Community Landscape Preferences for Reuse of Soviet-Era Post-Agricultural Brownfields—What’s the Difference?

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F60076658%3A12510%2F23%3A43906788" target="_blank" >RIV/60076658:12510/23:43906788 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ruso.12479" target="_blank" >https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ruso.12479</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12479" target="_blank" >10.1111/ruso.12479</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Community Landscape Preferences for Reuse of Soviet-Era Post-Agricultural Brownfields—What’s the Difference?

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Reuse preferences for post-agricultural brownfields on former socialist agricultural premises in CEE countries are likely to be diverse and may depend on communities&apos; 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&apos;s preferences for its reuse. When agricultural sites are abandoned, communities&apos; preferences for its reuse also change. © 2023 Rural Sociological Society (RSS).

Název v anglickém jazyce

Community Landscape Preferences for Reuse of Soviet-Era Post-Agricultural Brownfields—What’s the Difference?

Popis výsledku anglicky

Reuse preferences for post-agricultural brownfields on former socialist agricultural premises in CEE countries are likely to be diverse and may depend on communities&apos; 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&apos;s preferences for its reuse. When agricultural sites are abandoned, communities&apos; preferences for its reuse also change. © 2023 Rural Sociological Society (RSS).

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50403 - Social topics (Women´s and gender studies; Social issues; Family studies; Social work)

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2023

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Rural Sociology

ISSN

1549-0831

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

88

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

2

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

30

Strana od-do

"362 "- 391

Kód UT WoS článku

000928820700001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85147530561