<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>This paper aims to analyse to what extent the level and dynamics of development of rural regions located in two firmly different countries, Austria and Portugal, differ. In order to do this, an index to measure the ‘structural strength’ of rural regions was created. This index is a more holistic measure of socio-economic development than the traditional GDP per capita. After the identification of structurally weak regions in both Austria and Portugal, the paper compares them in the context of challenges faced by such regions.</p></abstract>

This paper aims to analyse to what extent the level and dynamics of development of rural regions located in two firmly different countries, Austria and Portugal, differ. In order to do this, an index to measure the ‘structural strength’ of rural regions was created. This index is a more holistic measure of socio-economic development than the traditional GDP per capita. After the identification of structurally weak regions in both Austria and Portugal, the paper compares them in the context of challenges faced by such regions.

Classification of Structurally Weak Rural Regions: Application of a Rural Development Index for Austria and Portugal

Quaestiones Geographicae

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

This paper aims to analyse to what extent the level and dynamics of development of rural regions located in two firmly different countries, Austria and...

Indicator	Calculation	Source
GDP per capita (PPS)	No calculation needed	Eurostat
Employment rate	Number of persons employed	Eurostat
Employment rate	Population (15 to 64 years)	Eurostat
Net Business Creation	Births – Deaths of enterprises	Eurostat
Net Business Creation	Population (15 to 64 years)	Eurostat
Crude rate of net migration	No calculation needed	Eurostat

	Immobile invests locally	Immobile abstains from investing
Mobile stays in rural region	Y, Y	Wr, Wr
Mobile moves to urban region	Wu, 0	Wu, Wr

	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015
Minimum	0.16	0.12	0.19	0.13	0.16	0.19	0.23	0.17
Maximum	0.80	0.81	0.79	0.74	0.83	0.80	0.67	0.59
Mean	0.42	0.35	0.42	0.39	0.42	0.48	0.44	0.41
Standard deviation	0.16	0.16	0.15	0.16	0.15	0.12	0.12	0.10
Coefficient of variation¹	38.09	45.71	35.71	41.02	35.71	25.00	27.27	24.39

Class	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015
I – Structurally strong	213%	425%	213%	319%	319%	425%	319%	213%
II – Moderately strong	531%	319%	638%	425%	531%	319%	638%	744%
III – Moderately weak	744%	744%	531%	638%	744%	531%	425%	531%
IV – Structurally weak	213%	213%	319%	319%	16%	425%	319%	213%

Class	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015
I – Structurally strong	417%	521%	521%	417%	417%	313%	417%	313%
II – Moderately strong	938%	521%	729%	625%	938%	938%	1042%	1042%
III – Moderately weak	625%	1042%	729%	1042%	729%	833%	521%	729%
IV – Structurally weak	521%	417%	521%	417%	417%	417%	521%	417%

Classification of Structurally Weak Rural Regions: Application of a Rural Development Index for Austria and Portugal

Published Online: Jun 11, 2020

Page range: 5 - 14

Received: Mar 26, 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2020-0014

Keywords
rural development, regional disparities, TOPSIS method, composite index, Austria, Portugal

© 2020 Barraí Hennebry et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Indicators used for the SSRR index.

The rural coordination game.

Descriptive statistics of SSRR index for Austria, 2008–2015.

Number and percentage of rural regions in each class for Portugal, 2008–2015

Number and percentage of rural regions in each class for Austria, 2008–2015.

Descriptive statistics of SSRR index for Portugal, 2008–2015.

	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015
Minimum	0.14	0.36	0.34	0.22	0.10	0.13	0.24	0.12
Maximum	0.77	0.61	0.68	0.72	0.89	0.56	0.82	0.78
Mean	0.36	0.49	0.48	0.40	0.47	0.36	0.57	0.45
Standard deviation	0.16	0.07	0.10	0.14	0.20	0.14	0.16	0.17
Coefficient of variation	44.44	14.28	20.83	35.00	42.55	38.89	28.07	37.78

Classification of Structurally Weak Rural Regions: Application of a Rural Development Index for Austria and Portugal

Published Online: Jun 11, 2020

Page range: 5 - 14

Received: Mar 26, 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2020-0014

Keywordsrural development, regional disparities, TOPSIS method, composite index, Austria, Portugal

© 2020 Barraí Hennebry et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Indicators used for the SSRR index.

The rural coordination game.

Descriptive statistics of SSRR index for Austria, 2008–2015.

Number and percentage of rural regions in each class for Portugal, 2008–2015

Number and percentage of rural regions in each class for Austria, 2008–2015.

Descriptive statistics of SSRR index for Portugal, 2008–2015.

Keywords
rural development, regional disparities, TOPSIS method, composite index, Austria, Portugal