courses-img1News
International Respiratory Medicine Conference 2024 JEMP2024 NextGen Omics US 2025 A Topic Collection Dedicated to JEMP 2024 9th Asian Conference on Civil, Material and Environmental Science The 4th Climate, Weather and Water Forum International Conference of the German Society for Plant Sciences Emerging concepts and Novel Mechanisms in Organ Fibrosis Workshop ECB-IBS 2024 Five Editors-in-Chief Featured in the List of "Highly Cited
Sign in Register Submit

Journals Article Details

Rural and Regional Development -logo
Submit to RRD
Comment Open Access

New Geographical (Im)materialities in Rural Spaces for a Renewed Countryside in the Global North. Some Key Comments in the Rural Geography Debate

Rural and Regional Development . 2024, 2(1), 10003; https://doi.org/10.35534/rrd.2024.10003
Angel Paniagua *   
Spanish Council for Scientific Research, CSIC, 28071 Madrid, Spain
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Received: 29 Dec 2023    Accepted: 15 Jan 2024    Published: 19 Jan 2024   

Full-Text HTML Full-Text PDF Download PDF

Abstract

From the point of view of the new (im)materialities and the relevance of vernacular house in the process of rural change and restructuring, this contribution comments some possible innovative ways of research in rural studies. The objective of the study is to bring the attention about the relevance of vernacular houses in the process of global rural change and restructuring and their particular expressions in localities and vernacular houses. The methodology in qualitatively based on auto-biographical and ethnographical research based in three houses of study in a marginal rural area of central Spain. The main conclusions suggest a process of hybridization of people and vernacular houses with two different circuits: new comers and traditional populations.

Keywords

Territory; Materialism; Place; Encounter; Hybridity; Community; Rural geography

References

1.
Paniagua A. Conceptualizing new materialism in geographical studies of the rural realm. Land 2023, 12, 225. [Google Scholar]
2.
Willians R. The Country and the City; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2016 (original 1973).
3.
Marsden T, Murdoch J, Lowe P, Munton RC, Flynn A. Constructing the Countryside; UCL Press: London, UK, 1993.
4.
Murdoch J, Marsden T. Reconstituting Rurality; UCL Press: London, UK, 1996.
5.
Deleuze G. Difference and Repetition; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1994 (original 1968).
6.
Massey D. For Space; Sage: London, UK, 2005.
7.
Whatmore S. Hybrid Geographies; Sage: London, UK, 2002.
8.
Nicholls WJ, Uitermark J. Introduction: planning/resistance. Urban Geogr. 2017, 38, 512–520. [Google Scholar]
9.
Jackson JB. Discovering the vernacular landscape. In Human Geography. An Essential Anthology; Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 1996; pp. 316–328.
10.
Eyles J. The geography of everyday life. In Horizons in Human Geography; MacMillan: London, UK, 1989; pp. 102–117. 
11.
Paniagua A. Recover old geographical materialities in rural areas: key politics and processes of (dis)assemblages. Athens J. Mediterr. Stud. 2022, 8, 247–256. [Google Scholar]
12.
Paniagua A. Social geographical materialities in rural spaces. Material changes or/and social changes? Key questions for a new countryside in the global North. New Countrys. 2023, 2, 43–51. [Google Scholar]
13.
Elwood SA, Martin DG. “Placing” interviews: Location and scales of power in qualitative research. Prof. Geogr. 2000, 52, 649–657. [Google Scholar]
14.
Cloke P, Little J. Contested Countryside Cultures; Routledge: London, UK, 1997.
15.
Holloway L. Smallholding, hobby-farming, and commercial farming: Ethical identities and the production of farming spaces.  Environ. Plan. A 2002, 34, 2055–2070. [Google Scholar]
16.
Crang MA. Doing Ethnographies; Sage: London, UK, 2007.
17.
Besio K. Autoethnography. In Encyclopedia of Human Geography, 2nd ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020.
18.
Hoggart K, Lees L, Davies A. Researching Human Geography; Arnold: London, UK, 2002.
19.
Williams B, Riley M. The challenge of oral history to environmental history. Environ. Hist. 2020, 26, 207–231. [Google Scholar]
20.
Hay I. Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2003.
21.
Willianson K, Etnographic research. In Research Methods. Information, Systems and Contexts, 2nd ed.; Elsevier: Cambridge, UK, 2018; pp. 311–335.
22.
Dunn K. Interviewing. In Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2003; pp. 50–82.
23.
Paniagua A. Counterurbanization and new social class in rural Spain: The environmental and rural dimension revisited. Scott. Geogr. J. 2002, 118, 1–18. [Google Scholar]
24.
Phillips M, Smith D, Brooking H, Duer M. The agencies of landscape in rural gentrification: Impressions from the wood, the village and the moortop. Soc. Rural. 2021, 61, 778–807. [Google Scholar]
25.
Phillips M, Smith D, Brooking H, Duer M. Re-placing displacement in gentrification studies: temporality and multi-dimensionality in rural gentrification displacement. Geoforum 2021, 118, 66–82. [Google Scholar]
26.
Phillips M, Smith, DP. Comparative ruralism and ‘opening new windows’ on gentrification. Dialog. Hum. Geogr. 2018, 8, 51–58. [Google Scholar]
27.
Cloke P, Johnston R. Spaces of Geographical Thought; Sage: London, UK, 2005.
28.
Creswell T. Place. A Short Introduction; Blackwell: London, UK, 2004
29.
Kolen J, Reen H, Hermans R. Landscape Biographies; Amsterdam University Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015.
30.
Paniagua A. Old, lost, and forgotten rural materialities: Old local irrigation channels and lost local walking trails. Land 2022, 11, 1358. [Google Scholar]
31.
Murdoch J. Post-structuralist Geography; Sage: London, UK, 2006.
Creative Commons

© 2024 by the authors; licensee SCIEPublish, SCISCAN co. Ltd. This article is an open access article distributed under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).