Processes Of Rural Change Research Articles

Recover Old Geographical Materialities in Rural Areas: Key Politics and Processes of (Dis)assemblages

The current rural geography is at a crossroads of theoretical options. Geographical studies on processes of rural change usually have a social perspective, based on the loss of traditional populations and the immigration of new populations, and on the analysis of social-territorial conflicts between the locals and the newcomers. Rematerializing rural studies through experimental materiality is an interesting option to revitalize rural geography. The experimental process of recovering rural houses generates a fluid hybridization process between human-materiality realities, but it can also lead to a disassemblage process between people and materiality (rural house). In this contribution, various types of disassemblage processes of recovered material realities (rural houses) and the people who carried out the experimental recovery of the house are reviewed. The methodology is qualitative and is based on the examination of six case studies in rural areas of Spain. The disassemblage process generates new pluralities and material realities in peripheral rural communities. Keywords: materiality, rural, geography, artifacts

New Zealand kiwifruit growers’ vulnerability to climate and other stressors

Commercial cultivation of kiwifruit in New Zealand is concentrated in a relatively small area of the North Island. Cultivation is economically significant and growing quickly. However, current understanding of vulnerability for this, and other primary sector activities in New Zealand, makes almost exclusive use of linear outcome-oriented frameworks. Drawing on in-depth, semi-structured interviews with kiwifruit growers and orchard managers, workshops and analysis of secondary data, a “bottom-up” contextual assessment of vulnerability was developed and empirically applied. The findings suggest that climate and markets are the main sources of exposure for growers, with sensitivity moderated by location. Growers employ mostly short-term, reactive adaptive strategies to manage climate exposure and sensitivity, but have less capacity to respond to market-related stressors. Warmer and drier conditions are likely to have adverse effects for kiwifruit production and compound existing vulnerabilities. An ageing population and other processes of rural change may also constrain future adaptation. In order to realise opportunities and minimise losses, longer-term strategic responses are required. The paper demonstrates the need to move beyond outcome-oriented and model-based vulnerability assessments in New Zealand, to consider the broad range of the factors that contribute to vulnerability in the nation’s agricultural sectors. It provides a basis for further consideration of multiple exogenous impacts in the industry and confirms the critical importance of qualitatively vulnerability assessments to determine spatially specific outcomes.

Commentary: Special issue of GeoJournal on Amenity Migration, Exurbia, and Emerging Rural Landscapes

The series of sessions at the 2007 AAG in Chicago and this special issue of GeoJournal that they have spawned reflect a growing excitement surrounding rural dynamics among North American geographers. When I initially began exploring rural restructuring in the early 1990s, I was forced to draw heavily on theorizations of rural change derived from the UK context, and this was especially true for theorizations of class dynamics implicated within processes of rural change. Rural spaces and the processes that transform them are geographically heterogeneous, so this exciting and excited group of young scholars working within rural North America is particularly encouraging given the need to explore these topics in different geographic contexts. The series of papers presented in these sessions sparked many thoughts, but my comments below are limited to three substantive themes that I see as needing further clarity and/or exploration: better definitions of ‘amenity’ and ‘exurbia’; greater connections between work conducted at varying spatial scales; research on amenity migration with a greater sensitivity to racial/ethnic differences. First, the terms ‘amenity’ and ‘exurbia’ require definitions with greater clarity and breadth. I particularly like Peter Walker’s (Walker et al. 2006; Walker 2009) typology of exurbia (considering the varied impacts of the transition from resource use to ruralresidential use). His typology acknowledges that exurbia is a spatially moving target. Exurban growth in the Western United States is considerably different from exurban growth in New England, because the urban landscapes are so different in those places. Geographers are particularly well-suited to provide this needed clarity because of our sensitivity the spatial variations. In a similar vein, ‘amenities’ is poorly defined. A large volume of empirical work has employed the USDA’s natural amenities index, yet this index leaves many regions, such as New England, void of any natural amenities. However, if you ask most residents of New England about their region’s natural landscape, they would celebrate the fall foliage, the four-season climate, and access to public lands and mountains. For many residents across any number of regions, natural amenities are in the ‘eye of the beholder.’ Furthermore, we too quickly shift from a discussion of amenities to a discussion of ‘natural’ amenities. Amenity migrants are likely to be simultaneously responding to perceptions of natural as well as social amenities when they move to the countryside and contribute to exurban growth. Therefore, we need more robust and nuanced understanding of these terms. My second comment revolves around the importance of geographic scale in work examining issues of P. B. Nelson (&) Department of Geography, Middlebury College, McCardell Bicentennial Hall 313, Middlebury, VT 05753, USA e-mail: pbnelson@middlebury.edu

‘Lesbian migrants in the gentrified valley’ and ‘other’ geographies of rural gentrification

This paper explores the migration and cultural consumption practices of lesbian households within processes of rural change. Taking forward Phillips’ (2004. Progress in Human Geography 28, 5–30) discussion of neglected geographies of rural gentrification, and building upon Halfacree's (2001. International Journal of Population Geography 7, 395–411) critique of dominant conceptualisations of rural in-migrants, the paper presents empirical findings from a qualitative study of lesbian households in Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire. This follows up an earlier study of rural gentrification (Smith and Phillips, 2001. Journal of Rural Studies 19, 457–469). Lesbian households are shown to be a significant group that socially and culturally (re)produce distinct constructions of rurality, and act as gentrifiers via their migration, residential, and consumption practices. Many parallels to the migration processes of non-lesbian gentrifiers in Hebden Bridge are revealed, with the alternative cultural structures of Hebden Bridge being a key factor. We therefore argue that lesbian households should not be ‘othered’ within discourses of rural gentrification. The discussion emphasises the value of focussing upon neglected socio-cultural groups in robust ways, in order to shed light on the wider lifestyles and experiences of diverse rural populations, and to deepen understandings of other geographies of rural gentrification.

Rural change: Britain and the U.S.S.R.

This second group of papers from the Third BritishSoviet Geography Seminar’ concerns the process of rural change in the two countries. As with the first set of papers on the city and the region (Geoforum, Vol. 21, No. 4), it is essential to have an understanding of the social context of change in each case. Nowhere do the enormous differences between the two societies become more obvious than in the countryside.