The Problems of Knowledge Economy and Innovation Processes in Agriculture Case Study of the Nitra Region

Open access

Abstract

Agriculture is an important element of rural economy development, currently facing many problems. The unfinished process of economic transformation, division of land use and land ownership, disintegrated social networks, under-developed institutions – these are the problems hindering the knowledge economy enforcement. Among the agricultural enterprises there is a high level of distrust resulting into low cooperation, reluctance against partnerships and networks which represent the main instrument for knowledge economy enforcement. Moreover, the current EU agricultural policy which is adjusted for agricultural conditions in the old member states hampers innovation activities of agricultural enterprises and conserves inefficient structures in them.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Blaas G. et al. 1999. Analýza vývoja pol'nohospodárstva a potravinárstva za obdobie rokov 1990 – 1998: research report. Bratislava: výskumný ústav ekonomiky pol'nohospodárstva a potravinárstva. pp. 184.

  • Blažík T. – FalŤan v. – Tarasovičová z. – Saksa M. 2011. Land Use Changes in Chosen Districts of various Productive Agricultural Regions in Context of Transformation Precess. In Geografcký časopis/Geographical Journal vol. 63 2011. no. 4 pp. 301–323.

  • Bandlerová A. 2005. Situation of the Agricultural Cooperatives in Slovakia Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra 2005 [cit. 2014-03-14]: Retrieved from: http://www.slpk. sk/eldo/aktualne otazky legislativy/bandlerova.pdf

  • Brunori G. – Rand S. – Proost J. – Barjolee D. – Granberg L. – Dockes A. 2011. Ch. Towards Conceptual Framework for Agricultural and Rural Innovation Policies 2011 WP1 – Review of Conceptual Frameworks an Theoretical Underpinnings [cit. 2010-06-11]. Retrived from: www.insightproject.net/fles/Rapport_insight_WP1fnal.pdf

  • Buček M. – Rehák Š. – Hudec O. 2010. výskum znalostí a poznatkov v ekonomike – koncepcie metodológia výsledky. In zborník príspevkov z konferencie: Národná a regionálna ekonomika VIII Herl'any. Košice: Technical University Košice pp. 105–118. ISBN 978-80-553-0517-2.

  • Burt R. S. 2004. Structural Holes vs Networks Closure as Social Capital. In: American Journal of Sociology vol. 110 2004. no. 2 pp. 349–399. ISSN 0002-9602.

  • Fáziková M. – Mariš M. 2010. Znalostná ekonomika a pol'nohospodárstvo v Nitrianskom kraji. In zborník príspevkov z konferencie: Národná a regionálna ekonomika VIII Herl'any. Košice: Technical University Košice. pp. 235–245. ISBN 978-80-553-0517-2.

  • Fáziková M. et al. 2011. Dimenzie znalostnej ekonomiky v Nitrianskom kraji. Nitra: Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra. ISBN 978-80-552-0650-9.

  • Godin B. 2005. The linear model of innovation: historical construction of analytical framework. Project of history and sociology of S&T statistics. Working paper No 30. [Retrieved 2010-07-14]. Retrieved from: http://wwwcsiic.ca/PDF/Godin_30.pdf

  • Goodman D. 2003. The Quality Turn and Alternative Food Practices: Refection and Agenda. In Journal of Rural Studies vol. 19 2003 no.1 pp.1–7. ISSN 0743-0167.

  • Hoffmann L. B. 2001. Agricultural Functions and Biodiversity Tilburg: ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation. ISBN 90-76762-10-4.

  • Hudec O. – Urbančíková N. – Džupka P. – Šebová M. – Klimovský D. – Suhanyi L. – žElinský T. 2009. Podoby regionálneho a miestneho rozvoja. Košice: TU Košice. pp. 245– 265. ISBN 978-80-553-0117-4.

  • Ivaničková A. – Vlčková V. 2010. L'udský kapitál – implikácie pre znalostnú ekonomiku. In: zborník príspevkov z vedeckej konferencie: Regionálne dimenzie znalostnej ekonomiky Herl'any. Košice: Technical University Košice. pp. 7–23. ISBN 978-80-225-3095-8.

  • Jarábková J. 2003. Analýza ekonomickej štruktúry vidieckeho priestoru na Slovensku. In Podniky v podmínkách procesu globalizace a integrace: Sborník příspěvk? z mezinárodní vědecké konference ostrava 24.–25. dubna 2003. ostrava: Technická univerzita pp. 74–78. ISBN 80-248-0498-0.

  • Knickel K. – Tisenkopfs T. – Peter S. 2009. Innovation processes in agriculture and rural development Results of a cross-national analysis of the situation in seven countries research gaps and recommendations. [cit: 2014-05-10] Retrieved from: http://www.insightproject.net/fles/IN-SIGHT_fnal_report.pdf

  • Koncoš P. 2005. The development of employment in agricultute in years 1990 – 2005 connected with labour productivity 2006 [cit. 2014-03-14]: Retrieved from: http://bandlerova.weby.uniag.sk/fles/rackova/PDF/Koncos.pdf

  • McMichael P. 2004. Global development and the corporate food regime. In XI World Congress of Rural Sociology. Trondheim. [Retrieved 2010-07-14]. Retrieved from: http://www.corporate-accountability.org/eng/dicuments/2004/corporate_food_regime.pdf

  • Pimbert M. P. – Thompson J. – Vorley W. T. – Fox T. – Kanji N. – Tacoli C. 2001. Global Restructuring Agri-Food Systems and Livehoods. London: IIED. [Retrieved: 2010-07-14]. Retrieved from: http://www.iied.org/pubs/display.php?o=9166IIED&n=9&I=15&t=food

  • Ploeg Van Der J. D. – Renting H. – Brunori G. – Knickel K. – Mannion J. – Marsden T. – De Roest K. – Sevilla-Guzman E. – Ventura F. 2000. Rural development: from practices and policies towards theory. In: Sociologia Ruralis vol. 40 2000 no. 4. pp. 391–408. ISSN 1467-9523.

  • Portes A. 1998. Social capital: its origins and Applications in Modern Sociology. In Annual Review of Sociology vol. 24 pp.1–24. [cit. 2014-02-12] Retrieved from: doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342

  • Rehák Š. 2004. Poznatkovo založený regionálny rozvoj: doctoral dissertation thesis. Bratislava: Ekonomická univerzita v Bratislave.

  • Scoones I. – Thopson J. 2009. Farmer frst revised: innovation for agricultural research and development Burton on Dunsmore/UK> Practical Action Publishing TRIGILIA C. 2001. Social Capital and Local Development. In European Journal of Social Theory vol. 4 2001 no. 4 pp. 427– 442. ISSN 1368-4310.

  • Waarts Y. 2005. Indicators for the quantifcation of multifunctionality impacts European Centre for Nature Conservation (ECNC) The Netherlands 2005 [cit. 2014-03-14]: Retrieved from: http://www.ecnc.org/uploads/documents/mea-scope-vol.pdf

  • Wilson G – Rigg J. 2003. Post-productivist'agricultural regimes and the South: discordant concepts?. In Progress in Human Geography vol. 27 2003 no. 6 pp. 681–707. ISSN 0309-1325.

  • Zander P. – Karpinski I. – Meijer B. J. M. – Michel B. – Rossing W. A. H. – Groot J. C. J. – Josien E. – Rambonilaza T. – Madureira L. 2005. Knowledge Models Techniques and Tools That Help to Explain and Forecast Multifunctionality of Agriculture: comparative report. [cit. 2010-07-14]. Retrieved from: http://www.wageningenur.nl/en/Publication-details. htm?publicationId=publication-way-333434333539

  • Záverečná Správa strednodobého (mid-term) hodnotenia PRV SR 2007 – 2013 [cit. 2010-07-14]: Retrieved from: http://www.mpsr.sk/sk/?navID=32&navID2=32&sID=43&id=4283

Search
Journal information
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 486 328 7
PDF Downloads 237 158 0