Understanding the diversity of European rural areas - Transition Pathways towards Sustainability in Agriculture: Case Studies from Europe - page 43

Copus and Hörnström (2011) have tried to structure different ruralities in the EDORA
project, which addressed the need to challenge outdated generalizations about the nature of
rural areas. Their framework recognizes both locational issues and structural characteristics
in creating that diversity, resulting in a differentiation between agrarian, consumption and
mixed countryside.
Other authors have described how rural space, from being essentially a production and
living space some decades ago, has progressively also become recognized as a space of
consumption and conservation (Woods, 2011; Holmes, 2012). Holmes (2006) has argued
that three sets of forces: production; consumption; and protection, create seven distinct
types of countryside in Australia, namely: productivist agriculture; rural amenity; pluri -
active; peri-metropolitan; marginalized agriculture; conservation; and indigenous. Whilst
indigenous people's use of land is very much a minority European interest (the Sami areas
of Scandinavia might be an exception), the rest of Holmes' categories all resonate with
types of region found in Europe.
Reflecting on Australia's immense rural territory, Holmes (2006, 2012) proposes a new
model for understanding not only expectations for the rural, but also society's use of the
rural. Holmes' model is grounded on multifunctionality as a key attribute of rural space,
and he suggests that rural areas may be classified differently according to the relative
importance of the modes of occupancy concerning production, consumption and protection.
Their positioning helps us to understand what the 'vocation' of the areas is today. In this
way, the conceptual model by Holmes (2006, 2012) is one basis in representing the
different transition pathways rural areas might follow, not only centred on agriculture but
including agriculture and its relations with other uses of, and demands on, the rural.
Further, Holmes also points out that the relative importance of the multiple functions of
rural space is not constant and its relative importance may change (Holmes, 2012). These
transition pathways need to be understood in order to identify the potential and possible
developments of agriculture and define strategies for the farming sector.
In many rural regions of Europe, there are favourable biophysical and structural
conditions for agriculture and the productivist paradigm has dominated for decades, with
production the main driver of rural occupancy (Primdahl and Swaffield, 2010). However,
social demand for non-commodity functions has typically been rising, related to
environmental concerns, and also to expectations for recreation and life quality, leading to a
new awareness concerning values of the physical landscapes and the need to consider other
farming outcomes besides production.
On the other hand, in rural areas with limiting conditions for industrial agriculture, as
in many places in southern Europe, agricultural systems have only recently (if at all)
entered the productivist phase (Robinson, 2008; Perfecto et al. , 2010; Ortiz-Miranda et al. ,
2013). The limitations for industrial agriculture are a function of a combination of many
factors including natural conditions, location, structural constraints, lack of access to
technology and socio-political history. In these areas, there is often a specific landscape
character, with high interest for nature conservation. Such areas are thus often much valued
by society due to conservation and consumption goals - but not well integrated in the
modernization farming discourse and ideals (Pinto-Correia et al. , 2014). If the conservation
and consumption roles could be acknowledged, this could lead to new forms of
management and compensation, corresponding to new and emerging roles for farming
otherwise in decay (van der Ploeg, 2008; Barbieri and Valdivia, 2010; Oreszczyn et al. ,