1. bookVolume 10 (2018): Issue 3 (September 2018)
Journal Details
First Published
24 Feb 2009
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Open Access

The Development of Rural Peripheral Areas in Lithuania: The Challenges of Socio-Spatial Transition

Published Online: 16 Oct 2018
Volume & Issue: Volume 10 (2018) - Issue 3 (September 2018)
Page range: 498 - 515
Received: 16 Nov 2017
Accepted: 27 Feb 2018
Journal Details
First Published
24 Feb 2009
Publication timeframe
4 times per year

[1] Berzins, A. & Zvidrins, P. (2011). Depopulation in the Baltic states. Lithuanian Journal of Statistics 50(1), 39–48.10.15388/LJS.2011.13931Search in Google Scholar

[2] Blowers, A. & Leroy, P. (1994). Power, politics and environmental inequality: A theoretical and empirical analysis of the process of “peripheralisation”. Environmental Politics 3, 197–228. DOI: 10.1080/09644019408414139.10.1080/09644019408414139Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[3] Burbulytė-Tsiskarishvili, G. (2012). Measuring Peripherality and Accessibility for Lithuanian Regional Policy. Regional Formation and Development Studies 8(3), 25–35.Search in Google Scholar

[4] Bürk, T. (2013). Voices from the Margin: The Stigmatization Process as an Effect of Socio-Spatial Peripheralization in Small-Town Germany. In Fischer-Tahir, A. & Naumann, M., eds., Peripheralization. The Making of Spatial Dependencies and Social Injustice (pp. 168–185). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Search in Google Scholar

[5] Burneika, D. (2006). Peculiarities of economic relations between former Soviet countries – influence of different heritage. Geopolitical Studies 14, 409–420.Search in Google Scholar

[6] Burneika, D. (2012). Transformations in Lithuania – factors of change and regional patterns. In Gorzelak, G., Goh, C. C. & Fazekas, K., eds., Adaptability and Change: The Regional Dimensions in Central and Eastern Europe (pp. 267–283). Drelow: Poligraf.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Chevalier, P., Mačiulyté, L., Razafimaheva, L. & Dedeire, M. (2017). The Leader Programme as a Model of Institutional Transfer: Learning From its Local Implementation in France and Lithuania. European Countryside 9(2), 317–341. DOI: 10.1515/euco-2017-0020.10.1515/euco-2017-0020Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[8] Copus, A. K. (2001). From Core-periphery to Polycentric Development: Concepts of Spatial and Aspatial Peripherality. European Planning Studies 9(4), 539–552. DOI: 10.1080/713666491.10.1080/713666491Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[9] Daugirdas, V., Burneika, D., Kriaučiūnas, E., Ribokas, G., Stanaitis, S. & Uberevičiuné, R. (2013). Lietuvos retai apgyventos teritorijos. Vilnius: Lietuvos socialinių tyrimų centras.Search in Google Scholar

[10] Daugirdas, V. & Burneika, D. (2008). Peripherality and peripheral regions in Lithuania – borderland of EU. In Baubinas, R., ed., Problem regions in Lithuania (sociogeographical aspect) (pp. 6–12). Vilnius: Geografijos ir geologijos institutas.Search in Google Scholar

[11] Deleuze, G. (2004). Desert islands and other texts. Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

[12] Dringelis, L. (2013). Lietuvos miestai, miesteliai ir kaimai: jų urbanistinių ir demografinių pokyčių įtaka šalies kraštovaizdžio erdvinės struktūros savitumui Juornal of architecture and urbanism 37(4), 310–323. DOI: 10.3846/20297955.2013.869884.10.3846/20297955.2013.869884Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[13] Elcock, H. (2014). Multi-level governance and peripheral places: The North-East of England. Local Economy 29(4–5), 323–333. DOI: 10.1177/0269094214541524.10.1177/0269094214541524Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[14] Eriksson, M. (2008). (Re)Producing a “peripheral” region – Northern Sweden in the news. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 90, 369–388. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0467.2008.00299.x.10.1111/j.1468-0467.2008.00299.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

[15] Gutiérrez, J. & Urbano, P. (1996). Accessibility in the European Union: the impact of the Trans European road network. Journal of Transport Geography 4(1), 15–25. DOI: 10.1068/a301337.10.1068/a301337Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[16] Janc, K. (2006). Human and social capital in Poland – spatial diversity and relations. Europa XXI 14, 39–55.Search in Google Scholar

[17] Jeřábek, M. (2006). Research into peripheral areas in the Czech Republic – changes in the landscape and land use in the model regions. Europa XXI 15, 171–183.Search in Google Scholar

[18] Juska, A., Poviliunas A. & Pozzuto, R. (2005). Resisting Marginalisation: The Rise of the Rural Community Movement in Lithuania. Sociologia Ruralis 45(1–2), 3–21. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9523.2005.00287.x.10.1111/j.1467-9523.2005.00287.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

[19] Juškevičius, P. (2015). Lietuvos miestų sistemos raida ir jos ateities perspektyvos. Acta Academiae Artium Vilensis 76, 11–34.Search in Google Scholar

[20] Kavoliutė, F. (2014). Gyvenamųjų vietovių vardai – nematerialusis šalies kultūros paveldas [Place names – intangible cultural heritage]. Geografijos metraštis 47, 88–102.Search in Google Scholar

[21] Keeble, D. E. (1989). Core-periphery disparities, recession and new regional dynamisms in the European Community. Geography 74(1), 1–11.Search in Google Scholar

[22] Kinsey, B. S. (2006). Cleavage formation in Norway: The Contextual Dimension. Scandinavian Political Studies 29(3), 261–283. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9477.2006.00152.x.10.1111/j.1467-9477.2006.00152.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

[23] Kondrotaitė, G. (2006). Socialinės rizikos šeimos Lietuvoje: atvejo studija. Filosofija.Sociologija 4, 55–60.Search in Google Scholar

[24] Kriaučiūnas, E., Krupickaité, D., Pociūté-Sereikiné, G. & Ubarevičiuné, R. (2014). Lietuvos kaimo gyvenviečių funkcijų kaitos regioninės ypatybės. Geografijos metraštis 47, 70–87.Search in Google Scholar

[25] Kriaučiūnas, E. (2010). Some development patterns of Lithuanian rural territories in 1990– 2010. Geopolitical Studies 16, 199–212.Search in Google Scholar

[26] Kriaučiūnas, E. & Daugirdas, V. (2013). Rečiausiai gyvenamų Lietuvos teritorijų gyvenviečių tinklo ypatumai Geografijos metraštis 46, 32–45.Search in Google Scholar

[27] Krugman, P. R. (2010). The New Economic Geography, Now Middle-aged. Regional Studies 45(1), 1–7. DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2011.537127.10.1080/00343404.2011.537127Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[28] Kühn, M. (2015). Peripheralization: Theoretical Concepts Explaining Socio-Spatial Inequalities. European Planning Studies 23(2), 367–378. DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2013.862518.10.1080/09654313.2013.862518Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[29] Kühn, M. & Bernt, M. (2013). Peripheralization and power – Theoretical debates. In Fischer-Tahir, A. & Naumann, M., eds., PeripheralizationThe making of spatial dependencies and social injustice (pp. 302–317). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Search in Google Scholar

[30] Lang, T. (2012). Shrinkage, Metropolisation and Peripheralisation in East Germany. European Planning Studies 20(10), 1747–1754. DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2012.713336.10.1080/09654313.2012.713336Search in Google Scholar

[31] Lang, T. (2015). Socio-economic and political responses to regional polarisation and socio-spatial peripheralisation in Central and Eastern Europe: a research agenda. Hungarian Geographical Bulletin 64(3), 171–185. DOI: 10.15201/hungeobull. in Google Scholar

[32] Mačiulytė, J. & Bagočiūtė, A. (2008). Regional Developement Disparities and Regional Policy in Lithuania after Accession to the European Union. In Gaidoš, P., ed., Regional Disparities in Central Europe (pp. 87–97). Bratislava: Interlingua.Search in Google Scholar

[33] Maldžiūnas, V. (1970). Teritorinių mikrorajonų centrų tinklas Lietuvos TSR [PhD thesis]. Kaunas: Kauno politechnikos institutas.Search in Google Scholar

[34] Marada, M., Chromý, P., Jančák, V. & Havlíček, T. (2006). Space polarization and peripheral regions in Czechia. Europa XXI 15, 29–34.Search in Google Scholar

[35] Miggelbrink, J. & Meyer, F. (2015). Lost in Complexity? Researching the Role of Socio-Spatial Ascriptions in the Process of Peripheralization. In Lang, T., Henn, S., Ehrlich., K. & Sgibnev, W., eds., Understanding Geographies of Polarization and Peripheralization (pp. 62–79). Basingstoke: Palgrave.Search in Google Scholar

[36] Nagy, G. (2006). Economic potential of regions – modelling the spatial structure of Hungary in the period of transition. Europa XXI 14, 7–26.Search in Google Scholar

[37] Pocius, A. (2007). Changes in internal territorial Lithuanian resident mobility and influence of migration of labour market. Survey of Lithuanian economy 2, 24–32.Search in Google Scholar

[38] Pociūtė, G. (2014). Trends of imbalances of demographic and socioeconomic development in post-reform period in Lithuania. In Churski, P., ed., The social and economic growth vs. the emergence of economic growth and stagnation areas (pp. 129–150). Poznan: Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe.Search in Google Scholar

[39] Pociūtė-Sereikienė, G., Kriaučiūnas, E. & Ubarevičienė, R. (2014). Peripheralisation trends in rural territories: the case of Lithuania. Studies in Agricultural Economics 116, 122–130. DOI: 10.7896/j.1421.10.7896/j.1421Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[40] Rokkan, S. & Urwin, D. W. (1982). Introduction: Centres and peripheries in Western Europe. In Rokkan, S. & Urwin, D. W., ed., The Politics of territorial identity: Studies in European regionalism (pp. 1–17). London: SAGE Publications.Search in Google Scholar

[41] Rupas, V. & Vaitekūnas, S. (1980). Lietuvos kaimo gyventojai ir gyvenvietės [Lithuanian rural population and settlements]. Vilnius: Mintis.Search in Google Scholar

[42] Šešelgis, K. (1975). Rajoninio planavimo ir urbanistikos pagrindai. Vilnius: Mintis.Search in Google Scholar

[43] Šešelgis, K. (1996). Teritoriju planavimo raida Lietuvoje. Urbanistika ir Architektūra 21(1), 4– 19.Search in Google Scholar

[44] Spiekermann, K. & Wegener, M. (1996). Trans-European Networks and Unequal Accessibility in Europe. European Journal of Regional Development 4, 35–42.Search in Google Scholar

[45] Spoor, M. (2013). Multidimensional Social Exclusion and the ‘Rural-Urban Divide’ in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Sociologia Ruralis 53(2), 139–157. DOI: 10.1111/soru.12008.10.1111/soru.12008Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[46] Swain, N. (2016). Eastern European Rurality in Neo-Liberal, European Union World. Sociologia Ruralis 56 (4), 574–596. DOI: 10.1111/soru.12131.10.1111/soru.12131Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

[47] Ubarevičienė, R. & van Ham, M. (2017). Population decline in Lithuania: who lives in declining regions and who leaves? Regional Studies, Regional Science, 4(1), 57–79. 10.1080/21681376.2017.131312.Search in Google Scholar

[48] Vaishar, A. (2006). Regional periphery: What does it mean? Europa XXI 15, 7–12.Search in Google Scholar

[49] Vaitekūnas, S. (1989). Gyvenviečių geografija. Vilnius: Vilniaus Universitetas.Search in Google Scholar

[50] Vaitekūnas, S. (2006). Lietuvos gyventojai: Per du tūkstantmečius. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.Search in Google Scholar

[51] Van Berkel, D. B. & Verburg, P. H. (2011). Sensitising rural policy: Assessing spatial variation in rural development options for Europe. Land Use Policy 28(3), 447–459. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2010. DOISearch in Google Scholar

[52] Vanagas, J., Kriśjane, Z., Noorkoiv, R. & Staniunas, E. (2002). Planning urban systems in Soviet times and in the era of transition: the case of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Geographia Polonica 75(2), 75–100.Search in Google Scholar

[53] Willett, J. (2010). Why is Cornwall So Poor? Narrative, Perception and Identity [PhD thesis]. Exeter: University of Exeter.Search in Google Scholar

[54] Census 1989 (1991). Lithuanian 1989 population census data. Vilnius: Statistics Lithuania.Search in Google Scholar

[55] European Commission (2017). Commission Staff Working Document. Country Report Lithuania 2017. SWD (2017) 80 final. Available online at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2017-european-semester-country-reports_en Accessed 22 February 2017.Search in Google Scholar

[56] LR Vyriausybės nutarimas (2003). Dėl probleminių teritorijų išskyrimo kriterijų [LR Government decision “Due to the criterion to distinguish problem territories”]. Act. No. 35–1483.Search in Google Scholar

[57] LR Vyriausybės nutarimas (2007). Dėl probleminių teritorijų [LR Government decision “Due to problem territories”]. Act. No. 15–555.Search in Google Scholar

[58] Lyman, R. (2016). Like Trump, Europe‘s Populist Win Big With Rural Voters. The New York Times December 6. Available online at: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/06/world/europe/europe-poland-populism-rural-voters.html?_r=2 Accessed 7 December 2016.Search in Google Scholar

[59] Raagmaa, G. (2003). Centre-periphery model explaning the regional development of informational and transitional society. Conference abstract. 43rd Congress of the European regional science association (ERSA) in Jyväskylä, Finland, 27–30 August 2003. Available online at: http://www.jyu.fi/ersa2003/cdrom/abstracts/a503.html Accessed 15 January 2017.Search in Google Scholar

[60] Statistics Lithuania (2017). Database of indicators. Available online at: http://osp.stat.gov.lt/en/statistiniu-rodikliu-analize1?epoch=ML Accessed 12 December 2016.Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD