Amenity Migration in the Context of Landscape-Ecology Research

Michael Bartoš 1 , Drahomíra Kušová 1 , Jan Těšitel 1 , Jan Kopp 2 ,  and Marie Novotná 2
  • 1 v.v.i., Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Institute of Systems Biology and Ecology, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05 České Budějovice, Czech Republic
  • 2 Faculty of Education, Department of Geography, University of West Bohemia in Pilsen, Veleslavínova 42, 306 19 Plzeň, Czech Republic

Amenity Migration in the Context of Landscape-Ecology Research

Amenity migration is a specific type of migration that is not economically motivated. Rather it is brought about by a desire to render more valuable the natural or socio-cultural environment of the target territory, and it is often directed from metropolitan to rural areas. This phenomenon has been strongly supported by the spread and growing accessibility of mass information technologies. As with any other kind of migration, it can lead to changes in the spatial distribution of human activities in the target territory. Under specific conditions, it can become one of the driving societal forces determining the socio-economic development of a given rural region. In the European context, amenity migration appears to be in its early stages of development. As such, it has been the subject of theoretical debate rather than being documented by empirical evidence. Amenity migration can be seen as an ambiguous phenomenon. Optimistic hypotheses claim that it could support local development of rural space and thus diminish the disproportionate development of particular regions and that it can maintain or even improve these region's environmental and cultural quality. On the other hand, it can also lead to a massive invasion of urban behavioural patterns into rural areas, making them culturally uniform. Tried and tested GIS methods exist for identifying a landscape's potential for amenity migration. The use of qualitative and quantitative techniques is a useful and progressive approach to landscape ecological research. We can expect further progress in the methods used to study amenity migration and for evaluating rural development within a landscape context following further research on amenity migrants, which will take place over the coming years.

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

  • Bartoš, M., Kušová, D. (2005). Amenitní migrace jako specifická forma globální migrace obyvatel a její vliv na kvalitu života. Životné prostredie, 39 (6): 315-318.

  • Bartoš. M., Kušová, D. & Těšitel, J. (2005). Amenity migration and tourism, In: Hasman, M., Šittler, E. (Eds.), Sustainable development and Tourism, 17-22 pp. Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Travel Trade in Tábor, Tábor 12-13 May 2005.

  • Bartoš, M., Kušová, D. & Těšitel, J. (2008). Amenity migration as an example of the environmental migration, In: Stojanov, R., Novosak, J. (Eds.): Migration, Development and Environment. pp 58-75. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Chapter III.

  • Bauman, Z. (1995). Úvahy o postmoderní době. SLON, Prague.

  • Bičík, I., Vágner, J. & Fialová, D. (2001). Druhé bydlení v Česku, Charles University in Prague, Prague.

  • Blažek, J. (2002). Teorie regionálního rozvoje: nástin, kritika, klasifikace, Karolinum Publishing, Prague.

  • Buckley, R. (2004). Environmental impacts of ecotourism, CABI Publishing, Wallingford UK.

  • Buckley, R., Sander, N., Ollenburg, C. & Warnken, J. (2006). Green change: Inland amenity migration in Australia, In: Moss, L. A. G. (Ed.), The amenity migrants: Seeking and sustaining Mountains and their cultures, pp 278-294. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK and Cambridge, USA

  • Bukáček, R., Matějka, P. (1997). Hodnocení krajinného rázu: metodika zpracování, Prague: Správa CHKO ČR, pp 32.

  • Center for the Study of Rural America (2006). Regional Asset Indicators: Human Amenities. Working paper. Kansas City: Center for the Study of Rural America, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, p 3.

  • Chipeniuk, R. (2004). Planning for amenity migration in Canada. Mountain Research and Development, 24 (4): 327-335.

  • Chipeniuk, R. (2006). Planning for amenity migration in communities of the British Columbia hinterland, In: Moss, L. A. G. (Ed.), The amenity migrants: Seeking and sustaining mountains and their cultures, pp 163-174. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK and Cambridge, USA.

  • Drbohlav, D. (1999). International Migration and the Czech Republic, Geography of Societal Transformation in the Czech Republic. DemoArt, Prague.

  • Drbohlav, D. (2002). Migratory Trends in the Czech Republic: ‘Divergence or Convergence’ vis-à-vis the Developed World? Migration and ethnic themes 18 (2-3): 167-176.

  • Flognfeldt, T., Jr. (2006). Second homes, work commuting and amenity migrants in Norway's mountain areas, In: Moss, L. A. G. (Ed.), The amenity migrants: Seeking and sustaining mountains and their cultures, pp 232-244. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK and Cambridge, USA

  • Gardavský, V. (1983). K problematice geografie druhého bydlení, Práce i studia geographiczne, 4: 101-156

  • Glorioso, R. S. (1999). Amenity migration in the Šumava bioregion, Czech Republic: Implications for ecological integrity, In: Gode, P. M., Price, M. F. & Zimmermann F. M. (Eds.), Tourism and development in mountain regions, pp 275-295. CABI Publishing, CAB International, Oxon, UK, Chapter 5.

  • Glorioso, R. S., Moss, L. A. G. (2007). Amenity migration to mountain regions: Current knowledge and strategic construct for sustainable management, Working paper 2007/01. International Amenity Migration Centre, Spokane, WA, USA.

  • Gülücka, A., Magel, H. (1992). Das Land hat Zukunft, J. Jehle Verlag, Munich.

  • Gutmann, M. P., Deane, G., Lauster, N. & Peri, A. (2005). Two Population-Environment Regimes in the Great Plains of the United States, 1930-1990. Population and Environment 27 (2): 191-225.

  • Halliday, J., Coombes, M. (1995). In search of counterurbanisation: some evidence from Devon on the relationship between patterns of migration and motivation. Journal of Rural Studies 11: 433-446.

  • Hendl, J. (2005). Kvalitativní výzkum: základní metody a aplikace. Portál, Prague, pp 408.

  • Honzík, K. (1965). Z tvorby životního slohu, NPL, Prague, pp 293.

  • Kopp, J., Novotná, M. (2007). Metodické přístupy k vymezení potenciálu krajiny pro amenitní migraci. Miscellanea geographica 13: 175-180

  • Kopp, J., Novotná, M. (2008). Evaluation of the landscape potential for amenity migration: theoretical analysis. In: Svatoňova (Ed.), Geography in Czechia and Slovakia, pp 53-58. Theory and Practice of Czech and Slovak Geography in the 21st Century. Brno: MU Brno

  • Kušová, D., Těšitel, J., Matějka, K. & Bartoš, M. (2008). Biosphere reserves - an attempt to form sustainable landscapes (A case study of three biosphere reserves in the Czech Republic). Landscape and Urban Planning, 84 (1): 38-51.

  • Löw, J., Míchal, I. (2003). Krajinný ráz, Kostelec nad Černými lesy: Lesnická práce, s.r.o., pp 552.

  • Librová, H. (1994). Pestří a zelení - kapitoly o dobrovolné skromnosti, Veronica Publishing, Brno.

  • Librová, H. (2003). Vlažní a váhaví, Doplněk Publishing, Brno.

  • McGranahan, D. (1999). Natural Amenities Drive Rural Population Change. Measures of Natural Amenities. Agricultural Economic Report No. 781, U. S. Department of Agriculture, pp 32.

  • McIntyre, N., Williams, D. & McHugh, K. (2006). Multiple dwelling and tourism. CABI Publishing, CAB International, Wallingford, UK, pp 374.

  • Moss, L. A. G. (1987). Santa Fe, New Mexico, Post-industrial amenity-based economy: Myth or model? Alberta Ministry of Economic and Trade & International Cultural Resources Institute, Edmonton and Santa Fe, New Mexico.

  • Moss, L. A. G. (1994). Beyond Tourism: The Amenity Migrants, in Coherence and Chaos: Visions, Means, Action, In: Mannermaa, M., Inayatullah, S. & Slaughter, R. (Eds.), School of Economics, Turku, Finland.

  • Moss, L. A. G. (2006). The Amenity Migration - seeking and sustaining Mountains and their culture, CABI Publishing, Oxfordshire UK, Cambridge USA.

  • Moss, L. A. G., Těšitel, J., Zemek, F., Bartoš, M., Kušová, D. & Heřman, M. (1999). Tourism in bioregional context: Approaching ecosystemic practice in Šumava, Czech Republic. In: Gode, P. M., Price, M. F. & Zimmermann, F. M. (Eds.), Tourism and development in mountain regions, pp 85-113. CABI Publishing, CAB International, Oxon, UK, Chapter 5.

  • Müller, D. K. (2006). Amenity migration and tourism development in the Tärna Mountains, Sweden, In: Moss, L. A. G. (Ed.), The amenity migrants: Seeking and sustaining mountains and their cultures, pp 45-258. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK and Cambridge, USA

  • Novotná, M. (2004). Využití metod GIS při výzkumu druhého bydlení, In: Vágner, J., Fialová, D. (Eds.), Regionální diferenciace druhého bydlení v Česku, pp 201-208. Charles University in Prague, Prague

  • Novotná, M. (2005). Ohodnocení geografického potenciálu pro cestovní ruch. Geografie, cestovní ruch a rekreace., Olomouc, Univerzita Palackého, katedra geografie, pp 15-26.

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park and London: Sage, pp 532.

  • Perlik, M. (2006). The specifics of amenity migration in the European Alps, In: Moss, L. A. G. (Ed.), The amenity migrants: Seeking and sustaining mountains and their cultures, pp 215-231. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK and Cambridge, USA

  • Price, M. F., Moss, L. A. G. & Williams, P. W. (1997). Tourism and amenity migration, In: Messerli, B., Ives, J. D. (Eds.), Mountains of the World: A Global Priority, pp 249-280. The Parthenon Publishing Group, London & New York

  • Reinöhlová, E. (2005). In: Novotná, M. (Ed.), Problémy periferních oblastí. pp 36-43. Katedra sociální geografie a regionálního rozvoje, Charles University in Prague, Prague

  • Reuveny, R. (2005). Environmental Change, Migration and Conflict: Theoretical Analysis and Empirical Explorations. Paper presented at the International Workshop "Human Security and Climate Change" in Asker, Norway, 21-23 June 2005.

  • Riley, M., Ladkin, A. & Szivas, E. (2001). Tourism employment: Analysis and planning, Channel View, Clevedon.

  • Steward, I. S. (2002). Amenity migration, In: Luft, K., MacDonald, S. (Eds.), Shaping the Future, pp 369-378. 5th Outdoor Recreation & Tourism Trends Symposium, Michigan State University Department of Park, Recreation and Tourism Resources, Lansing MI

  • Těšitel, J., Kušová, D. & Bartoš, M. (1999). Non marginal parameters of marginal areas, Ekológia (Bratislava), 18, (2): 39-46.

  • Těšitel, J., Kušová, D. & Bartoš, M. (2001). Population size - the indicator of the response of local population to external pressure (a case study of the right shore of the Lipno lake area), Ekológia (Bratislava), 20, (1): 29-37.

  • Těšitel, J., Kušová, D. & Bartoš, M. (2003). Tourist's reasons for visiting mountain areas: a case study of the Šumava Mountains, Landscape Research, 28, (3): 317-322.

  • Vágner, J. (2001). Vývoj druhého bydlení v Česku, In: Bičík, I., Vágner, J. & Fialová, D. (Eds.), Druhé bydlení v Česku, pp 42-54. Charles University in Prague, Prague

  • Vágner, J., Fialová, D. (2004). Regionální diferenciace druhého bydlení v Česku, Charles University in Prague, Prague.

  • Van Dam, F., Heins, S. & Elbersen, B. S. (2002). Lay discourses of a rural and stated and revealed preferences for rural living. Some evidence of the existence of a rural idyll in the Netherlands. Journal of Rural Studies, 18: 461-476.

  • Vorel, I. (1999). Hodnocení krajinného rázu - vývoj názoru a osnova postupu. Péče o krajinný ráz - cíle a metody, Prague: ČVUT, pp 103-110

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search