The Impact of Covid-19 on the Tourism and Accommodation Sector in Lithuanian Rural Areas

This article aims (1) to underline the level of impact of COVID-19 on the accommodation sector in Lithuanian rural areas, (2) to evaluate transformation possibilities and new opportunities for rural tourism, and (3) to present a new model of the tourism future in the regions. The article discusses the historical aspects of the accommodation business in Lithuania, the territorial distribution of accommodation in rural areas of Lithuania, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the accommodation sector in rural areas. Spatial analysis, together with qualitative and quantitative methods, was used in this research. The primary data for the article were received from the questionnaires filled out by fifty representatives of the Tourism Information Centres from different Lithuanian regions. Also, the analysis is supplemented by the secondary official statistical data. The research results revealed the direct impact of COVID-19 on the accommodation sector in rural regions of Lithuania. The proposed RegTour model contributes to reducing the impact of COVID-19 on the country\u27s economy and promoting the development of new forms of knowledge-based business and the transformation of the sector. Moreover, the research revealed the unexploited opportunities of rural tourism and the possible directions of change

Peripheralisation trends in rural territories: the case of Lithuania

This article describes the main trends in the changes to the system of rural settlements in Lithuania and determines the regional peculiarities of these changes. The analysis was carried out using data collected during the censuses of 2001 and 2011, and information that was gathered during field trips to rural settlements across the country in 2013 and 2014. Our analysis showed that the population decreased in the majority of settlements independently of their size. However, distinct regional differences can be identified and these were especially evident when comparing the data collected from the rural settlements located close to the capital city (Vilnius) or regional centres (Kaunas, Klaipėda, Šiauliai, Panevėžys and Alytus) with the data collected from the peripheral areas located further from cities or roads of regional importance. The survey showed that the north-eastern and southern parts of Lithuania are depopulated most, whereas in the western part of the country the number of residents was stable until 2000, and only in the 21st century did it start to decrease due to the increasing emigration rates. Also, the analysis of the structure of settlements allowed us to point out the historical circumstances as the cause of regional differences. In the north-eastern part of Lithuania the settlements are smaller than in the western part of Lithuania. The analysis shows that the increasing importance of the centre-periphery factor will further determine the decline of rural settlements in peripheral territories in Lithuania

Challenges of the tourism sector in Lithuania in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: State aid instruments and the efficiency of the tourism business support

At the beginning of 2020 Lithuania, and many other European countries, introduced quarantine and began restricting movement across the country’s borders. The imposed restrictive measures have greatly impacted and led to the stagnation of tourism sector. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and travel restrictions, the number of international tourist arrivals sharply decreased. In 2021 the majority of restrictions have been eased due to the decreasing morbidity, but it did not reinstate the tourism into the previous level. According to statistics, the decline in tourist flows in Lithuania in 2021 still continued, albeit the decrease was smaller. The increase in the number of local tourists (especially in 2021) has somewhat compensated the loss of international tourism, but has not changed it. The tourism business is still going through a difficult period. This article emphasizes the issues of local and inbound tourism business in Lithuania in the context of Covid-19 pandemic. The greatest attention is placed on the instruments proposed by the Lithuanian Government to mitigate the negative consequences of the pandemic on tourism service. The research combines secondary and primary data sources. Secondary data was used for the analysis of official Lithuanian statistics in order to introduce general trends of the development of tourism sector during the last decade. Primary data was received using the methods of focus group and survey (a questionnaire to collect data sets from tourism business enterprises in Lithuania). The statistical analysis revealed that the difficult situation was noticed in all fields of tourism sector, however, the main losers of the pandemic were those relying on the international tourist. The analysis of official documents disclosed, that even though the tourism business was able to benefit from the variety of offered governmental aid packages in 2020–2021, the quantity and quality of support was not enough and strongly criticized. Our survey results pointed out the instruments that were most effective among the tourism enterprises. Moreover, from the collected answers we noticed, that at least part of tourism enterprises took the opportunity to use the support not only for compensation of pandemic related costs but also to look forward and the received financial support invested in innovative solutions in the tourism business, so pandemic potentially had some positive effects as well. Also, the survey results reviled that there are considerable opportunities for tourism related development of the nature rich, non-metropolitan regions, though at the moment these activities quite often remain outside the market relations and do not produce new incomes and jobs

Particularities of Lithuanian rural settlement network alternations during the period 1989-2011

Article analyses tendencies of general and regional development of Lithuania's rural settlement network in the period of 1989-2011. Also, in the article is briefly reviewed the heritage of rural politics of the soviet period. The analysis is based on the data of general population and housing census of 1989, 2001 and 2011, submitted by the Lithuanian Department of Statistics. It is also based on researches carried out by Lithuanian scientists during previous years. [...] The article states that remains rather significant historically formed regional rural settlement differences in Lithuania. In municipalities of the Eastern Lithuania the average village size is about twice smaller than the average of Lithuania (60 inhabitants). In the municipalities of Zarasai, Molėtai, Ignalina in a village live hardly about 20 people at an average and in small villages (with up to 100 inhabitants) live about a half of all inhabitants of villages. Moving from East to West (with some exceptions) rural settlements become larger. In the Western Lithuania most rural settlements are larger: the average village size reaches 100 and more inhabitants and about a half of inhabitants live in the large settlements (>500 inhabitants). Apart from this East-West direction also a centre-periphery direction appears: big cities are surrounded by larger settlements (>500 inhabitants). The alternation of rural population in different Lithuania regions also differs: during recent years rural population increased only around three Lithuanian largest cities. During the previous years the most intensive rates of depopulation were in the North Eastern part of Lithuania and the least intensive - in the Western part of Lithuania.However, during the latest years in some territories (Šiauliai, Alytus, Tauragė districts) the rates of rural depopulation already reached and in some cases even exceeded the rates of depopulation of the Eastern Lithuania. Comparing the alternation of rural population in rural settlements of different size, regional regularities emerge as well. The population increase in the surroundings of large cities was determined by changes that occurred in medium and large settlements: in the surroundings of Vilnius and Kaunas cities the population increased mostly in settlements with 200-499 people (population in them increased by 30-35 per cent). Around Klaipėda the large settlements (>500 inhabitants) grew the most (population increased by over 50 per cent). If large settlements around the large cities grew the most, so in peripheral regions (especially in - the Northern and the North-Eastern Lithuania) the population mostly in the large settlements decreased. In those municipalities where the rates of rural depopulation were the highest, namely the rural depopulation in larger rural settlements essentially determined the common negative tendencies of rural population alternation. In municipalities of Šiauliai district the population in settlements with more than 200 inhabitants decreased about 30 per cent and in the largest settlements (>500 inhabitants) the population decreased about 50 per cent. In the Eastern Lithuania (Molėtai, Utena, Švenčionys municipalities) where small villages prevail, the population in larger settlements (>500 inhabitants) also decreased about 50 per cent. The system of Lithuania's rural settlement (except surroundings of the cities, where town-residents live in rural territories) practically lost the connections with current economical use of rural territories. Evident inadequacy between current economic system and rural settlement structure cause the main social problems in rural territories. [...

Geographical situation as a valuation factor of Lithuanian agrarian, forested and recreational territories

The article analyses implications of the geographical situation factor in works related to Lithuanian territoty valuation. It is also a review of research works focused on evaluation of agrarian, forested and recreational territories, as well as on legally adopted methods for fixing the prices of land. It has been determined that the factor of geographical situation is usually used for amendments in estimations of the quality of farming lands: the first step includes the estimation of the quality of lands, and it is followed by specification of the quality with respect to geographical situation. This method of valuation depending on the geographical situation goes back to the 20s of the 20th century and was related with the land reform in Independent Lithuania. The key index of geographical situation significant for valuation of agrarian areas is the location with respect to cities and roads. The implications of the geographical factor in forest valuation are not so obvious - the intrinsic quality of forested lands is emphasized. The price of forests is fixed taking into consideration the habitat and qualitative characteristics of stand. The major indices of geographical situation used in valuation works of recreational territories are: distance from a water basin (convenient for recreation) and distance from a city (as a supplier of holiday-makers)

Changes in land use in Eastern Lithuania in context of influence of Vilnius city

Rytų Lietuvos regionas dėl savo problemiškumo susilaukia vis daugiau tyrėjų dėmesio. Vilniaus miestas su aplinkiniu regionu istoriškai susietas stipriais ekonominiais, socialiniais ir kultūriniais ryšiais, bet Vilniaus įtakos regionui samprata ir ribos nėra aiškios. Dar sunkiau nustatyti, kokiu atstumu Vilniaus miestas turi įtakos žemėnaudos ypatumams. Straipsnyje pateikti tyrimo, kurio tikslas – išsiaiškinti, kiek ir kaip Vilnius veikia Rytų Lietuvos žemės naudojimą, duomenys. Analizuota Rytų Lietuvos žemės ūkio naudmenų struktūra ir jos kaita, nagrinėta apleistų žemės ūkio naudmenų problema, atkreipiant dėmes ir į žemės reformos bei žemės grąžinimo savininkams klausimams.Eastern region of Lithuania is one of the most problematic ones in the country. This region has specific demographic situation, with almost all the territory being sparsely populated. The region is one of the territories that are less favourable for agricultural activities. Moreover the situation regarding ethnic minorities in this region is more complicated than elsewhere in Lithuania. An important factor is that Eastern Lithuania is on the edge of the EU, which complicates the development of this region even more. The said factors result in distinctive land use characterised by small plots of land, which are generally non-marketable. The region has lots of abandoned agricultural land. Moreover, much of the land is cultivated only to receive the EU assistance. This region is under the influence of Vilnius city region, which is the biggest and most significant in Lithuania. Being a state capital and a large economic centre Vilnius city influences the entire country, but the influence is most felt in Eastern Lithuania comprising Vilnius, Utena and Alytus counties. Logically, land use in areas closer to cities should be more intensive than in the peripheral ones. A similar effect was observed in the past, but after the restoration of independence in 1990 the situation has changed and the intensity of use of land closer to Vilnius became lower than in remote agrarian territories. The territories of analyzed counties do not differ by agricultural land structure and the influence of Vilnius city is felt only in the closest surroundings of the city. The land use structure and its dynamics depend on natural and economic conditions that influence land suitability for agricultural activity. The regions that provide better conditions for developing agriculture have more agricultural land. In farms operating in Vilnius district agricultural land comprises 85%. In territories less favourable for agricultural activity the agricultural land area is even smaller, for example in Varėna district such land constitutes only 64%, in Zarasai district – 75%. Meanwhile in Ukmerg district, where land is better, the percentage of agricultural land is even 91%. The analysis of changes in agricultural land in 2003 and 2010 shows that intensity of land cultivation increased. Areas of arable land enlarged the most. However, rather big regional differences can be seen. In Vilnius district arable land decreased by more than 2 thousand ha. This could be explained by the fact that Vilnius district has more registered farm holders who do not intend to engage in agricultural activity and by buying land only expect to easier get permits for construction or other activities unrelated to agriculture than other districts have. Influence of Vilnius city is felt only in a small area around the city and is concentrated in the Vilnius district. In other districts the areas of arable land significantly increased: by 11 thousand ha in Šalčininkai district, by 20 thousand ha in Ukmerg district, and by 19 thousand ha in Anykščiai district. [...