet criteria for a high level of development and so might be
also considered to represent features otherwise typical for peripheral areas.
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
26
MIROSLAWA CZERNY, ANDRZEJ CZERNY
One of the key indices where peripherality and marginalization are concerned
is the one relating to the level of education attained. Given below are data
obtained in the course of fieldwork as regards the level of illiteracy in the
communities studies, as well as the proportions that have completed either
primary or secondary education.
Table 1. Level of education in three regions of Frias District, 2012
Level of education
Sector Bajo
Sector Medio
Sector Alto
Level of education achieved ( )
Illiterate
Non-completed primary
Completed primary
Non-completed secondary
Completed secondary
Higher
No response
3.17
30.2
22.22
12.82
8.05
4.05
19.45
9.21
32.26
20.01
8.41
8.91
8.1
13.05
6.2
22.6
17.4
4.5
9.23
8.46
31.5
Source: Questionnaire-based research, December 2012 in: Co´rdova-Aguilar [2013: 42].
The table reveals that more than half of the population in the area studied has
education to primary level at best. Furthermore, the interviews carried out make it
clear that those claiming to have non-completed primary education are often
unable to read and write.
In the course of the interviews, local people complained about the quality of
teaching – the lack of assistance, difficult conditions present in schools, and poor
teachers with inadequate preparation to do their job. The three main postulates
regarding an improvement in quality of life mentioned by respondents include
raising of the level of education.
According to data from Peru’s statistical office [Compendio Estadı´stico del Peru´
2011, vol. 1: 134], as of 2010 Frias District had one doctor’s surgery and seven
medical rooms. This number is insufficient to serve all the residents of the
district’s villages, all the more so when reaching one of the medical rooms may be
a process taking several hours to achieve. The crisis of medical care is further
deepened by the fact that these potential treatment points are lacking both
equipment and medicines.
In the circumstances of lack of efficient medical care, diseases (including those
of parasitic origin and with insect vectors) can spread effectively. There is a high
mortality rate among infants and young children, as well as an under-nourishment
problem among infants that is first and foremost the result of an inappropriate
diet lacking protein and vitamins. Average life expectancy in Frias District is 67, as
compared with 69.4 in Piura region and 72 in Peru as a whole [ibidem].
Among the economic factors which attest to peripherality is a prevalence of
subsistence agriculture over other forms of economic use. In these circumstances,
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
1. HOW TO UNDERSTAND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN PERIPHERAL RURAL REGIONS?
27
the crop structure is dominated by food plants grown to meet families’ own needs.
A poor state of roads makes any commercialization of agriculture difficult, such
that the few attempts made to achieve this are the exception rather than the rule,
with farmers who need also to overcome many challenges and obstacles of an
institutional or bureaucratic nature if they wish to stay in business. In the course
of discussions run with them, farmers complain about the role of ‘‘middle-men”,
who buy at times of a glut in production and often therefore offer prices that fail
to cover production costs incurred.
Conclusions: rural peripheries – problems and opportunities
for development in Peru
When it comes to the criteria of peripherality presented above, all are met by
the region in the north-western part of the Peruvian Andes selected by us to serve
as an example.
1. To begin with the simplest (geographical) criterion, it can be noted how the
region is at the edge of the country, not far from the border with Ecuador. It
is thus literally peripheral in respect of the center, which is the Peruvian
capital Lima. Peripherality thus denotes a great distance from the center,
and hence a marginal location.
2. The consequence of such a location – far from the capital and in a natural
environment quite different from that characterizing even the seat of the
regional authorities (with Piura located on the Pacific Lowland) – is neglect
as regards education and environmental protection. Doctors are absent, and
the level of education is very low, inter alia because there is also a shortage
of teachers.
3. A poor system of infrastructure (most especially as regards roads) makes it
difficult to incorporate local producers into global supply chains, and even
to have them meet requirements on the domestic market as regards on-
time deliveries, freshness and continuity of supply.
The further conclusion arising from the analysis is that circumstances of
shortages and shortfalls are combined with a low quality of life to hinder the
incorporation of sustainable development principles into the local economy.
While the slogan is currently popular among local politicians and authorities, it is
seen to mean very little in practice. Only once a certain level of development is
achieved, as well as increased awareness and an entrenchment of the idea at
middle levels (including also in agriculture) will it be possible to commence with
a discussion on the introduction of sustainable development principles. At any
earlier stage, this will just be a slogan that inhabitants will fail to respond to.
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
28
Bibliography
MIROSLAWA CZERNY, ANDRZEJ CZERNY
Czerny M. 1985. Działalnos´c´ obcego kapitału a regionalne dysproporcje w Ameryce Łacin´skiej. In:
Neokolonializm. Warszawa: PAN.
Czerny M. 1986. Planes del desarrollo regional y la integracio´n del espacio en Ame´rica Latina. ‘‘Actas
Latinoamericanas de Varsovia”, vol. 2, pp. 89–102.
Czerny M. 1980. Urbanizacja w warunkach rozwoju zalez˙nego na przykładzie Kolumbii. Materiały
z sympozjum: ‘‘Rozwo´j zalez˙ny krajo´w Trzeciego S´wiata”. Kozubnik.
Czerny M., Co´rdova Aguilar H. 2014. Livelihood – Hope and Conditions of a New Paradigm for
Development Studies. The Case of Andean Regions. New York: Nova Publishers.
Czerny M. (red.). 2013. Bieda i bogactwo we wspo´łczesnym s´wiecie. Warszawa: WUW.
Fritz P., Huber J., Levi H.W. 1995. Nachhaltigkeit in naturwissenschaftlicher und sozialwissenszaftlicher
Perspektive. Stuttgart: S. Hirzel, Wissenschaftlich Verlaggesellschaft.
Handke K. 1993. Poje˛cie ‘‘region” a symbolika ‘‘s´rodka”. In: Region, regionalizm – poje˛cia i rzeczywistos´c´.
Warszawa: Instytut Slawistyki PAN, pp. 105–120.
Hauff V. (ed.). 1987. Unsere gemeinsame Zukunft. Der Brundland-Bericht der Weltkommission fu¨r
Umwelt und Entwicklung. Greven.
Petzold H. 1997. Nachhaltigkeit und ‘‘neuzeitlicher Sta¨dtebau” – zur kulturellen Dimension der
nachhaltiger Stadtentwicklung. IO¨ R-Schriten.
Prebisch R. 1959. Commercial policy in the underdeveloped countries. ‘‘American Sociological Review”,
vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 251–273.
Roszkowska-Ma˛dra B. 2009. Koncepcje rozwoju europejskiego rolnictwa i obszaro´w wiejskich; 5http://
gospodarkanarodowa.sgh.waw.pl/.../gospodarka_narodowa_2009_10_05.pdf4 (21.04.2015).
Ros´ciszewski M. 1974. Przestrzen´ krajo´w Trzeciego S´wiata – problemy metodologiczne. In: M. Ros´ciszewski
(red.) Przestrzen´ krajo´w Trzeciego S´wiata. Przegla˛d Zagranicznej Literatury Geograficznej, zeszyt 1–2.
Warszawa: IGPAN.
Santos M. 1971. La spe´cificite´ de l’espace en pays sous-de´veloppe´s: quelques aspects significatifs. Institut
d’Etude du De´veloppment Economique et Social, Doc. De Travail, no. 28.
Tuan Yi-Fu. 1987. Przestrzen´ i miejsce. Warszawa: PIW.
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
PART A
QUESTIONS OF RURAL
SUSTAINABILITY
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
2. RECENT CHANGES OF WAYS OF LIFE
AND LIVELIHOOD IN THE SPANISH
RURAL MOUNTAIN AREAS1
Carmen Delgado Vin˜as
Abstract: In this paper we present the results of the analysis of territorial
dynamics that the mountain areas of Spain have had in recent decades from the
identification and definition of factors, processes and outcomes. To this end, we
have chosen several representative case studies of various autonomous commu-
nities corresponding to different regions of the mountains of northern Spain (the
Cantabrian Mountains and the Pyrenees Atlantiques), mountains of the north-
west of Castilla and Leo´n, the Central System, the Iberian System and the Mounts
of Toledo.
Keywords: territorial development, socioeconomic dynamics, productive diversi-
fication, mountain areas, Cantabria, Spain
Cambios recientes de los modos y los medios de vida en las a´reas
rurales de las montan˜as espan˜olas
Resumen: El trabajo que aquı´ se presenta aborda el ana´lisis de las principales
transformaciones sociales y econo´micas que han tenido lugar en las a´reas de
montan˜a de Espan˜a en los u´ltimos decenios, a partir de la identificacio´n
y definicio´n de procesos y resultados. A tal fin se han elegido varios casos de
estudio representativos correspondientes a diferentes comarcas de las montan˜as
del norte de Espan˜a (Montan˜as Canta´brica y Pirineos Atla´nticos), las montan˜as
del Noroeste de Castilla y Leo´n, el Sistema Central, el Sistema Ibe´rico y los
Montes de Toledo.
1 This paper summarizes the most significant results of a research project that has been
developed over three years and which has involved researchers from several Spanish universities
(Cantabria, Leo´n, Oviedo, Basque Country, Salamanca and Valladolid). Part of the overall
results of the research was published by the members of research team in: C. Delgado Vin˜as and
J.I. Plaza Gutie´rrez (ed.). 2012. Territory and Landscape in the Spanish Mountains. Spatial Structures
and Dynamics. Santander: Liberia Estvdio, pp. 249]. The research that has given rise to this
article is also financed by the research project ‘‘Landscape and Heritage of the Atlantic Spain and
Navarra” CSO2012-39564-C07-05, 2013–2016.
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
32
CARMEN DELGADO VIN˜ AS
Palabras clave: Desarrollo territorial, Dina´mica Socioecono´mica, Diversificacio´n
productiva, A´reas de Montan˜a, Cantabria, Espan˜a
The main objective of the research project that supports this paper has been to
detect and diagnose the conditions in which the current process of renewal and
socioeconomic innovation is taking place in the Spanish mountain areas. We also
attempt to prepare proposals for valorization of mountain landscapes and to
identify the areas of greatest transformation and the areas with sensitive potential
impact.
To achieve the aims specified above, which constitute the core of the analysis
in this study, we have taken different mountain areas as case studies (Figure 1)
selected by voluntary basic criteria regarding the degree of change, the economic
growth and the level of development reached. All mountain counties studied are
singular territories with an extraordinary richness of resources, but also with
a remarkable weakness, and some of the features are shared by most of these
spaces put in evidence.
Figure 1. Geographical location of studied mountain areas
Source: Prepared by the team of researchers project from the map basis of the National Geographic
Institute of Spain (IGN).
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
2. RECENT CHANGES OF WAYS OF LIFE AND LIVELIHOOD IN THE SPANISH...
33
The reality and the risks of depopulation
One of the main problems suffered by many of these mountainous areas at present
is the low level of human occupancy, as is evidenced by the predominance of an
extremely low population density. Almost half of the studied municipalities have
a lower average density of 10 inhabitants per km2 (Figure 2), a number
considered as the threshold of ‘‘demographic desertification”, which makes
territorial revitalization very difficult and stifles their chances of development
without external populational contributions. Moreover, there are few munici-
palities that do not even reach 5 inhabitants per km2; such a situation is in the
Cabrera in Len, in the Highlands of Soria, in the Sierra de Ayllon and in the
Serrota in Avila, while in Sanabria and the Villuercas data are obtained with
a great difficulty. Only in those cases where the mountain areas are close to
urban areas or strongly influenced by urbanization, as well as in those in which
there is one or two important population centers, are densities higher, as in the
Asturian Central High Mountain, the Sierra of Be´jar-Candelario, the Hernio
Massif, the Valley of Tie´tar and the Gorbea Massif. On a regional scale, 9 out of
the 17 study cases tackled surpass the average density (13.9 inhabitants per
km2), whereas the remaining 8 do not reach it.
Figure 2. Population density at municipal scale in 2010
Source: Project prepared by the team of researchers based on data of the National Statistics Institute (INE),
census of inhabitants.
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
34
CARMEN DELGADO VIN˜ AS
Apart from small differences introduced by the uneven surface dimensions of
the studied counties, the faint current human occupancy is a relatively recent
phenomenon linked to the low volume of population today living in these
territories. In turn, the demographic shortage is the result of a regressive dynamic
marked by the continuing population losses since the mid-20th century,
particularly during the 1960s and 1970s, but with temporal and spatial
differences. And, what is even more serious, the intense decrease of human
resources has been prolonged many times to the present. It is true that the decline
has slowed in recent years, especially since the beginning of the 21st century, and
sometimes population growth is produced in some centers that function as county
towns, which on the other hand has contributed to rising of the intraregional
imbalances.
However, many of the mountain areas analyzed continued to lose population
even in the years when their territorial contexts had significant growth; or when
these territories decreased, the mountain areas suffered a much more pronounced
reduction of their population. This is a common denominator which also affects
well-placed mountainous regions. They have a positive economic dynamism
because of their proximity and accessibility to urban-industrial centers, values of
decline are much smaller. Some of these last counties have started to gain
population in the last decade due to the development of their role as peri-urban
residential space for nearby urban areas.
The key factors of the decrease are: first, the persistence of rural exodus
motivated both by the continuation of the crisis of traditional agricultural models
and, at the same time, though at first sight it seems contradictory, by rapid
modernization, especially due to difficult living conditions in the mountain areas
and the lack of employment opportunities, particularly for women, the main
protagonists of the recent rural emigration. A socioeconomic reality, on the other
hand, explains the second factor, a negative natural balance which has existed for
years and shows a state of biological exhaustion due to the falling birth rate and
increased mortality.
The corollary of this demographic decline is represented by the processes of
masculinizing and aging in different degrees, which go to the extreme in some
cases (La Serrota) and remain at somewhat lower levels in others, but they are
always severe for the stability of the demographic structures, defined for clear
features of dislocation. The recent presence of non-resident linked population,
although favors the increase of population effective for a few weeks in the middle
of the summer, does not help solve the fundamental problems of mountain
populations.
The regressive evolution of the population has also induced changes in the
pattern of settlement of these counties. Except for some cases (Tierra de Pinares),
the traditional system of settlements has consisted in the existence of numerous
tiny villages, hamlets and ‘‘neighborhoods”, whose dimensions have been reduced
more and more as the process of depopulation has progressed to the point that
many of them, even without physical disappearance, have lost all their inhabitants
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
2. RECENT CHANGES OF WAYS OF LIFE AND LIVELIHOOD IN THE SPANISH...
35
and have increased the number of depopulated villages existing in some counties
(Sierra de Ayllon, the northwestern Merindades).
At the same time, there has been a redistribution of the few people who have
remained in these villages and they tend to concentrate in the county towns,
where they can have more facilities and services (healthcare, education, etc.) and
can significantly improve their quality of life. Thus, with a few exceptions (Massif
of Hernio), the mountain areas studied share today the population growth with
the county capitals to the detriment of other towns.
In another aspect, a cursory and rapid analysis of the data on the distribution
of employment by productive sectors reveals that the areas where more traditional
traits survive and are demographically most regressive are those where the weight
of the agricultural sector is more evident and dominant in employment.
The change of traditional economic basis of rural space
One of the functions that the Spanish mountain areas played until today has been
the exploitation of natural resources to be used in industrial and urban areas,
sometimes in very remote areas.
The best examples are located in the western part of the Cantabrian
Mountains, both in the northern and in the southern slopes. This type of use
remains today, even sometimes it has increased. But further, recently wind power
production has acquired great importance and takes place on big wind farms in all
regions studied. These farms are changing the landscape of the mountain areas
being located even in the limits of natural protected areas, national and natural
parks. However, they have been supported by the institutions and the inhabitants
themselves because they provide income to the municipalities or to neighbors and
generate employment for people.
Mining activities have also had a special protagonism in some of the areas
studied. Such is the case of the extraction of coal in the Asturian mountain
counties since the late 19th century, in almost artisanal mines, although the large
takeoff came from the demand generated during the First World War. Since then,
coal became the main economic resource of the Central Asturian Mountain, at
least until the second half of the 20th century. From the 1960s, mining activity
began to take the first symptoms of a structural crisis which stretched during the
1990s and hit bottom in the 2000s, with the significant closure of mineshafts and
open-cut mines, washing places and adjacent installations.
Something similar happened in the county of Sanabria where, along the
1990s, the crisis in the mining sector was reflected in a progressive rise in
unemployment, the gradual closure of local shops overly dependent on the mining
industry, and in an alarming depopulation caused by early successive retirement
plans that were implemented by the coal companies in the area.
To the dismantling of mining, the mismatch of urban facilities and services
and the emigration and aging of the population as the main obstacles to
##7#52#aSUZPUk1BVC1WaXJ0dWFsbw==
36
CARMEN DELGADO VIN˜ AS
socioeconomic recovery, the social deterioration caused by a dramatic growth of
unemployment, and the degradation of landscape and environment provoked by
the use of highly risky production systems are now added.
However, in general, the towns that exercise the function of county centers
are being affected by all these damages with less virulence due to the
centralization of public and private services and immigration of both many young
and old people from smaller villages and hamlets with fewer facilities.
Some forms of mining are a new risk for numerous mountain counties: the
obtaining of gas via the technique of hydraulic fracturing or fracking. Behind this
Anglicism there is the work consisting in fracture of the subsurface by injecting
water, sand and chemical substances about 3,000 m deep in order to obtain the
upwelling of gas. The environmentalist groups opposed this procedure because
they fear damaging aquifers, moreover, the increasing tension in the geological
faults and it is also generating a great alarm and the social rejection. Even if the
name is new, the technique is not, because similar mining works have been
practiced from the first century in some areas of Spanish mountains (Montes de
Leo´n) with names more linked to their territorial consequences: arrugia (gallery)
and, above all, ruina montium (collapse of the mountains), a technique that
consisted in damming up water at the top of a mountain, dropping it hard,
building underground corridors and extracting minerals. To the current procedure
adds the use of more powerful chemical resources, but basically it is the same.
Although there are still
Pobierz darmowy fragment (pdf)