The Tourist Potential of Rural Areas in Poland

This paper critically examines the role tourism can play in the stabilisation and diversification of rural areas using the example of Poland. Based on the literature and statistical data, the past development and current state of rural tourism in Poland is analysed. Then an analytical framework based on Porter (1990) is developed to assess the future tourist potential of Polish rural areas and identify barriers and chances of tourist development. The analysis revealed that the future tourist potential of rural areas in Poland is limited and often overestimated. Considerable deficits on the supply side and poor financial resources are combined with a limited and recently shrinking demand. The economic significance of tourism in most rural areas outside of the traditional tourist destinations has so far been marginal. Rural tourism in Poland can grow on a small scale and in niche markets requiring: 1) sound market research at national level, 2) regional tourism strategies based on an analysis of the seven depicted success factors, 3) organisations and intersectoral partnerships at regional level, and 4) a high level of interest and initiative of the local population to develop creative ideas for supply ‘bundles’ and to overcome the numerous barriers. Rural tourism is not a panacea for the structural problems of rural areas in Poland. The majority of regions - particularly outside of the traditional tourist destinations and far from big cities - will have to base their diversification on more pillars than tourism

Das Mathematiklabor und seine Verzahnung mit dem Schulunterricht

In diesem Beitrag wird die Konzeption des Mathematiklabors an der Universität Würzburg, erste Ideen zu dessen Verzahnung mit dem Schulunterricht und das im Rahmen des Mathematiklabors stehende Dissertationsvorhaben vorgestellt

Agricultural Employment Trends in an Enlarged European Union: Does the CAP Reform/Introduction Matter?

In the course of economic development there is a general downward trend of agricultural employment, although structural change in agriculture is often delayed. In the EU-15, agricultural employment decreased by -2.3% p.a. (measured in regular persons) and -3.0% p.a. (measured in annual working units) between 1995 and 2000. In some of the new EU Member States, employment in agriculture plummeted in the early 1990s, whereas in others it increased during the first years of transition and has served as a social buffer in times of economic hardship. The most important determinants of agricultural employment changes are labor saving technical progress, the macroeconomic environment, the farm structure, socio-economic characteristics of the farmer and agricultural support policies. Currently, farmers in the enlarged EU are facing significant policy changes, both in the EU-15 (2003 CAP reform) and in the new Member States (CAP introduction). The results of 15 case studies assessing the future development of agricultural employment and the impact of CAP reform/introduction confirm the general downward trend which overall will not be much affected by these policy changes. However, the case studies also reveal significant differences between regions and enterprises.Agricultural labor market, agricultural policy, European Union, transition countries, case studies, Agricultural and Food Policy, Labor and Human Capital, J43, Q18, Q19,

AGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT TRENDS IN AN ENLARGED EUROPEAN UNION: DOES THE CAP REFORM / INTRODUCTION MATTER?

In the course of economic development there is a general downward trend of agricultural employment. In the EU-15, agricultural employment decreased by 2.3% p.a. (measured in regular persons) and 3.0% p.a. (measured in annual working units) between 1995 and 2000. In some of the new EU Member States, employment in agriculture plummeted in the early 1990s, whereas in others it increased during the first years of transition and has served as a social buffer in times of economic hardship. The most important determinants of agricultural employment changes are labor saving technical progress, the macroeconomic environment, the farm structure, socio-economic characteristics of the farmer and agricultural support policies. Currently, farmers in the enlarged EU are facing significant policy changes, both in the EU-15 (2003 CAP reform) and in the new Member States (CAP introduction). The results of 15 case studies assessing the future development of agricultural employment and the impact of CAP reform/introduction confirm the general downward trend which overall will not be much affected by these policy changes. However, the case studies also reveal significant differences between regions and enterprises.Agricultural labor market, agricultural policy, European Union, transition countries, case studies., Agricultural and Food Policy,

Interregionale Disparit�ten und Entwicklung l�ndlicher R�ume als regionalpolitische Herausforderung f�r die neuen EU-Mitgliedstaaten

Since the beginning of transition, interregional disparities in Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs) have increased. Particularly, the differences between urban and rural areas have grown. This paper traces the development of these disparities and discusses, based on theoretical considerations and political objectives, the need for and the design of regional policy measures. For rural development in the new EU member states, institution building, competitiveness of the agri-food sector, non-farm income sources and labour mobility are crucial. These measures should be adapted to the specific characteristics of the respective areas. Since the end of the 1990's, the efforts of regional policy in the CEECs were highly influenced by the preparation for EU-accession. The SAPARD programme has strengthened institutional mechanisms and capacity building. Nevertheless, there remain important challenges in this field.regional disparities, rural area, regional policy, structural policy, Central and Eastern Europe, EU Eastern Enlargement, regional types, Community/Rural/Urban Development,

Typisierung ländlicher Räume in Mittel- und Osteuropa

Die ländlichen Räume in den mittel- und osteuropäischen Ländern sehen sich mit zahlreichen Problemen konfrontiert, die häufig verallgemeinert mit einer geringen Bevölkerungsdichte, einer unzureichenden Infrastruktur, einem niedrigen Pro-Kopf-Einkommen, einer ungünstigen Alters- und Bildungsstruktur, einer hohen Arbeitslosigkeit und einer immer noch starken Abhängigkeit von der Landwirtschaft beschrieben werden. Mit Hilfe einer Clusteranalyse auf NUTS-3-Ebene kann jedoch gezeigt werden, dass ländliche Räume keine homogene Einheit bilden, sondern jeweils spezifische Charakteristika besitzen. Die Analyse gruppiert die Regionen in Mittel- und Osteuropa zu fünf Typen, welche Aussagen über den Stand der sozio-ökonomischen Disparitäten erlauben: a) agrarisch geprägte Regionen mit niedrigstem Einkommen und sehr hoher Arbeitslosenrate, b) agrarisch geprägte Regionen mit niedrigem Einkommen, c) durchschnittlich entwickelte Regionen mit mittlerem Einkommen und hoher Arbeitslosenrate, d) industriell geprägte Regionen mit leicht überdurchschnittlichem Einkommen und e) Hauptstadtregionen und andere große Städte mit hohem Einkommen. Die Ergebnisse bieten eine erste Orientierung für die Konzipierung von Raumentwicklungsstrategien im Rahmen der EU-Struktur- und Regionalpolitik und für tiefer gehende Analysen. (Autorenreferat)The rural regions in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe are confronted with numerous problems that in a generalised sense are frequently characterised as a low population density, insufficient infrastructure, low income per capita, unfavourable age and education structure, high unemployment and a persistent dependence on agriculture. However, a cluster analysis on NUTS-3 level can be used to indicate that rural regions do not form any homogeneous unit, but instead that each of them possesses specific characteristics. The analysis groups the regions in Central and Eastern Europe in five types that enable statements on the state of the socio-economic disparities: a) Agriculturally dominated regions with the lowest income and very high rate of unemployment, b) Agriculturally dominated regions with low income, c) Regions of average development with an average income and high rate of unemployment, d) Industrially dominated regions with a slightly above-average income level and e) Capital city regions and other large cities with high income. The results provide an initial orientation in order to draft a concept for regional development strategies within the framework of EU structural and regional policies and for more in-depth analyses. (author's abstract

Analyse der raumwirtschaftlichen Differenzen ländlicher Räume in Bulgarien als Folge der Systemtransformation

In Bulgarien haben seit Beginn der Transformation die Disparitäten zwischen urbanen und ländlichen Regionen als auch unter den ländlichen Räumen selbst zugenommen. Mit Hilfe der Faktoranalyse gelingt es in diesem Beitrag, aus 16 Strukturvariablen (auf Oblast-Ebene) drei hypothetische Entwicklungsfaktoren abzuleiten, die für die Ausprägung der vorhandenen Raumstrukturen der ländlichen Gebiete Bulgariens eine wichtige Rolle spielen. Dabei handelt es sich um die latent existierenden Raummerkmale "Agglomeration", "Marginalität" und "Beschäftigung", welche den Einfluss von Agglomerationsvorteilen, ethnischen Minderheiten und Arbeitsmarktstrukturen auf die regionalen Disparitäten betonen. Sie können als Ansatzpunkte für die bulgarische Regionalpolitik verwendet werden. Auf Basis dieser drei Faktoren werden mit Hilfe der hierarchischen Clusteranalyse die ländlichen Räume Bulgariens zu sechs Raumtypen mit unterschiedlichem Entwicklungsstand gruppiert, die differenzierter Entwicklungsstrategien bedürfen. Um die Zielformulierung für eine realistische Regionalplanung in Bulgarien präzisieren zu können, erweist sich jedoch eine vergrößerte Datenbasis auf einer kleinräumigeren Ebene als notwendig. (Autorenreferat)Since the beginning of transition, disparities in Bulgaria between urban and rural areas as well as among rural areas have increased. This paper identifies three hypothetical factors behind the spatial structure of rural Bulgaria by a factor an alysis investigating 16 economic, sociodemographic, settlement and infrastructure variables (on oblast level). These latent factors are named "agglomeration", "marginality" and "employment" and emphasize the influence of agglomeration advantages, ethnic minorities and employment patterns on interregional disparities. They can be used as starting point for Bulgarian regional policy. The subsequent cluster analysis of 27 rural oblasti (all except for the capital) carried out with the factor values resulted in the identificati on of six types of regions which each need differentiated development strategies. However, in order to design conc rete policy objectives adapted to the peculiarities of the specific regions in Bulgaria, more detailed analyses -on a more disaggregated regional level- proved to be necessary. (author's abstract