Not Only in Cities: Creative Activities in Rural Areas with a Case Study of Lower Silesia

Challenges for the development of rural areas are, in large measure, linked to an increase in the significance of knowledge of management processes. As a result, knowledge becomes the driving force in regional and local development (Cooke, Leydesdorff 2006; Stryjakiewicz et al. 2013). This increase in the significance of such knowledge poses a challenge for rural areas as their access to it is objectively weaker than that of the cities (Czapiewski, Janc 2011). But at the same time, it creates an opportunity for them. The increased significance of management knowledge offers an opportunity to introduce new, more effective ways of conducting economic activity and managing rural communities. In this context, creativity appears to be one of the responses to rural decline connected with the shift of society from the era of agriculture, through the industrial era, towards a knowledge economy (Li et al. 2019). This shift is manifested in the emergence of new types of activities as well as the increased significance of those that had been marginalised in favour of agricultural production until the present (Santos 2018).

One of the indicators and at the same time determinants of rural development is the presence of creative activities in a given area (Escalona-Orcao et al. 2018), which are mostly the domain of the so-called ‘creative class’ (e.g. Florida, 2002; Stryjakiewicz, Stachowiak 2013). Creative activities are the ‘new motor of economic growth worldwide’ (Chapain, Stryjakiewicz 2017: 1), contributing to socio-economic development. However, creativity, as an important developmental factor, is characterised by a lack of a single, universal model of emergence and localisation. When analysing this phenomenon, it is advisable to apply a spatial approach, which allows for the identification of various determinants and mechanisms of creativity-shaping in different locations undergoing different processes.

The objective of the present study is to identify rules governing the distribution and thematic structure of creative activities within the region illustrated with an example of Lower Silesia. The implementation of the objectives also comprises the identification of the distance of rural areas from cities in relation to the development of creative activities. It allows for an answer to the question ‘How do creative economies in rural and urban parts of the same region differ?’ The research also includes an assessment of the prevalence of these activities in rural areas in the context of development-policy shaping.

Lower Silesia was chosen for the case study because of the significance of the spatial diversification of its rural areas. These differences are manifested in the following: relations/linkages with urban centres, settlement networks, functional structures of municipalities, and levels of socio-economic development (e.g. Bański 2014; Zarębski 2015). Thus, the relatively small area provides the opportunity to identify the specific spatial patterns of creative activity as well as the conditions that shape them.

However, while the literature presents a number of approaches to defining the creative sector and creative activity (Potts et al. 2008), it generally refers to the original approach proposed by the British Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS 1998). According to this organisation, the creative sector includes activities that originate in the creativity of individuals, in their skills and talent, which, through the creation and use of intellectual property, are the basis for the creation of wealth and jobs. From this point of view, the creative sector is the sum of various creative activities. Given the objectives of this research, it is essential to note that the character of the space – its diversity – also plays an important role in issues connected with knowledge, its creation and its transfer. Nonaka and Toyama (2003) draw attention to the fact that knowledge requires a physical context in order to emerge, and thus, is space-dependent. Locations (space) providing necessary interactions (sharing time and space) allow for a sharing of the context. Hence, rural areas, due to lower population density (and consequently lower levels of interactions), are at a disadvantage in comparison to cities. Close connections between cities and knowledge-related issues are observed on various levels. Thus, from the very beginning of the interest in the phenomenon of creativity, its connections with cities, especially metropolises, have been emphasised (e.g. Florida 2005; Scott 2006). However, creativity and the entrepreneurship connected with it are not reserved to cities alone, or to their suburbs (Argent 2018); they are also found in rural areas.

Rural areas usually display lower development potential than cities do, often being areas of stagnation (Churski et al. 2015), which concerns the significance of access to knowledge and the possibility of its shaping. Doing business in rural areas requires meeting two challenges: their location away from the cities (i.e. more difficult, more time-consuming and more expensive access to products) and their lower population density (i.e. dispersion of local resources, including human capital) (Malecki, Moriset 2008). It needs to be remembered that rural areas are highly internally diversified in terms of economic structures, economic development, access to natural resources and resources connected with the inhabitants (for example, human and social capital), demography and social context or location in relation to large urban centres. Rural areas are subject to various processes (Marsden 1999) that affect them with various levels of intensity, depending on the specific character of each rural area.

The limited economic development of rural areas is connected, among other things, with the fact that physical proximity (and other forms of proximity) between actors on the local economic scene translates into the possibility of sharing information and knowledge (Boschma 2005). The factor of social isolation and fragmentation in rural areas is fundamentally important, as it hinders the creation and utilisation of knowledge as effectively as in cities (Fleming 2009). The advantages of cities have their origin in other aspects of spatial concentration, such as proximity of customers, proximity of suppliers, access to information, and an environment conducive to creativity (Rumpel et al. 2010; Tomczak, Stachowiak 2015). The attractiveness of rural areas for creative people or creative activities is dependent on the following aspects: the quality of life, a landscape, natural heritage, potential for socio-economic interactions, and physical as well as virtual accessibility (White 2010).

As Rastghalam et al. (2017) point out, the rural creative class is made up of creative villagers who possess local knowledge and internal connections to creative migrants and who introduce new knowledge and external connections. The question of how to obtain new migrants remains, especially in peripherally located rural areas. One of the aspects of a creative economy is the so-called ‘allure of the rural’. For some creative people tired of living in metropolises and taking part in the ‘rat race’, this fact may be an important incentive to change their place of residence (Collins, Cunningham 2017). The quality of life (outdoor amenities – mountains, lakes, other attractive landscapes) is the main determinant of rural creativity in the context of human inflow (McGranahan, Wojan 2007; McGranahan et al. 2010). This attraction does not, however, signify a tendency of the creative class to inhabit the ‘wild’ areas, as it requires relatively densely populated areas necessary to obtain ‘economic critical mass’ and socio-economic development (Argent et al. 2013).

Economic activity is deeply rooted in the community’s function in a given territory. When introducing or stimulating smart solutions, one needs to adjust these solutions according to socio-economic and local environmental conditions (Zavratnik et al. 2018) that affects the social assets of knowledge, ways of operating and approach to economic development (Woods 2005; Price, Evans 2009). This is why rural areas give greater significance to other types of creative activities (such as gastronomy, arts and crafts, or tourism) than cities do (Guzal-Dec 2018).

On the basis of the above considerations, it can be stated that in the case of rural areas, the main focus should be placed on the appropriate shaping – utilisation of territorial (local) resources. This would mean a better utilisation of knowledge based on the unique character of particular areas, that is, available resources.

Research into spatial distribution of creative activities has been conducted for many years, and it is indisputable that at present, creativity is highly spatially diversified at various levels: –

on the global scale (Lhermitte et al. 2015),

Some of the research on rural creativity does not include analyses of spatial diversity, usually concentrating on case studies of rural territories at various levels (e.g. Bell, Jayne 2010; Harvey et al. 2012). The main reason for addressing this issue is the association of the increase in the significance of knowledge with socio-economic development (including creativity), predominantly in urban areas. This phenomenon is observed in scientific research and the current public policy (Stryjakiewicz et al. 2014; Tomczak, Stachowiak 2015). It leads to insufficient recognition of conditions and opportunities for the functioning of creative industries in rural areas (Chapain, Stryjakiewicz 2017). Moreover, due to the high diversification of socio-economic development in rural areas, it is essential to carry out research not only into the general aspect of creativity, but above all into its various components. Another reason for concentrating on spatial analysis is an observed lack of sufficient empirical research, especially at local levels. This issue is discussed in the literature (e.g. Collins, Cunningham 2017; Escalona-Orcao et al. 2016). Surprisingly, as Woods (2015) notes, creativity is an inherent feature of rural communities. They have always had to find ways of meeting social and environmental challenges; hence, the need for research into rural creativity, which is different in nature from urban creativity and which therefore requires a slightly different approach (e.g. Petrov, Cavin 2018).

In view of the above, the major contribution of this article is its investigation into the issue of rural creativity locally, with a particular focus on the specific character of creative activities. We aim to bridge the urban–rural gap in creativity research. This has been achieved through the identification of territorial patterns of a creative economy (mapping of creative activity) in rural areas in relation to urban ones. A novel methodological approach has been applied in this study, which is based on the examination of all types of activities conducted by specific enterprises and not only the dominant ones. This approach fundamentally changes the research perspective and allows for a complete implementation of the study objectives.

This research adopts the region of Lower Silesia as the study area (Fig. 1). It is one of the most dynamically developing regions of Poland. In Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita in 2017, it was ranked second in Poland (following the Mazowieckie Voivodeship). On the European Union (EU) scale, however, its position was relatively low (77% in purchasing power standards, 186th place in the EU). On the national scale, Lower Silesia also scored high (third out of 16 voivodeships) in the share of outlays on research and development (R&D) in GDP (0.85%). The report of the Regional Innovation Scoreboard (Hollanders et al. 2019) describes it as a moderate innovator scoring above the national average. At the same time, agriculture generated only 1.4% of the gross added value of Lower Silesia (with 2.6 on a national scale). Agriculture employed 7.8% of workers. As stated in the introduction, the rural areas of Lower Silesia are highly spatially diversified. This diversity includes, among others, rural areas situated within the metropolitan area of Wrocław, industrial areas (e.g. Legnicko-Głogowski Okręg Miedziowy [the Legnica-Głogów Copper Belt]), a mountainous area (the Sudety Mountains), and woodland areas (north-eastern part of the region).

Fig. 1

In our research, we adopted an administrative division of Polish municipalities (NUTS 5

Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics. Level NUTS 5 in Poland is equivalent to a municipality. According to the National Official Register of the Territorial Division of the Country (TERYT), we could distinguish three types of municipalities: urban, rural and urban-rural.

We focus on rural and urban areas because all rural activity should be analysed in relation to the area’s surroundings. Research in Poland indicates that as many as 85% of creative companies are situated in cities and those operating in rural areas are usually concentrated in the suburban zones of the largest cities (Środa-Murawska, Szymańska 2013). Investigating the rural–urban gap in creativity in the economic sphere on the local level significantly expands the possibilities of explaining the identified patterns. In addition, the observed scarcity of research on creativity in rural areas is in itself a research gap which we intended to address.

An important challenge connected with investigating the phenomenon of creativity is the operationalisation of the notion of the creative sector. According to Namyślak (2014), activities can be described as creative as long as they produce or utilise knowledge and information based on intellectual property. In this context, some approaches relate to the sector of culture (Hesmondhalgh 2002) or creative economy (Howkins 2002). According to the approach of UNCTAD

UNCTAD – United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.

One of the first complex and practical approaches to the creative sector under the development policy was the classification proposed by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) in the UK (Miodońska 2019). Intellectual property was deemed to be the basis for building the creative sector, with its source in individual creativity, knowledge and skills (DCMS 1998). Based on the above classification, a number of its alternative versions has emerged, applying slightly modified assumptions and adapting the classification to the specific character of particular countries. It needs to be remembered, however, that in some cases, they differ significantly as to the number of proposed domains. The literature also lacks a single, universal methodology for research into the creative sector, which causes significant problems for the comparability of the research results.

The classification proposed by Namyślak (2014), which corresponds with the DCMS’s division and research by Stryjakiewicz and Stachowiak (2010), has been adopted as the research basis of this study. It has the advantage of being fully suited to Polish conditions, especially PKD (Polska Klasyfikacja Działalności [Polish Classification of Economic Activities] 2007). The applied classification distinguishes 13 groups of activities, comprising 35 creative activities.

These are the following: manufacture of ceramic tableware and ornamental articles; manufacture of furniture; manufacture of jewellery; bijouterie and related articles; manufacture of musical instruments; other retail sale of new goods in specialised stores; retail sale of second-hand goods in specialised stores; book publishing; publishing of directories and registers, newspapers, journals and periodicals; other publishing activities; publishing of computer games, other software; motion picture, video and television programme production, post-production, and distribution activities; motion picture projection activities; sound recording and music publishing activities; radio broadcasting; public and licensed television programmes broadcasting; computer programming activities; news agency activities; architectural activities; advertising; specialised design activities; photographic activities; translation and interpretation activities; performing arts activities; support activities to performing arts; artistic creation activities; operation of arts facilities; library activities; archive activities; museum activities; operation of historical sites and buildings and similar visitor attractions

The CEIDG base lists 37,000 economic entities in the study area. The study includes only active entities. Thus, finally, the study covers 175,963 entities. It includes information about the scope of the activity defined at the level of a subclass according to the Polish Classification of Activity of 2007 (PKD), coherent and comparable with NACE Rev2 classification (OJ L 393, 30.12.2006).

Economic entities were assigned to particular creative activities based on the PKD codes. A significant problem for the study was the decision about what should be the basis for such an assignment when a company is engaged in multiple activities (i.e. creative and non-creative in character).

Economic entities may enter many types of activities – they are not limited to defining only the main, dominant activity.

The first solution seems the easiest to implement. However, it rests upon the assumption that the activity declared as dominant at the moment of registration will remain dominant, which is not always the case. Small companies, in particular, can be very flexible, according to the current demand, in the products and services they offer. In such a case, the notion of a dominant activity does not apply in practice, as it undergoes constant changes (which are most probably not updated in the register). As indicated by Raczyk (2009), research conducted on the sample city of Milicz (Lower Silesia, Poland) showed that about 26% of existing units had different activities than the ones declared in the register.

It needs to be remembered that the dominant activity in a situation in which a company has several or dozens of various activities (which is the case for over 72% of companies in Poland [Raczyk 2020]) may in practice be very limited (accounting for considerably less than 50% of the company’s total activity). Moreover, this approach of basing only on dominant activity completely disregards the remaining types of activities which often constitute an important aspect of the functioning of the company (and which may be creative in character). In essence, it is necessary to decide whether creative companies are creative solely and exclusively (i.e. 100%), predominantly (over 50%) or only temporarily.

The approach proposed by the Authors solves the above dilemma, as it changes the research perspective and concentrates on examining creative activities and not creative companies. In practice, it assigns proportional shares to particular activities so that the total equals 1 (e.g. when one creative activity was assigned to a company which conducts a total of two activities, the share was 0.5, in a company conducting three activities, 0.33, etc.). Such values are later defined as ‘weighted shares of creative activities’ and are calculated for each company according to this formula: CA=cmCA = {c \over m} where: –

CA is the weighted share of creative activities [0–1], 1 meaning 100% of the creative activities in a specific economic entity,

For all entities in urban or rural areas (units of analysis), we calculated the overall average share of creative activities, thus: CASo=(1n∑i=1nCAi)×100{CAS_o} = \left({{1 \over n}\sum\limits_{i = 1}^n {{CA_i}}} \right) \times 100

For creative entities (CA > 0) in urban or in rural areas (units of analysis) only, we calculated the average share of creative activities, thus: CASc=(1n∑i=1ncCAi)×100{CAS_c} = \left({{1 \over n}\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{{n_c}} {{CA_i}}} \right) \times 100 and the sum of the weighted share of creative activities, thus: CAA=∑i=1ncCAiCAA = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^{{n_c}} {{CA_i}} where: –

CAA is the sum of the weighted share of creative activities in a specific area [0–n],

In order to compare different spatial units, we calculated an index: CAAI=CAAI×1000CAAI = {{CAA} \over I} \times 1000 where CAAI is the sum of weighted shares of creative activities in a specific area in relation to the number of inhabitants (I).

It is important to remember that such an approach rests upon the assumption that all the activities registered for a given company are conducted to the same extent, which is obviously a simplification. An advantage of such a solution is the possibility of a relatively precise estimation of the scale of the conducted creative activities (through weight assignment) and the incorporation of all the manifestations of the activities of the economic entities, regardless of their number.

The present paper is descriptive in character and relies on standard statistical methods. The focus has been placed on the identification of spatial patterns.

The classification of creative activities is a limitation of this research, as these classifications cannot encompass a complete description of all the creative activities undertaken in a given region. This limitation is related to the wider issue of the multidimensionality of the phenomenon of creativity, which may take various forms. A comprehensive explanation of the observed patterns would require extensive quality studies orientated towards understanding motivation, mechanisms of emergence, implementation methods, efficiency variabilities and the consequences of introducing particular creative activities.

When considering the global picture of rural creativity in Lower Silesia, it first needs to be stated that companies fully engaged in creative activity (CA = 1) were a minimal portion – about 1% – of the total number of companies operating in rural areas. At the same time, the portion of entities conducting at least one creative activity (CA > 0) (irrespective of this activities’ significance within the company) was 22.2% (Table 1). The measuring method highly differentiated the obtained creativity results as well as affected the observed distance in the level of creativity between rural and urban areas. The greatest distance was found by the index that considered only economic entities conducting exclusively creative activity, and the smallest distance was observed in the units conducting any creative activity.

The research methodology rests upon the concept of weighted shares of creative activities (CA), and it shows that the 176,000 economic entities examined conducted over 1.45 million activities (on average 8.2 per unit). The overall weighted share of creative activities (CASo) constituted 5.5% of all the activities conducted in the rural areas. This share was smaller than that of the cities (CAS = 8.1%). At the same time, a strong thematic concentration of this phenomenon was observed – 5 out of 35 creative activities (advertisement, software creation, sales of new pieces of art, manufacture of furniture, and architectural activity) had a total weighed share of over 50%. On the other hand, some categories played a marginal role – for example, activities connected with museums, libraries and archives.

Among the entities conducting creative activities in rural areas, there were many more whose weighted share was relatively very little (CASc – nearly 10 on average) (Fig. 2). This means that in an average company with a creative character, creative activities comprised only 10% of all registered activities. At the same time, economic entities which conducted 100% creative activities (= 1) constituted less than 5% of the researched population. Creative enterprises operating in the rural areas were characterised by a clearly lower weighted share of creative activities (CASc) compared to the urban areas. This proves that the essence of creative activities is above all co-operation with other economic entities, which usually complement these forms of activities. This phenomenon was especially visible in rural areas, which is natural, taking into account the more restricted access to a narrow market (resulting, among other things, from the distance from this market) as well as the low local demand for the product or service (compared to cities). In such conditions, multi-profile economic entities stand more of a chance of being successful. In this context, it needs to be stated that there is an intense diversity of creative domains in companies that are entirely creative (CA = 1)

Where 100% of the company’s activities were creative

Fig. 2

When analysing the structure of the weighted creative activities (CASc), it may be noted that out of 35 researched activities, only 8 obtained significantly greater shares in the rural areas compared to the urban areas (Annex 1). These were (in order of importance) manufacturing of ceramic tableware and ornamental articles, manufacturing of furniture, archive activities, museum activities, performing arts activities, support activities for performing arts, library activities and specialised design activities. In turn, the activities with relatively marginal significance for rural areas are as follows: video and television programme production activities, translation and interpretation activities, news agency activities, publishing of journals and periodicals, and book publishing. This shows that there exists a group of creative activities (though a small one) that are clearly preferred in the development of rural areas.

In terms of the significance for economic development, the weighted creative activities (CASc) calculated per the total number of economic entities in three instances played a greater role in rural areas than in cities (Annex 1): the manufacture of ceramic tableware and ornamental articles, the manufacture of furniture, and archive activities. This shows that although generally a creative economy is the domain of cities, in individual, particular instances, some creative activities may also constitute an important element in the development of the local economy in rural areas. However, these activities have a unique (as opposed to universal) character.

An essential dimension of the examined creative activities is the involvement of local communities in their creation (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3

Notably, there are relatively few rural areas that displayed a high level of the researched index (CAAI). They can be divided into several groups. The first one covers the territorial units connected with the functional areas of the largest and most dynamically economically developing cities in the region. This applies, above all, to the metropolitan area of Wrocław as well as important subregional centres (Legnica and Jelenia Góra). In this context, a high level of socio-economic development seems more crucial than the size of the settlement unit. This is clearly shown in the example of another subregional unit (Wałbrzych) undergoing serious economic difficulties. Its functional area is characterised by a low number of creative activities. Among the discussed groups, creative activities in rural areas were formed either as a result of their relocation from urban areas – for example, in an attempt to reduce the costs of doing business, such as rental or purchase of real estate – relocation of the owner to suburban areas, or as a response to the existing external demand (generated across the entire functional area of the city). In this group, the factors conducive to the development of creative activities had a mainly exogenic character. As a result, the scope of the conducted creative activities was extensive, but lacked a distinct thematic specialisation. In some cases, they had an ‘urban’ character – for example, computer games, software, publishing activities, architecture and so on. This is illustrated by the spatial structures of two selected creative activities with a strictly ‘urban’ character (Table 2): activities connected with software and advertising (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4

The highest values of the index were observed in the activities connected with software design in the functional area of Wrocław, while rural areas in the suburban zone yielded only slightly lower values compared to the core areas (and the highest on the province scale). At the same time, the remaining rural areas, especially those situated on the outskirts of a city, were characterised by very low values of the examined index (over half of the units below 0.2). A similar situation was identified in the case of advertising activity – in this case, however, the dominance of Wrocław and its functional area over the remaining areas of the region was even more pronounced.

Another characteristic group included territorial units in which the development of creative activities was based on specific competitive advantages with a local, endogenic character. In this case, a coherent area connected with the manufacture of furniture was highly distinguished (Fig. 5) and covered the north-eastern part of the region (Twardogóra, Międzybórz, Syców, Krośnice). The value of the index here exceeded 1, with an absolute maximum on the regional scale reaching almost 10. The development of creative activities was conditioned in this case by access to high-quality raw materials (forest resources), as well as a fully developed production culture, based on coopetition among a group of small and medium-sized production and service companies. However, it needs to be noted that there were a number of markets for the products manufactured there – the metropolitan systems of Wrocław, Łódź and Poznań, among others.

Fig. 5

Another group of rural areas with high creative activity was composed of territorial units associated with the manufacture of ceramic tableware and ornamental products from around Bolesławiec (in the north-western part of the region). The values of the index were not as high (maximum of 0.5) as with the manufacture of furniture, but among the units specialising in the manufacture of ceramic products, they were the highest in the researched area. These areas are a unique example of the retention of a centuries-long manufacturing tradition (and industrial design) despite the complete exchange of inhabitants following resettlement processes after World War II (exchanging a German population with a Polish population). This might be associated with maintaining the tangible heritage, which became the basis for the development of creative activities. Ceramic products have been manufactured in this area since at least the 14th century, and Bolesławiec and its surroundings has been one of the two largest ceramic centres in Silesia since the Middle Ages (Adler 2005). What is particularly important is that the highest values of the researched index were observed in rural areas, which were characterised by strong specialisation in this respect on the regional scale.

Rural areas (compared to cities) display a generally lower level of economic development (e.g. Hryniewicz 2017), and the weighted shares of creative activities (CASo) are also lower. The important question remains as to whether development and promotion of creative activities will significantly enhance the level of economic development, including adding new workplaces, and consequently counteract negative trends observed in rural areas. The shaping of a development policy may in this case be accompanied by an important dilemma: whether the formation of the creative class in rural areas (connected with an attempt to increase the significance of creativity) should be conducted above all in the context of migration (migratory influx into rural areas, or at least a limit of the outflow), as is often the case in urban areas. Or perhaps the focus should be placed on boosting creativity among the present inhabitants of rural areas, based on the identified already-existing or potential local resources (e.g. manufacturing tradition, cultural achievements). The immobility of the majority of developmental factors (social capital, social assets of knowledge) may be a considerable premise in this case. What is important is that the conducted research showed that the foundations of underlying creative activities in rural areas might be inherited despite significant social changes (e.g. ceramic activities) or be developed from local resources (e.g. manufacture of furniture).

Analysis results confirm that craft-based activities tend to be situated (and have the greatest significance) outside large cities. Such dependence is also reflected in the pattern observed in Italy, among other countries (Bertacchini, Borrione 2013). This observation is also compatible with research results carried out in Portugal in which it was proven that although the most knowledge-intensive activities (e.g. advertising, software) are concentrated in urban centres, the remaining activities (e.g. clay, fabric, glass) can also be found in rural areas, depending on the existing tradition (Cruz, Teixeira 2015). Surprisingly, the foundation of the creativity of rural areas on traditional activities should be viewed in a positive way. In view of the above, the basic threats connected with depopulation processes in rural areas do not only diminish human capital resources, but also, according to Visvizi et al. (2019), cause the dying out of the rural heritage and traditions, which are an important element of the heritage of regions and nations. As the example of the vicinity of Bolesławiec shows, this heritage may resist ‘the winds of history’ and be passed down despite a radical change of the cultural and social context.

A clear specialisation among creative activities indicates that rural areas should mainly undertake activities that are in line with the character of particular local settings and are strongly connected with local conditions. According to Stryjakiewicz et al. (2014), the shaping of creative areas requires activities that resonate with local contexts. Thus, a policy of promoting the development of creative activities in rural areas will be ineffective if it is not based on already-existing (or already-shaped) potentials. In this context, the simple mapping of the experiences of the development of creative activities in cities onto rural areas may also prove futile, especially when it is connected with the promotion of activities typical of urban areas.

Our research confirms the existence of a gap between cities and rural areas in creativity. Other studies from East-Central Europe show core-periphery relations in the spatial pattern of a creative economy (e.g. Egedy et al. 2018; Rehák et al. 2013). The creative economy is strictly related to urban hierarchy, urbanisation (Kozina, Clifton 2019) and economic development (Kozina, Bole 2017). Nevertheless, this research shows that rural areas and their specific heritage can also drive creative activity development. Moreover, it is not only tradition that can influence creativity in rural areas, but also changes connected with the renewal processes due to (among other) an influx of newcomers escaping from cities. These are mainly young people who, starting a new life in the countryside, mostly open new companies, small in scale but often classified as creative. Using their knowledge and experience, as well as technological skills, they can serve as a kind of channel for the transfer of creativity from cities to the countryside, which contributes to its development in rural areas and to the bridging of the gap between urban and rural creativity levels (RURALIZATION 2019).

The conducted research showed that the adoption of a particular research perspective very strongly affects the scale and structure of the researched phenomenon of creativity. It seems that this observation should be reflected in the shaping of local development policy. This poses an important dilemma – whether this policy should concentrate on activities aiming at publicising creative activities among companies, even when these activities play an insignificant or complementary role, or instead should be focused on enhancing the prominence of creative activities in the activity structure of particular economic entities. From the perspective of rural development, the former approach seems more accurate and fitting for the specific character of rural areas, where strict economic specialisation is definitely more demanding as compared to the cities, due to the economy of scale. The final resolution of this dilemma would require undertaking separate research, both qualitative (the implications of these solutions for the opportunities of company functioning) and quantitative (e.g. its implications for the income structure or the employment scale).

The study also showed that within particular enterprises, creative activities in most instances co-exist with other activities, while totally creative economic entities constitute a very small share of the enterprise population. A new interesting research perspective unfolds – whether and to what extent the phenomenon of the co-occurrence of creative and non-creative activities within particular economic entities affects the general improvement in the quality of their operations and whether it is conducive to, for example, the intensification of innovation diffusion.

Finally, it needs to be noted that the shift towards a service-oriented society in rural areas has led to the appearance of various developmental trajectories for rural areas. The question remains to what extent it will cause their diversification and enhance their individuality. The analysis of creative activities in Lower Silesia indicates that there are reasons for ‘adaptation’ to the new reality. However, at present, it is significantly territorially limited. This portrays the scale of challenges facing the regional policy for rural areas.