Guía docente de Strategies for the Development and Revitalization of European Rural Areas (MQ1/56/1/10)

• Introduction to the diversity of European rural areas.
• Current problems, threats, and challenges facing rural areas in Europe.
• Strategies for the development and revitalization of European rural areas.
• Pros and cons of the policies and programs that affect them.
• Local governance and empowerment in rural areas. Promotion of partnerships and participation in decision-making.
• Practical cases and experiences of successful and failed initiatives. Assessment of their impact, limitations, methods of operation, etc.

The main aim is to describe the geographical dynamics of European rural areas from both a socio-cultural and environmental perspective, and to understand the variety of strategies that have been implemented for their development and revitalization in the 21st century.

The secondary objectives are as follows:

• Highlight the importance of understanding the diversity of European rural areas, with their particularities, potential, and weaknesses.
• Encourage students to move beyond a contemplative attitude towards the problems of rural spaces and be able to propose development strategies and proposals.
• Understand rural space as a geographical reality from different typologies and scales, mainly at the European level.
• Become familiar with the different policies and programs that affect the development of rural areas in Europe.
• Analyze and evaluate the repercussions and impacts of different policies and programs regarding rural development.
• Recognize the importance of empowerment, social innovation and local decision-making when promoting the endogenous development of rural regions.

• Unit 1. Introduction. The geography of rural areas in Europe.
• Unit 2. Rural depopulation and farmland abandonment in Europe. Weaknesses and strengths of European rural areas. Concept and evolution of rural development.
• Unit 3. Multifunctionality and rural development in Europe. From agriculture and livestock farming to productive diversification. Emerging challenges and opportunities. Case studies.
• Unit 4. Participation, governance and leadership in the rural areas. Is it real the empowerment of society and the participation of young people and women in decision-making? Neo-endogenous rural development.
• Unit 5. Smart rural and social innovation? Innovation in European rural areas.

• Individual or group oral presentations (depending on the class size) on a topic agreed upon in relation to the course units. The oral presentations will be delivered in person.
• Analysis of statistical sources for the study of European rural areas.
• Debate seminars based on mandatory readings (scientific papers, press analyses, books) and/or graphic material (documentaries, videos, films).
• Field trip to a chosen rural area in Andalusia.
• Any other teaching activity in relation to the subject syllabus.

• Ballas, D., Kalogeresis, T. & Labrianidis, L. (2003). "A comparative study of typologies for rural areas in Europe", 43rd Congress of the European Regional Science Association: "Peripheries, Centres, and Spatial Development in the New Europe", 27th - 30th August 2003, Jyväskylä, Finland, European Regional Science Association (ERSA), Louvain-la-Neuve.
• Cejudo-García, E., Navarro-Valverde, F. A., & Cañete-Pérez, J. A. (2024). Win or Lose in Rural Development. Springer.
• Esparcia, J. (2014). “Innovation and networks in rural areas. An analysis from European innovative projects”. Journal of Rural Studies, 34, 1-14.
• Todorova, S. &  Parzhanova, A. (2021). "The role of multifunctional agriculture for sustainable rural development". Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, 21 (2), 645-652.
• Navarro, L. M., & Pereira, H. M. (2015). “Rewilding abandoned landscapes in Europe”. In Rewilding European Landscapes (pp. 3-23). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
• Sánchez, M. (2019). Land of Women (C. Bauer, Trans.). Trinity University Press.
• Shucksmith, M. (2000). “Endogenous development, social capital and social inclusión: perspectives from LEADER in the UK”. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(2), pp. 208-218. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9523.00143/abstract

• Bock, B. (2016). “Rural marginalisation and the role of social innovation; a turn towards nexogenous development and rural reconnection”. Sociologia Ruralis, 56(4), 552-573, DOI: 10.1111/soru.12119
• Bosworth, G., & Atterton, J. (2012). “Entrepreneurial in‐migration and neoendogenous rural development”. Rural Sociology, 77(2), 254-279.
• Cheshire, L., Esparcia, J. and Shucksmith, M. (2015). "Community resilience, social capital and territorial governance". Ager, 18, 7-38.
• EIT FOOD PROJECT (2021). The regenerative agriculture manual. Bruselas: European Comission.
• Elliot, N. L. (2021). “Ecotourism and Rewilding Europe”. In Routledge Handbook of Ecotourism (pp. 344-356). Routledge.
• Genovese, D., Culasso, F., Giacosa, E., & Battaglini, L. M. (2017). “Can livestock farming and tourism coexist in mountain regions? A new business model for sustainability”. Sustainability, 9, 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9112021
• Hostiou, N., Vollet, D., Benoit, M., & Delfosse, C. (2020). “Employment and farmers’ work in European ruminant livestock farms: A review”. Journal of Rural Studies, 74: 223-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.01.008
• Johnson, K. M., & Lichter, D. T. (2019). “Rural depopulation: Growth and decline processes over the past century”. Rural Sociology, 84, 1: 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12266
• Mahon, M., Woods, M., Farrell, M., Jones, R., & Goodwin‐Hawkins, B. (2023). “A spatial justice perspective on EU rural sustainability as territorial cohesion”. Sociologia Ruralis, 63(3), 683-702.
• Navarro, F. A., Woods, M., & Cejudo, E. (2016). “The LEADER initiative has been a victim of its own success. The decline of the bottom‐up approach in rural development programmes. The cases of Wales and Andalusia”. Sociologia Ruralis, 56(2), 270-288.
• Neumeier, S. (2017). “Social innovation in rural development: identifying the key factors of success”. The Geographical Journal, 34-46.
• Ruiz Morales, A., Cruz Moriana, V., Bermúdez Rus, M., Mancilla-Leytón, J.M., & Ureña Cámara, L.P. (2024). “Exploring Andalusia’s Rich Heritage through Surveys: Pastoral Livestock Farming as a Tourist Attraction Resource”. Animals, 14: 468. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14030468
• Roman, M., & Kawęcki, N. (2024). “Agritourism in academic research: Literature review and cluster analysis”. Turyzm/Tourism, 45-55. https://doi.org/10.18778/0867-5856.34.1.04
• Vercher, N., Bosworth, G., & Esparcia, J. (2023). “Developing a framework for radical and incremental social innovation in rural areas”. Journal of Rural Studies, 99, 233-242.
• Wang, L., Pedersen, P. B. M., & Svenning, J. C. (2023). “Rewilding abandoned farmland has greater sustainability benefits than afforestation”. Biodiversity, 2(1), 5.
• Wanner, A., Pröbstl-Haider, U., & Feilhammer, M. (2021). “The future of Alpine pastures–Agricultural or tourism development? Experiences from the German Alps”. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 35, 100405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2021.100405
• Woods, M. (2007). "Engaging the global countryside: globalization, hybridity and the reconstitution of rural place". Progress in Human Geography, 31 (4), 485-507. http://phg.sagepub.com/content/31/4/485.full.pdf+html
• Woods, M. (2010). Rural. Routledge.

• EU migration and asylum policy, European Council https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-migration-policy/
• European Network of Rural Development, Projects and practices. https://enrd.ec.europa.eu/projects-practice_en
• EUROSTAT: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat
• Le Monde Diplomatique (English edition): https://mondediplo.com/
• Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): https://www.oecd.org/
• Our World in Data: https://ourworldindata.org/
• Spanish Association of Geography: https://www.age-geografia.es/site/
• The Economist: https://www.economist.com/
• The World Bank: https://www.worldbank.org/en/home
• The World Factbook: https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/
• United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs: https://www.un.org/en/desa
• United Nations Development Programme: https://www.undp.org/
• World Trade Organization: www.wto.org

Article 17 of the UGR Assessment Policy and Regulations establishes that the ordinary assessment session (convocatoria ordinaria) will preferably be based on the continuous assessment of students, except for those who have been granted the right to a single final assessment (evaluación única final), which is an assessment method that only takes a final exam into account.

According to the Rules of assessment and grading of the students of the University of Granada (latest modification approved by the Governing Board on 26th October 2016), the assessment of students’ academic performance will reflect public, objective and impartial criteria, and will preferably be continuous and ongoing. The ongoing evaluation consists of the following components:

• 40%: Essays and/or reports on agreed topics related to the content.
• 30%: Oral presentations (the oral presentations will be delivered in person).
• 15%: Active and proactive participation during lessons and fieldtrip. 
• 15%: Assistance and proactive participation during field practices.

Article 19 of the UGR Assessment Policy and Regulations establishes that students who have not passed a course in the ordinary assessment session (convocatoria ordinaria) will have access to an extraordinary assessment session (convocatoria extraordinaria). All students may take part in this extraordinary assessment session, regardless of whether or not they have followed continuous assessment activities. In this way, students who have not carried out continuous assessment activities will have the opportunity to obtain 100% of their mark by means of an exam and/or assignment.

• The extraordinary assessment session if an exam that represents 100% of student’s mark. This exam is multiple choice, in which three incorrect answers subtract one correct answer, while blank answers neither add nor subtract points. The exam is going to be based on the theoretical and practical content that have been presented during the course.

Article 8 of the UGR Assessment Policy and Regulations establishes that students who are unable to follow continuous assessment methods due to justifiable reasons shall have recourse to a single final assessment (evaluación única final), which is an assessment method that only takes a final exam into account.

In order to opt for a single final assessment (evaluación única final), students must send a request, using the corresponding online procedure, to the Coordinator of the Master’s Programme, in the first two weeks of the course or in the two weeks following their enrolment (if the enrolment has taken place after the classes have already begun). The coordinator will communicate this information to the relevant teaching staff members, citing and verifying the reasons why the student is unable to follow the continuous assessment system.

In this case, the assessment will comprise:

• Multiple choice final exam as described above.

• All the material associated with this course (whose availability will be offered from the PRADO platform of the University of Granada), will be for the exclusive use of the students of this Master’s course. Therefore, its reproduction or dissemination, in whole or in part, regardless of the means or device used (including platforms and web pages such as Wuolah, Docsity, etc.) is prohibited.
• If any kind of plagiarism is detected during the evaluation of any of the assignments, the grade of the whole module will be 0.0, notwithstanding the possible higher academic consequences.
• Following the recommendations of the CRUE and the Secretariat of Inclusion and Diversity of the UGR, the systems of acquisition and evaluation of competencies compiled in this teaching guide will be used following the principle of design for all people, facilitating the learning and demonstration of knowledge according to the needs and functional diversity of the students.
• The evaluation systems will be adapted to the special needs of students with disabilities, guaranteeing, in any case, their rights and favouring their inclusion in university studies, as established in Article 11 of the regulations for the evaluation and qualification of students from the University of Granada. The evaluation tests will be adapted to their needs, according to the recommendations of the Inclusion Unit of the University of Granada.
• Communication with the professor will be through the institutional email (example@correo.ugr.es) including name and surname, as well as the name of the module.