Content uploaded by Andre Torre
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Andre Torre on Oct 09, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
1
Regional development in rural areas
Analytical tools and public policies
André TORRE
Frédéric WALLET
UMR SAD-APT
University of Paris-Saclay
INRA – Agro Paristech
16, rue Claude Bernard
F-75231 Paris Cedex 05
torre@agroparistech.fr
wallet@agroparistech.fr
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
2
Chapter I. Disputed notions and definitions in rural and regional studies
Abstract
Based on the literature Chapter 1 addresses the question of the disputed notions or rural,
regional, territorial and development terms. The first issue is about the definition – or the very
existence, even – of “the rural”. We isolate two main definitions highlighted the fact that in
certain cases “rural” is used to refer to the landscape, while in others it is the population that is
of primary interest. We also identify that rural areas have lost their past uniformity and have
now become home to a mix of different service activities and agricultural or industrial
production; and consist of both remote territories and areas close to cities, of historic and new
populations. Then we consider the notion of development, and show that Regional science
places considerations of economic and social change in territories at the heart of the debate,
together with issues associated with the development process and the distribution of gains and
losses resulting from new configurations, as well as the recent integration of well-being in social
and economic indexes. Finally we move to the terms “region” and “territories”, and agreed to
the idea that regional development refers to the processes that occur within the institutional
borders of the region, whereas that of territorial development pertains to a construction of
territorialities by local populations.
Keywords
Rural, region, territory, development, changes, regional development, territorial development
Addressing the question of regional, territorial and rural development necessarily leads – given
the amount of literature that exists on these issues – to pondering the meaning of the terms used.
Three main questions are raised with respect to terminology and definitions of the fields of
study.
They concern, respectively:
- The notions of” “rural” and rurality and their shifting definition
- The very notion of development and its scope;
- The regional/territorial trade-off and the definition of the notion of “territory”
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
3
I.1. The notions of “rural” and rurality: what is at stake?
The first question to consider is the definition – or the very existence, even – of “the rural”.
This concept is often discussed and has been the subject of debate and controversy in
contemporary literature and in the context of the criteria used by national and international
agencies or governments in the main OECD countries, for example.
At first glance, the question seems simple enough and is often answered by distinguishing
between people who live in cities and those who live in the countryside; and indeed, although
it has its limitations, this effective distinction allows for a clear insight into the place and
evolution of rural areas and their populations in today’s world. In this respect, it is an interesting
and informative exercise to examine the figures provided by the Department of Economic and
Social Affairs of the United Nations concerning the distribution of the world population
between rural and urban areas (see Figures 1 and 2, and Table 1), those provided by the UN’s
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), or by the Data Center in NASA’s Earth Observing
System Data and Information System (EOSDIS) (Figures 3 and 4).
World Urbanization Prospects, the 2014 Revision – UN | Key facts
http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/index.htm
Globally, more people live in urban areas than in rural areas, with 54 per cent of the world’s population residing in
urban areas in 2014. In 1950, 30 per cent of the world’s population was urban, and by 2050, 66 per cent of the world’s
population is projected to be urban.
Today, the most urbanized regions include Northern America (82 per cent living in urban areas in 2014), Latin
America and the Caribbean (80 per cent), and Europe (73 per cent). In contrast, Africa and Asia remain mostly rural,
with 40 and 48 per cent of their respective populations living in urban areas. All regions are expected to urbanize
further over the coming decades. Africa and Asia are urbanizing faster than the other regions and are projected to
become 56 and 64 per cent urban, respectively, by 2050.
The rural population of the world has grown slowly since 1950 and is expected to reach its peak in a few years. The
global rural population is now close to 3.4 billion and is expected to decline to 3.2 billion by 2050. Africa and Asia
are home to nearly 90 per cent of the world’s rural population. India has the largest rural population (857 million),
followed by China (635 million).
The urban population of the world has grown rapidly since 1950, from 746 million to 3.9 billion in 2014. Asia, despite
its lower level of urbanization, is home to 53 per cent of the world’s urban population, followed by Europe (14 per
cent) and Latin America and the Caribbean (13 per cent).
Continuing population growth and urbanization are projected to add 2.5 billion people to the world’s urban population
by 2050, with nearly 90 per cent of the increase concentrated in Asia and Africa.
Some cities have experienced population decline in recent years. Most of these are located in the low-fertility
countries of Asia and Europe where the overall population is stagnant or declining. Economic contraction and natural
disasters have contributed to population losses in some cities as well.
As the world continues to urbanize, sustainable development challenges will be increasingly concentrated in cities,
particularly in the lower-middle-income countries where the pace of urbanization is fastest. Integrated policies to
improve the lives of both urban and rural dwellers are needed.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
4
Figure 1. Percentage urban and urban agglomerations by size class in 2014
Source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division
(2014), WUP: The 2014 Revision, Highlights
Figure 2. Growth rates of urban agglomerations by size class 2014-2030
Source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division
(2014), WUP: The 2014 Revision, Highlights
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
5
Table 1. Urban population by major geographical area (% of total population)
Source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2012
Figure 3. Global Land Cover–SHARE for 2014
Source: FAO, Global Land Cover Network.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
6
Figure 4. The human influence index
Source: NASA’s Earth Observing System Data and Information System (EOSDIS).
These figures provide a striking estimation of the balance between rural and urban areas, as
well as a vivid and ostensibly realistic picture of the world’s gradual transition from rural to
urban, to the point where the majority of the global population lives in urban areas. However,
examination of the data and methods used reveals that there are almost as many definitions of
the term urban (and therefore implicitly, of the term rural, as these are the only categories
considered) as there are countries in the world. For example, in some countries, a town is
considered rural if it has a population of less than 10,000, while in others a town is rural if has
fewer than 1,500 inhabitants. In other countries still, all areas situated outside the capital city
and large administrative centres are considered rural. Geographical scale is, quite clearly, a key
consideration: if the framework of reference comprises relatively small local-government
districts, a given area may be classified as rural, whereas the same area could be deemed to
belong to an urban zone if the reference framework is made up of larger units such as
metropolitan areas or travel-to-work areas.
It is therefore necessary to clarify the distinction between rural and urban areas, as the
vagueness of their respective definitions casts some ambiguity on the results presented
(Halfacree, 2003). Specifying the distinction between “rural” and “urban” or giving a clear-cut
definition of the term “rural” is admittedly no easy task (Mormont, 1990), but the uncertainty
that characterizes current transformations may give rise to a productive debate.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
7
Though rural areas are sometimes defined in the negative – as a remainder category of non-
urban areas – the characterization of a rural area is traditionally based on morphological criteria:
low population density, irregularly and sparsely distributed buildings, the presence of farming
activities, etc. Yet this definition includes a diverse range of areas, such as countryside close to
cities, natural or recreational spaces, or more distant, depopulated or disadvantaged areas. It is
for this reason that the concept of “rural” remains vague and is often treated residually (as is
the case in United Nations statistics); i.e. the rural is that which is not urban.
But even if we accept this basic definition, we still have to clarify what is meant by non-urban,
as well as what exactly the urban counterpart of “the rural” is, especially given that traditional
rural areas, which for the most part are farming areas, have undergone substantial changes,
particularly since the second half of the 20th century. In most countries around the world, this
period was marked by the massive migration of tens of millions of people from farming areas
to urban areas, which subsequently expanded to previously unthinkable proportions.
Meanwhile, rural areas, which had been predominantly or even exclusively used for farming,
experienced major changes in terms of their economic activity. For example, in rural areas in
France – a major agricultural country – farming now only ranks third in terms of the number of
people it employs, behind the service and manufacturing sectors.
The frontier between rural and urban domains, often mentioned in reference to the city–country
relationship, has weakened or even disappeared as a result of a twofold process. On the one
hand, areas traditionally devoted to agriculture have been urbanized, with a dramatic increase
in the number of buildings and individual houses encroaching upon open spaces. This has been
accompanied by an increase in the size of small towns in which populations and services tend
to concentrate at the expense of smaller villages. On the other hand, rurality and agriculture are
making their way into cities, as demonstrated by the ever-growing success of locally based
farming, local food systems and transition towns (Reid et al., 2012), and even urban agriculture
(Despommier, 2010). There is increasing demand from city dwellers for products with traceable
origins as concerns rise regarding the ecological footprint of the commodities consumed by city
dwellers, in terms of food miles, for example (Pretty et al. 2005).
Finally, the notion of the distinctiveness of rural populations – an idea once so firmly
established that rural areas are often referred to as “rural worlds” – is now increasingly being
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
8
eroded. Now, in the era of the Internet and Google, of television, mobile communications and
smartphones, information spreads quickly and is accessible to growing numbers of people. This
has led to a certain standardization of people’s attitudes, desires, and representations of reality,
which suggests that the perception of rural folk as a distinct social category is no longer entirely
valid. Indeed, the needs and expectations of rural populations increasingly resemble those of
people living in cities, as a result of the “global village” phenomenon and the migration, in
some European countries, of older populations to areas away from cities. But, like urban
communities, rural areas are becoming more complex and more fragmented than in the past,
with the development of pockets of poverty and of spaces devoted to tourism.
Today, “the rural” can be mostly considered a conceptual category, and, if we go by what Cloke
says in “Conceptualizing Rurality”, we can accept that the construction of rurality rests on three
interconnected frames of understanding that shed light on the concept and help us to gain a
better grasp of its complexity (Cloke, 2006).
The first is functional by nature and serves to identify markers of rurality such as the extensive
use of land (often for farming), the small size of often scattered settlements, or respect for the
environmental and behavioural qualities associated with living in the countryside. The second
involves a more political economic perspective, based on the suggestion that certain structural
problems affecting populations often take different forms in rural areas due to the latter’s
distinguishing characteristics, including: a pleasant environment that attracts tourists,
pensioners and those who are not economically active; the acknowledgement that these areas
are not easily accessible due to a lack of appropriate infrastructure; and the great value attached
to volunteering and self-help attitudes. The third and final frame of understanding pertains to
rurality as a social construction and places emphasis on the cultural dimension, that is to say
the social, cultural and moral values associated with rural areas, and rural living in general.
On a simpler level, this book subscribes to the idea that some of the conflicting or confusing
definitions highlighted above arise because in certain cases “rural” is used to refer to the
landscape, while in others it is the population that is of primary interest. This separation allows
us to understand the differences and ambiguities of certain analytical definitions, and to
categorize the different types of policies implemented in rural areas:
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
9
When the primary focus is the area/land/resources, definitions of what is rural tend to
refer above all to issues pertaining to nature, landscape, types of afforestation,
environmental zoning, protected species or land use. When this is the case, it makes
sense for sector-specific polices such as agricultural development or recreation/tourism
to potentially be the main focus for both analysis and policy. The same is also true for
environmental concerns and policies, as well as the historic association between
agriculture and rurality.
However, when population size, sources of income, and employment are considered,
the definition of what is rural tends to be much more focused on functional ties between
rural and urban areas, such as where people live and where they work and earn their
living, and where they spend their money, consume goods and services or use amenities.
Policies in favour of rural spaces are therefore above all targeted at local populations,
be it in terms of action to promote employment and access to services or education,
measures to reduce inequalities and increase income levels, or efforts to empower the
population, develop local democratic processes and involve local stakeholders in
territorial governance practices.
There is, of course, some overlap between landscape-based definitions of rurality and people-
based definitions; for example, access to rural landscapes and recreation areas affects the living
conditions and consumption possibilities of the population. But, in the end, the different visions
of rural space – a productive resource historically related to farming, recreational or touristic
activities related to the amenities that characterize it, or, more recently, natural areas – are
conditioned by people’s perceptions and by the different types of public policies implemented
(Perrier-Cornet, 2002). They combine with or oppose one another, offering a variety of
trajectories for rural spaces – spaces which, in recent decades, have undergone profound
transformations, and in particular have regained attractiveness following a long period of
depopulation.
Indeed, the fact is that, in these regions, rural areas have become hybrid, so to speak. They have
lost their past uniformity and have now become home to a mix of different service activities
and agricultural or industrial production; they consist of both remote territories and areas close
to cities, of historic and new populations. They are consequently facing forms of development
far more complex than in the past, and therefore require particular attention.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
10
I.2. A review of the notion of development
Let us begin with the notion of development, which underlies all the approaches discussed here.
A brief review of the literature shows that, in many respects, it is an intriguing concept that is
sometimes lacking in clear theoretical foundations. As Stimson et al. pointed out, “[i]t is
surprising to find how authors have diversely and often imprecisely defined the term” (Stimson
et al., 2006). Often used as a synonym for “process” or “state” (“this country has reached an
important level of development”), it is still used as a sort of adverb associated with such terms
as “economic”, “regional” or “agricultural”, or evokes the idea of increase or improvement.
Like all institutions, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD),
to cite one example, is now placing considerable emphasis on sustainable development, and
clarifies the role of capacity development as “the process by which individuals, groups and
organizations, institutions and countries develop, enhance and organize their systems, resources
and knowledge; all reflected in their abilities, individually and collectively, to perform
functions, solve problems and achieve objectives” (OECD, 2006c). Mention is also often made
of the definition proposed by Perroux, according to whom development is a “combination of a
population’s mental and social changes which make it capable of ensuring the cumulative and
lasting growth of its real global product. Development encompasses and supports growth”
(Perroux, 1964). Just like the OECD, Perroux makes a distinction between development and
growth, for the former does not merely pertain to factors such as increases in living standards
or in GDP, but also encompasses broader dimensions related to people’s lifestyles, skills,
knowledge and mental dispositions. Furthermore, this definition includes non-economic
variables and brings to the fore the central role played by social and cognitive changes.
Equitable access to resources such as food, education, justice and healthcare are dimensions
that are now commonly included in the definition.
It is justifiable to consider that the essence of development lies somewhere else, in the idea of
transformations and dynamic processes, or in the question of economic and institutional
changes, along with changes in customs, lifestyles and people’s perceptions. In this regard, it is
interesting to consider here what the key definition of psychology is: the development of a
person, or personality, in his/her early childhood, corresponding to the development of a
potential and of qualities and skills during the course of a trial-and-error process that is not
necessarily linear. Another approach, of great interest, was initiated by Schumpeter (1934) with
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
11
his famous theory of economic development, which above all translates a dynamic process of
departure from the routine in transactions and homothetic growth, as well as the implementation
of new rules and new modes of functioning, characterized by shifts from the more linear phases
of growth.
This reference should discourage researchers or practitioners from limiting their reflection to
comparisons or typologies, which, while admittedly useful, often merely consist of making
observations or evaluations of a given state of development, without directly addressing the
question of economic and technical transformations and changes in society.
In this regard, regional science provides a stimulating avenue for re-examining the nature of
development processes while taking into account aspects such as geographic scales of reference
for coordination and public intervention, and the diverse configurations of overlapping areas.
In addition to these aspects are the configurations and meanings of the concept of development
that are at stake and the question of regional science. They place considerations of economic
and social change in territories at the heart of the debate, together with issues associated with
the development process and the distribution among players of gains and losses resulting from
new configurations.
The expansion of definitions of development by integrating sustainability criteria has further
complicated the situation in terms of the dimensions to be considered, rekindling debate not
just on the hierarchy of goals and the possibility of their virtuous combination, but also on
indicators and opportunities for measuring change (Jany-Catrice & Méda, 2013). There is also
a need to take account of negative externalities in development strategies, mentioned in
particular in the Stiglitz–Sen–Fitoussi report (2009), echoing calls for greater consideration of
cultural and heritage dimensions (and more broadly positive externalities) and the issue of
welfare in the review of development dynamics. Meanwhile, against the backdrop of
maintaining or increasing differences in growth between territories is the problem of necessary
regional convergence, and with it the identification of drivers of development and effects of
inequality in the distribution of wealth with which scientists and policymakers alike are now
faced.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
12
I.3. On Regions and territories
The notions of “regional development” and “territorial development” now tend to surround the
term “local development”, generally applied to small, infra-regional portions of territory,
undergoing self-reliant or bottom-up development processes. But the generalized use of these
expressions raises questions: are they identical, opposed, or substitutable? And, above all, this
raises the question of how the concepts of region and territory are defined.
The term “regional” refers to two relatively distinct definitions. The first, which is fading and
is mostly used in an administrative sense by regional authorities themselves or by the EU, refers
to administrative regions (e.g. the Centre region in France, or the Tuscany region in Italy). The
second, used since the 1950s in the literature on regional development and regional sciences,
and mostly based on an economic vision, pertains to the “geographical” dimensions of
development or growth (e.g. Isard 1956). It encompasses questions relating to the “local”, the
region, the location of activities or people, as well as the wealth and competitiveness of certain
portions of space or nations.
Although regional development theories have changed significantly since the mid-20th century,
there is no unanimity among researchers on this issue, and debates have raged since the
emergence of these theories (see, for example, the discussions reported by Isard (1960),
according to whom the term “region” refers to “any subnational entity not necessarily defined
by political boundaries,” or to “generalizations of the human mind”). However, various
definitions can be found, all of which correspond to different categories and core interests,
depending on whether their authors place emphasis solely on economic or geographical
cohesion, or on a more explicit premise (Dawkins, 2003). Authors like Christaller (1933) and
Lösch (1940) argue that regions can be identified through the existence of central places or
cities, while other authors define the region primarily on the basis of the existence of local
labour markets. Others still refer to “planning regions”, which they equate to political or
administrative units. Finally, some define regions in terms of natural resources, ecosystems or
geographical boundaries, while more recent theories go further and argue for an approach
focused on the interdependencies between natural resources and human populations.
The territory is generally ignored in this type of approach. The qualifier “territorial” was
recently introduced in the literature on development, particularly in the English-language
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
13
literature, although it has been in use for longer in Italian- and French-language literature
(Camagni, 2009; Pecqueur, 1996). It refers to the concept of territory, whose emergence was
slow and sometimes controversial in this field of analysis. In this book, we have opted for the
following definition: a geographic zone with defined boundaries, within which relationships
are organized and governed by groups or particular populations that identify with one another
through common projects. Here, mention should also be made of the conventional definition
given by Sack (1986): “Territoriality will be defined as the attempt by an individual or a group
to affect, influence or control people, phenomena, and relationships, by delimiting an asserting
control over a geographic area. This area will be called the territory”. As a result, territories are
permanent constructs with moving boundaries, and are constituted through oppositions between
and compromises among local actors. Many authors, however, consider that the notion of
geographical borders is obsolete, and that territories can comprise areas or enclaves that may
be very far from one another.
Territories are collective productions of a human community, with citizens, governance
structures and organizations, and are not merely geographic entities; they are formed of a
combination of individuals and/or stakeholders located within areas whose boundaries may
shift according to their interactions. They are under permanent construction, developing
through contention and compromise between local and external actors, and are long-term
constructs encompassing a history and a set of core concerns that are deeply rooted in local
cultures and customs. Far from being set within fixed administrative boundaries, their frontiers
are shaped by the existence of a sense of belonging (and awareness thereof), as well as by
political governance institutions and specific rules of organization and operation.
Based on these definitions, the concept of regional development refers to the processes that
occur within the institutional borders of the region, whereas that of territorial development
pertains to a construction of territorialities by local populations (Mollard et al., 2007), in
relation, naturally, with policy directives or more general incentives.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
14
References
Alexander, J. W. (1954) The basic–non basic concept of urban economic function, Economic
Geography, 30, pp.246–261.
Altieri M. (1987) Agro-Ecology: The Scientific Basis of Alternative Agriculture. (Boulder:
Westview Press).
Anderies, J. M., Janssen, M. A. & Ostrom, E. (2004) A framework to analyse the robustness
of social–ecological systems from an institutional perspective, Ecology and Society, 9(1), p.
18. [online]. Available at http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss1/art18
Atkinson, G., Dietz, S. & Neumayer, E. (Eds) (2007) Handbook of Sustainable Development
(Cheltenham:Edward Elgar).
Autant-Bernard, C., Mairesse, J. & Massard, N. (2007) Spatial knowledge diffusion through
collaborative networks, Papers in Regional Science, 86(3), pp. 341–350.
Barca, F. (2009) An agenda for reformed cohesion policy. A place-based approach to meeting
European Union challenges and expectations,
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/policy/future/pdf/report_barca_v0306.pdf
Barles, S. (2009) Urban Metabolism of Paris and its Region, Journal of Industrial Ecology
13(6), pp. 898-913.
Bache, I. & Flinders, M. (Eds) (2004) Multi-level Governance, p. 237 (New York: Oxford
University Press).
Batabyal, A. & Nijkamp, P. (2008) Sustainable development and regional growth. Working
paper, 42 p.
Bateman D., Ray C. (1994) Farm pluriactivity and rural policy: some evidence from Wales.
Journal of Rural Studies 10 (1), 1–13.
Becattini, G. (1990) The Marshallian industrial districts as a socio-economic notion, in: F.
Pyke, G. Becattini & W. Sengenberger (Eds) Industrial Districts and Inter-Firm Cooperation
in Italy (Geneva: International Institute of Labour Studies).
Behrens, K., Gaigné, C., Ottaviano, G. & Thisse, J. (2007) Countries, regions and trade. On
the welfare impacts of economic integration, European Economic Review, 51(5), pp. 1277–
1301.
Bérard, I., Bigot, R., Hatchuel, G. (2001) Les Français et l’espace rural, (Paris : CREDOC), p.
140
Berger, G. (2003) Reflections on governance: Power relations and policy making in regional
sustainable development, Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 5(3), pp. 219–234.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
15
Berriet-Solliec, M., Schmitt, B., Trouvé, A. & Aubert, F. (2009) Deuxième pilier de la PAC et
développement rural: le RDR est-il vraiment rural?, in: F. Aubert, V. Piveteau & B. Schmitt
(Eds) Politiques agricoles et territoires (Paris: Quae).
Berriet-Solliec, M., Trouvé, A. (2013) Développement des territoires de projet. Quels enjeux
pour les politiques rurales ?, Economie Rurale, N° 335
Boiffin J., Benoit M., Le Bail M., Papy F., Stengel P. (2014) Agronomie, espace, territoire :
travailler « pour et sur » le développement territorial, un enjeu pour l’agronomie, Cahiers
Agricultures, vol.23, n°2, mars-avril, pp.72-83
Borts, G. & Stein, J. (1964) Economic Growth in a Free Market (New York: Columbia
University Press).
Boschma, R. (2009) Evolutionary Economic Geography and Its Implications for Regional
Innovation. Policy, Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography, 09.12, URRC, Utrecht:
Utrecht University.
Boschma, R. & Frenken, K. (2011) The Emerging Empirics of Evolutionary Economic
Geography. Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography, 11.01, URRC, Utrecht: Utrecht
University.
Bourgeron, P. S., Humphries, H. C. & Riboli-Sasco, L. (2009) Regional analysis of social–
ecological systems, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 17, pp. 185–193.
Brusco, S. (1982) The Emilian model, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 6(2), pp. 167–184.
Bryant, K. (2001) Promoting innovation. An overview of the application of evolutionary
economics and systems approaches to policy issues, in: J. Foster & S. Metcalfe (Eds)
Frontiers of Evolutionary Economics. Competition, Self-organization and Innovation Policy,
pp. 361–383 (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).
Camagni, R. (1995) The concept of innovative milieu and its relevance for public policies in
European lagging regions, Papers in Regional Science, 74(4), pp. 317–340.
Camagni, R. (2009), Territorial capital and regional development, in Roberta Capello and
Peter Nijkamp (eds.), Handbook of regional growth and development theories, (Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar).
Capello, R. (2007) Regional Economics (New York: Routledge).
Cassiolato, J.E., Lastres, H.M.M., Maciel, M. L. (2003) Systems of innovation and
development: evidence from Brazil. (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).
Chambers, R. (1994) The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal, World
Development, 22(7), pp.953–969.
Christaller, W. (1933) Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland, (Iena : University of Iena)
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
16
Cloke, P. (2006) Conceptualizing rurality, in: P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P. Mooney (Eds) The
Handbook of Rural Studies, p. 510 (Londres: Sage).
Cloke, P., Marsden, T. & Mooney, P. (2006) The Handbook of Rural Studies (Londres: Sage),
p. 510.
Coudel, E. (2009) Formation et apprentissages pour le développement territorial: regards
croisés entre économie de la connaissance et sciences de gestion, thèse de doctorat en
agroéconomie, Montpellier: Supagro.
Coudel E., Devautour H., Soulard C.T., Faure G., Hubert H. (eds) (2013) Renewing
innovation systems in agriculture and food. How to go towards more sustainability?,
(Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publisher)
Dargan L., Shucksmith M. (2008) LEADER and Innovation, Sociologia Ruralis, Vol 48,
Number 3, July, 274 – 291
Darly S., Torre, A. (2013) Conflicts over farmland uses and the dynamics of “agri-urban”
localities in the greater Paris region, Land Use Policy, 33, July, 90 – 99.
Davezies, L. (2008) La République et ses Territoires (Paris: Editions du Seuil).
Davezies, L. (2012) La crise qui vient. La nouvelle fracture territoriale (Paris: Editions du
Seuil).
Dawkins, C.J. (2003) Regional Development Theory: Conceptual Foundations, Classic
Works, and Recent Developments Journal of Planning Literature November 2003 18: 131-
172.
Delgado, M. & Ramos, E. (2002) Understanding the institutional evolution of the European
rural policy: A methodological approach. Xth EAAE congress, Zaragoza, August 28–31.
Despommier, D. (2010) The vertical farm, Thomas Dunne Books, N. Yok, 305p.
Donald, B., Gertler, M., Gray, M. & Lobao, L. (2010) Re-regionalizing the food system?,
Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 3(2), pp. 171–175.
Dowding K. John P. Mergoupis T. et Van Vugt M., (2000) Exit, voice and loyalty : Analytic
and empirical developments, European Journal of Political Research, 37, 469-495.
Drabenstott, M., Novack, N. & Weiler, S. (2004) New governance for a new rural economy:
Reinventing public and private institutions: A conference summary, Economic Review, Q IV,
pp. 55–70.
Ellis F., Biggs S. (2001) Evolving Themes in Rural Development 1950s-2000s, Development
Policy Review, 2001, 19 (4): 437–448.
Epstein R. (2008) Gouverner à distance : la rénovation urbaine, démolition-reconstruction de
l’appareil d’Etat, Thèse de doctorat en Sciences sociales, soutenue le 27 novembre 2008, ENS
Cachan, Paris, 472 p.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
17
European Commission. (2004) Rural Development: The Impact of EU Research (1998–2004),
Workshop Report, (Luxembourg: European Commission).
European Commission. (2010) Agriculture and Rural Development. Available at
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/index_en.htm
European Commission (2012) Synthesis of mid-term evaluations of rural development
programmes 2007-2013, (Vienna; ÖIR GmbH).
European Commission (2013) Overview of the CAP reform 2014-2020, Agricultural Policy
Perspectives Brief, n°5
Falk, I. & Harrison, L. (1998) Community learning and social capital: “Just having a little
chat”, Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 50(4), pp. 609–627.
Feldman, M. (1994) The Geography of Innovation, Economics of Science, Technology and
Innovation (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers), p. 155.
Florida, R. (2002) The Rise of the Creative Class. And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure
and Everyday Life (New York: Basic Books).
Foray D., P. A. David, B. Hall, (2009) Smart Specialisation – The Concept, Knowledge
Economists Policy Brief n° 9, June
Frenken, K. & Boschma, R. (2007) A theoretical framework for evolutionary economic
geography: Industrial dynamics and urban growth as a branching process, Journal of
Economic Geography, 7(5), pp. 635–649.
Frenken, K., Van Oort, F., Verburg, T. (2007) Related variety, unrelated variety and regional
economic growth, Regional Studies, 41 (5), pp. 685-697.
Fujita, M. & Thisse, J. F. (1997) Economie ge´ographique, proble`mes anciens et nouvelles
perspectives, Annales d’Economie et de Statistique, 45, pp. 37–87.
Garmise, S. (1994) Economic development strategies in Emilia Romagna, in: M. Burch (Ed)
The Regions and the New Europe, pp. 136–164 (Manchester: Manchester University Press).
Gaudin, J-P. (1999) Gouverner par contrat. L’action publique en question, (Paris : Les Presses
de Science Po)
Geels, F.W. (2002) Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a
multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy 31 (8/9), 1257–1274.
Gilly J-P., Wallet F. (2005) Enchevêtrement des espaces de régulation et gouvernance locale.
Les processus d’innovation institutionnelle dans la politique des Pays en France, RERU, n°5
Glazer A., Konrad K.A., (eds), (2005) Conflict and Governance, Springer Verlag, 201p.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
18
Gliessman, S. R. (1990) Agroecology: Researching the Ecological Basis of Sustainable
Agriculture (New York: Springer).
Goetz, E. & Clarke, S. (1993) The New Localism: Comparative Politics in a Global Era
(Newbury Park, CA: Sage).
Goldstein, H. (2009) Theory and practice of technology-based economic development, in: J.
E. Rowe (Ed) Theories of Local Economic Development, p. 375 (Burlington: Ashgate).
Gosnell, H., Abrams, J. (2011) Amenity migration: diverse conceptualizations of drivers,
socioeconomic dimensions, and emerging challenges. Geo J., 76 (4), pp.303-322
Guérin, M. (2008) Evaluation des politiques de développement rural. Quelques éléments
d’analyse, Economie Rurale, 307(November–December), pp. 39–52.
Halfacree, K. (1993) Locality and social representation: space, discourse and alternative
definitions of the rural, Journal of Rural Studies, 9, 23-37.
Halfacree, K. (2003) Landscapes of rurality: rural others / other rurals, in I. Roberston & P.
Richards (eds.) Studying Cultural Landscapes, London: Arnold, 141-69.
Halkier, H., Danson, M. & Damborg, C. (1998) Regional Development Agencies in Europe
(London: Jessica Kingsley).
Hall, P. (1994) Innovation, Economics and Evolution (New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf).
Hardy, S. & Lloyd, G. (1994) An impossible dream? Sustainable regional economic and
environmental development, Regional Studies, 28(8), pp. 773–780.
Harvey, D. (1989) From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation in urban
governance in late capitalism, Geografiska Annaler, 71B(1), pp. 3–17.
High, C. & Nemes, G. (2007) Social learning in LEADER: Exogeneous, endogeneous and
hybrid evaluation in rural development, Sociologia Ruralis, 47(2), pp. 103–119.
Hirschmann, A. (1970). Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms,
Organizations, and States, (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press).
Hooghe, L. & Marks, G. (2001) Multi-level Governance and European Integration (Lanhamn,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield).
IAASTD Collective Author. (2008) International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge,
Science and Technology for Development. Available at www.agassessment.org/
Isard, W. (1956) Location and Space Economy (Boston, MA: MIT Press).
Isard, W. (1960) Methods of Regional Analysis; an Introduction to Regional Science.
(Cambridge: Published jointly by the Technology Press of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and Wiley, New York).
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
19
Jany-Catrice, F., Méda D., (2013) Well-Being & the Wealth of Nations, Review of Political
Economy, July, vol. 25 n°3. p. 444-460.
Johansson, B., Karlsson, C. & Stough, R. R. (2001) Theories of Endogenous Regional
Growth (Heidelberg: Springer).
Johansson, B., Quigley, J.M. (2004) Agglomeration and networks in spatial economies. In:
Florax, R.J.G.M., Plane, D.A. (Eds.), Fifty Years of Regional Science. Springer, Berlin,
Heidelberg, New York, pp. 165-176.
Jordan, A., Wurzel, A. K. W. & Zito, A. (2005) The rise of ‘new’ policy instruments in
comparative perspective: Has governance eclipsed government?, Political Studies, 53(3), pp.
477–96.
Karlsson, C. Flensburg, P. & Horte, S-A. (2004) Knowledge Spillovers and Knowledge
Management (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).
Keating, M., Loughlin, J. & Deschouwer, K. (2003) Culture, Institutions and Economic
Development: A Study of Eight European Regions (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).
Knickel K., Renting H. (2000) Methodological and conceptual issues in the study of
multifunctionality and rural development. Sociologia Ruralis 40 (4), 512–528.
Kooiman J. (2000) Societal governance: levels, modes, and orders of social-political
interaction, in Pierre J. (ed), Debating Governance. Authority, steering and democracy,
(Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Krugman, P. (1991) Geography and Trade (Cambridge: MIT Press).
Lacour, C., Delamarre, A. & Thoin, M. (2003) 40 ans d’aménagement du territoire (Paris:
DATAR, La Documentation Française).
Lascoumes, P., Le Galès, P. (2004) Gouverner par les instruments (Paris : Les Presses de
Science Po)
Leeuwis, C. (2000) Reconceptualizing participation for sustainable rural development:
Towards a negotiation approach, Development and Change, 31, pp. 931–959.
Leydersdorff, L. (2006) «While a storm is ragging on the open sea»: Regional development in
a knowledge-based economy, Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), pp. 189–203.
Lincoln, N. D., Travers, C., Ackers, P. & Wilkinson, A. (2002) The meaning of
empowerment: The interdisciplinary etymology of a new management concept, International
Journal of Management Reviews, 4(3), pp. 271–290.
Lipietz, A. (2001) Aménagement du territoire et développement endogène, Rapport au
Conseil d’Analyse Economique, 18 janvier 2001, Conseil d’Analyse Economique n°31,
(Paris : La documentation française).
Lösch, A. (1940) Die räumliche Ordnung der Wirtschaft, (Iena: University of Iena).
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
20
Losch, B. (2004) Debating the multifunctionality of agriculture: from trade negotiations to
development policies by the south, Journal of agrarian change, 4 (3), pp.336-360.
McGranahan, D.A., Wojan, T.R., Lambert, D.M. (2011) The rural growth trifecta: outdoor
amenities, creative class and entrepreneurial context. Journal of Economic Geography, 11 (3),
pp.529-557.
McCann, P., Ortega-Argilès, R. (2013) Smart specialization, regional growth and applications
to European Union cohesion policy, Regional Studies, published online 14 Jun 2013
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00343404.2013.799769 accessed 2015-01-02.
Maresca, B., Dujin, A., Poquet, G., Mordret, X., Picard, R., Fournel, E. (2008) Les retombées
économiques et les aménités des espaces naturels protégés, p.132 (Paris : CREDOC).
Marini, M. B. & Mooney, P. H. (2006) Rural economies, in: P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P.
Mooney (Eds) The Handbook of Rural Studies, p. 510 (Londres: Sage).
Marks, G., Hooghe, L. & Blank, K. (1996) European integration since the 1980s: State-centric
versus multi-level governance, Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(3), pp. 341–378.
Markusen, A. (1996) Sticky places in slippery space: A typology of industrial districts,
Economic Geography, 72(2), pp. 294–314.
Marsden, T. (2003) The Condition of Rural Sustainability. (Assen: Royal Van Gorcum).
Marsden, T. (2006) Pathways in the sociology of rural knowledge, in: P. Cloke, T. Marsden &
P. Mooney (Eds) The Handbook of Rural Studies, p. 510 (London: Sage).
Martin, R. & Sunley, P. (1998) Slow convergence? Post neo-classical endogenous growth
theory and regional development, Economic Geography, 74(3), pp. 201–227.
Martinez-Alier, J. (2002) The Environmentalism of the Poor. A Study of Ecological Conflicts
and Valuation (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).
Maskell, P. (2001) The firm in economic geography, Economic Geography, 77(4), pp. 329–
344.
Midmore, P., Langstaff, L., Lowman, S. & Vaughan, A. (2008) Evaluating pillar 2
employment impacts: Case study methodology and results for East Wales. 12th congress of
the European Association of Agricultural Economics, Ghent.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-being : Synthesis
(Island Press: Washington DC).
Mollard, A., Sauboua, E. & Hirczak, M. (Eds) (2007) Territoires et enjeux du développement
régional (Paris: Quae).
Mormont, M. (1990) Who is rural? Or, how to be rural: Towards a sociology of the rural, in:
T. Marsden, S. Whatmore & P. Lowe (Eds) Rural Restructuring, pp. 21–44 (London: Fulton).
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
21
Moseley, M. J. (2003) Rural Development. Principles and Practices (London: Sage).
Muller, P. (2013) Les politiques publiques (Paris: PUF, Collection “Que sais-je ?”, 10th
edition)
Murray, P. (2000) Evaluating participatory extension programs: Challenges and problems,
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 40(4), pp. 519–526.
Musgrave, R. (1959) The Theory of Public Finance: A Study in Political Economy (New
York: McGraw-Hill).
Neuchâtel Group. (1999) Common Framework on Agricultural Extension. Available at
http://www.neuchatelinitiative.net/english/index.htm
Nijkamp, P., Lasschuit, P. & Soeteman, F. (1992) Sustainable development in a regional
system, in: M. J. Breheny (Ed) Sustainable Development and Urban Form (London: Pion).
Nooteboom, B. (2000) Learning and Innovation in Organizations and Economies (Oxford:
Oxford University Press).
de Noronha Vaz, T., Morgan, E. & Nijkamp, P. (Eds) (2006) The New European Rurality.
Strategies for Small Firms (Ashgate Economic Geography Series).
de Noronha Vaz, T., Nijkamp, P. & Rastoin, J. L. (Eds) (2009) Traditional Food Production
and Rural. Sustainable Development. A European Challenge (Ashgate Economic Geography
Series).
North, D. (1955) Location theory and regional economic growth, Journal of Political
Economy, 63, pp. 243–258.
Nussbaum, M. (2000) Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
OECD. (2006a) The New Rural Paradigm (Paris: Policies and Governance, OECD), p. 164.
OECD. (2006b) Coherence of Agricultural and Rural Development Policies (Paris: OECD
Publishing), p. 415.
OECD. (2006c) DAC Guidelines and Reference Series Applying Strategic Environmental
Assessment: Good Practice Guidance for Development Co-operation (Paris: OECD).
OECD. (2009a) Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development—Region at the
Glance (Paris: OECD), p. 255.
OECD. (2009b) Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development—The Role of
Agriculture and Farm Household Diversification in the Rural Economy: Evidence and Initial
Policy Implications (Paris: OECD), p. 144.
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
22
OECD. (2009c) Methods to monitor and evaluate the impacts of agricultural policies on rural
development (Paris: OECD), p.116.
Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons. The Evolution of Institutions for Collective
Action (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Ottaviano, G. & Thisse, J. F. (2004) Agglomeration and economic geography, in: J. V.
Henderson & J. F. Thisse (Eds) Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, vol
4, pp. 2563–2608 (Elsevier) (Chapter 58).
Partridge, M.D., Rickman. D.S. (2008) Distance from Urban Agglomeration Economies and
Rural Poverty. Journal of Regional Science 48:285-310.
Payne, A. (2000) Globalization and modes of regionalist governance, in: J. Pierre (Ed)
Debating Governance. Authority, Steering and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University
Press).
Pearce, D. W., Hamilton, K. & Atkinson, G. (1996) Measuring sustainable development:
Progress on indicators, Environment and Development Economics, 1, pp. 85–101.
Pecqueur, B. (sous la dir. de) (1996). Dynamiques territoriales et mutations économiques,
(Paris : L’Harmattan).
Perrier-Cornet, P. (2002) Repenser les campagnes (Editions de l’Aube).
Perrier-Cornet, P. (2011) Rural territories, governance and rural policies: What perspectives?,
in: A. Torre & J. B. Traversac (Eds) Territorial Governance (Heidelberg: Springer Verlag).
Perroux, F. (1964) L’économie du XXème siècle, 2nd ed. (Paris: Presses Universitaires de
France).
Pierre J. (ed.), 2000, Debating Governance. Authority, Steering and Democracy, Oxford
University Press, 251 p.
van der Ploeg, J. D., Renting, H., Brunori, G., Knicken, K., Mannion, J., Marsden, T., de
Roest, K., Sevilla Guzman, E. & Ventura, F. (2000) Rural development: From practices and
policies towards theory, Sociologia Ruralis, 40(4), pp. 391–408.
Porter, M. E. (1985) Competitive Advantage (New York: The Free press).
Porter, M. E. (1990) The Competitive Advantage of Nations (New York: The Free Press).
Porter, M. (1998) Clusters and competition: New agendas for companies, governments, and
institutions. In M. Porter, On competition (pp. 197-287). (Boston: Harvard Business School
Press).
Powell W. (1991) Neither Market nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organisation. In
Thompson G., Frances J., Levavcic R. and Mitchell J. (eds), Markets and Hierarchies and
Networks: The Co-ordination of Social Life, (London: Sage).
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
23
Prager, J.-C. & Thisse, J.-F. (2009) Les enjeux géographiques du développement économique
(Agence Française de Développement, Département de la Recherche).
Pretty, J., Lang, T., Ball, A. & Morison, J. (2005) Farm costs and food miles: An assessment
of the full cost of the weekly food basket, Food Policy, 30(1), pp. 1–20.
Rappaport, J. (2009) The increasing importance of quality of life, Journal of Economic
Geography, 9 (6), pp.779-804.
Reid, N., Gatrell, J.D., Ross, P. (eds) (2012) Local food systems in old industrial regions,
Ashgate, Farnham, 264p.
Renski, H.C. (2014) The influence of industry mix on regional new firm entry, Regional
Studies, 48 (8), pp.1353-1370.
Renting, H., Marsden, T. K. & Banks, J. (2003) Understanding alternative food networks:
Exploring the role of short supply chains in rural development, Environment and Planning A,
35, pp. 393–411.
Richardson, H. (1985) Input-Output and economic base multipliers: looking backward and
forward, Journal of Regional Science, 25(4), pp.607-661
Robinson, G. (2008) Sustainable Rural Systems: Sustainable Agriculture and Rural
Communities (Aldershot: Ashgate).
Rodrigez-Pose, A. (2002) The European Union: Economy, Society, and Polity (Oxford:
Oxford University Press).
Rodden, J. (2000) The Dilemma of Fiscal Federalism: Hard and Soft Budget Constraints
around the World (Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
Röling, N. & de Jong, F. (1998) Learning: Shifting paradigms in education and extension
studies, The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 5(3), pp. 143–161.
Romer, P. M. (1990) Endogenous technological change, Journal of Political Economy, 98(5),
pp. 71–102.
da Rosa Pires A., M. Pertoldi, J. Edwards and F.B. Hegyi (2014) Smart Specialisation and
Innovation in Rural Areas, S3 Policy Brief Series No. 09/2014, JRC Technical Support, 21
pages
Rowe, J. E. (Ed.) (2009) Theories of Local Economic Development (Burlington: Ashgate), p.
375.
Sack, R. (1986) Human Territoriality. Its Theory and History (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press).
Scharpf, F. W. (1991) Crisis and Choice in European Social Democracy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press).
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
24
Schmitz, H. (1995). Collective efficiency: growth path for small-scale industry. Journal of
development studies 31 (4), 529-66.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934) The Theory of Economic Development, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press).
Scott, M. (2004) Building institutional capacity in rural Northern Ireland: The role of
partnership governance in the Leader II programme, Journal of Rural Studies, 20, pp. 49–59.
Scott, A. & Storper, M. (2007) Regions, globalization, development, Regional Studies, 41, pp.
191–205.
Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom (New York: Alfred A Knopf).
Singh, K. (2009) Rural Development, 3rd ed. (New Delhi: Sage).
Solow, R. M. (1956) A contribution to the theory of economic growth, Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 70(1), pp. 65–94.
Solow, R. M. (2000) Growth Theory: An Exposition (New York: Oxford University Press)
Sombart, W. (1916) Der Moderne Kapitalismus (Munich: Duker & Humbolt).
Stiglitz J., Sen A., Fitoussi J-P. (2009) « Commission sur la mesure des performances
économiques et du progrès social », Rapport au président de la République. France.
http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/fr/
Stimson, R.J., Stough, R. & Roberts, B.H. (2006) Regional Economic Development. Analysis
and Planning Strategy (Heidelberg: Springer), p. 452.
Stöhr, W. B. (1986) Regional innovation complexes, Papers in Regional Science, 59, pp. 29–
44.
Terrier, C. (2006) L’économie présentielle, un outil de gestion du territoire, Cahier Espaces
n°90, numéro spécial Observation et Tourisme, 6 pp. (Paris: Editions Espaces tourisme &
loisirs).
Tiebout, C. M. (1956) A pure theory of local expenditures, Journal of Political Economy,
n°64, pp. 416–424.
Torre, A. (2008) On the role played by temporary geographical proximity in knowledge
transfer, Regional Studies, 42(6), pp. 869–889.
Torre, A., Melot, R., Magsi, H., Bossuet, L., Cadoret, A., Caron, A., Darly, S., Jeanneaux, P.,
Kirat, T., Pham, H.V, Kolokouris, O. (2014) Identifying and measuring land-use and
proximity conflicts: methods and identification, SpringerPlus, 3, 1, 85.
Torre, A. & Traversac, J. B. (2011) Territorial Governance (Heidelberg: Springer Verlag).
Torre A., Wallet F. (eds) (2014) Regional development and proximity relations (London:
Edward Elgard Publishing)
Torre A., Wallet F., 2016, Regional Development in Rural Areas. Analytical tools and Public
policies, Springer Briefs in Regional Science, Springer, 110 p.
25
Trouvé, A, Berriet-Solliec, M., Lépicier, D. (2013) Le développement rural en Europe. Quel
avenir pour le deuxième pilier de la Politique Agricole Commune ? (Berne : Peter Lang),
336p.
Vatn, A. (2001) Environmental resources, property regimes and efficiency, Environment and
Planning C: Government and Policy, 19(5), pp. 681–693.
Vazquez Barquero, A. (2002) Endogenous Development (London: Routledge).
Vereijken, P.H., Hermans, C.M.L., Naeff, H.S.D. (2005) Impact of liberalisation of food and
land markets on agrarian land use in the EU. In: Bradley, R.S., Wiseman, J. (Eds.), Yields of
Farmed Species: Constraints and Opportunities in the 21st Century. (Nottingham :
Nottingham University Press).
Vollet, D. (2002) Multifonctionnalité et territoires, in D. Vollet (ed.) Multifonctionnalité et
territoires : justification et modalités de la territorialisation des politiques publiques, (Paris :
Cemagref)
Warner K.D. (2007) Agroecology in action, (MIT Press)
Westlund, H., Larsson, J.P., Rader Olsson, A. (2014) Start-ups and local entrepreneurial
social capital in the municipalities of Sweden, Regional Studies, 48 (6), pp.974-994.
Wettenhall R. (2003) The rhetoric and reality of public-private partnerships, Public
Organization Review, 3, 1, 77-107.
Wildasin, D. E. (2004). The institutions of federalism: Toward an analytical framework,
National Tax Journal LVII, n°2, part 1, June.
Wilson G.A. (2007) Multi-Functional Agriculture: A Transitional Perspective. (CABI
International).
Wixe, S., Andersson, M. (2013) Which Types of Relatedness Matter in Regional Growth?
Industry, Occupation and Education. CESIS Electronic Working Paper Series No. 332. Royal
Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
Wojtowski A. (2006) Introduction to Agroecology, (N. York: FPP).
World Bank (2007) Agriculture for Development, World Development Report 2008
(Washington, DC: The World Bank).
