Suchergebnisse

AbstractReuse preferences for post‐agricultural brownfields on former socialist agricultural premises in CEE countries are likely to be diverse and may depend on communities' experiences. Our research question is to reveal, through a questionnaire survey of 774 respondents from 180 communities, the difference in reuse preferences among communities with different experiences: communities where former collective farm sites had been abandoned (leaving a post‐agricultural brownfield), those where such sites had remained in continuous agricultural use, and those where such sites had been abandoned and later remediated or reused. The responses from the three types of communities were compared using Kruskal–Wallis tests and the structure of preferences was analyzed by Non‐Metric Multidimensional Scaling. Communities with an existing post‐agricultural brownfield prefer housing and leisure activities, while communities with sites in continuous agricultural production prefer agrarian uses. Two main poles of choice were identified—productive and non‐productive uses. While productive uses are preferred by respondents from communities with continuous agricultural production, non‐productive uses are preferred by communities with former post‐agricultural brownfields. The presence of post‐agricultural brownfields within the community is an important factor in determining a community's preferences for its reuse. When agricultural sites are abandoned, communities' preferences for its reuse also change.

AbstractStructural change in the agricultural economy may result in the abandonment of agricultural buildings, creating rural brownfield sites. Since the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, post‐agricultural brownfields have become very common in Central and Eastern Europe. Our aim is to uncover and understand the reuse preferences for 16 reuse options, among 1275 survey respondents (local residents) from 272 rural communities with post‐agricultural brownfields in the Czech Republic. The influence of respondent status, the socioeconomic characteristics of those communities and environmental characteristics of communities were tested using redundancy analysis and variation partitioning. Three types of reuse were identified as most preferred among respondents: agricultural reuse, industrial reuse and reuse for housing, services and leisure time activities. We found strong and significant ties between the pattern of preferences for potential reuse options and demographic, community socioeconomic and environmental context variables. It can therefore be concluded that preferences for rural renewal tend to be constructed comprehensively and encompass social, economic and environmental dimensions of sustainability. In order to implement a vision that promotes sustainable rural development, we need to recognise that the preferences of rural residents are fundamentally shaped by the local environment and are therefore highly dependent on the place‐based circumstances.