Just Accepted Manuscripts
Original Articles - Appraisal and Rural Economics

Stakeholders’ perceptions of factors shaping quality of life in rural areas: Evidence from two Italian case studies

pdf
  • Maria Andreoli,
  • Francesca Gerini,
  • Mario Cozzi,
  • Severino Romano,
  • Fabio Boncinelli,
  • Leonardo Casini,
  • Enrico Marone,
  • Martijn Burger,
  • Mauro Viccaro
Maria Andreoli
Department of Agricultural, Forestry, Food and Environmental Sciences, University of Basilicata, Italy
Francesca Gerini
Department of Agriculture, Food, Environment and Forestry, University of Florence, Italy
Mario Cozzi
Department of Agricultural, Forestry, Food and Environmental Sciences, University of Basilicata, Italy
Severino Romano
Department of Agricultural, Forestry, Food and Environmental Sciences, University of Basilicata, Italy
Fabio Boncinelli
Department of Agriculture, Food, Environment and Forestry, University of Florence, Italy
Leonardo Casini
Department of Agriculture, Food, Environment and Forestry, University of Florence, Italy
Enrico Marone
Department of Agriculture, Food, Environment and Forestry, University of Florence, Italy
Martijn Burger
Erasmus Happiness Economics Research Organization, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Mauro Viccaro
Department of Agricultural, Forestry, Food and Environmental Sciences, University of Basilicata, Italy
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/aestim-18753

Published 2026-01-22

Keywords

  • well-being,
  • inner areas,
  • sustainable rural development,
  • local context,
  • place-based policy

Copyright (c) 2025 Maria Andreoli, Francesca Gerini, Mario Cozzi, Severino Romano, Fabio Boncinelli, Leonardo Casini, Enrico Marone, Martijn Burger, Mauro Viccaro

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

Rural areas play a crucial role in achieving sustainable development, yet they face persistent and recurring social issues such as demographic decline, limited access to essential services, and economic stagnation. Framed on community revitalization and place-based development, this study examines the factors influencing quality of life in marginal rural areas at high risk of abandonment, focusing on Basilicata and Tuscany—two Italian regions with distinct socio-economic profiles. Adopting a qualitative approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with local stakeholders to capture their lived experiences and perceptions of rural well-being and development opportunities. The analysis, supported by textual data processing, highlights shared and region-specific challenges. Key themes include service accessibility, demographic dynamics, economic opportunities, and governance capacity. Findings reveal that while both regions emphasize essential services and economic revitalization, their approaches differ: Basilicata stakeholders stress infrastructural deficits and demographic decline, whereas Tuscany stakeholders highlight rural diversification and place-based initiatives. These insights underscore the importance of local stakeholder perceptions in shaping rural development strategies. The study contributes to theoretical debates on rural well-being by demonstrating how stakeholder perspectives influence policy priorities and intervention strategies. It advocates for place-sensitive policies that enhance institutional capacity and leverage regional assets to promote sustainable rural community revitalization. These findings support the need for a context-specific approach to rural policy that integrates both qualitative and quantitative measures of well-being.

pdf

References

  1. Agency for the Territorial Cohesion (2024). National Strategy for “Inner Areas” SNAI [WWW Document]. Available at: https://www.agenziacoesione.gov.it/strategia-nazionale-aree-interne/?lang=en (Accessed 19 July 2024).
  2. Ballas, D. (2013). What makes a ‘happy city’?. Cities, 32(Supplement 1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.04.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.04.009
  3. Barca, F., Casavola, P., & Lucatelli, S. (2014). A strategy for inner areas in Italy: definition, objectives, tools and governance. Collana Materiali UVAL, 31, 1–68.
  4. Barrington-Leigh, C., & Escande, A. (2018). Measuring Progress and Well-Being: A Comparative Review of Indicators. Social Indicators Research, 135, 893–925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1505-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1505-0
  5. Bertolini, P., & Pagliacci, F. (2017). Quality of life and territorial imbalances. A focus on italian inner and rural areas. Bio-based and Applied Economics, 6, 183–208. https://doi.org/10.13128/BAE-18518
  6. Black, N., Scott, K., & Shucksmith, M. (2019). Social inequalities in rural England: Impacts on young people post-2008. Journal of Rural Studies, 68, 264–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.09.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.09.008
  7. Bletzer, K. V. (2015). Visualizing the qualitative: making sense of written comments from an evaluative satisfaction survey. Journal of Education and Evaluation for Health Professions, 12, 12. https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2015.12.12 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2015.12.12
  8. Bock, B. B. (2016). Rural Marginalisation and the Role of Social Innovation; A Turn Towards Nexogenous Development and Rural Reconnection. Sociologia Ruralis, 56, 552–573. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12119 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12119
  9. Boncinelli, F., & Casini, L. (2014). A Comparison of the Well-Being of Agricultural and Non Agricultural Households Using a Multicriterial Approach. Social Indicators Research, 119, 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0488-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0488-3
  10. Brunori, G., & Rossi, A. (2007). Differentiating countryside: Social representations and governance patterns in rural areas with high social density: The case of Chianti, Italy. Journal of Rural Studies, 23, 183–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2006.10.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2006.10.001
  11. Burns, G. W. (2005). Naturally happy, naturally healthy: The role of the natural environment in well-being. In Huppert, F. A., Baylis, N., & Keverne, B. (Eds.). The Science of Well-being. Oxford, Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198567523.003.0016
  12. Camargo, B. V., & Justo, A. M. (2013). IRAMUTEQ: um software gratuito para análise de dados textuais. Temas em Psicologia, 21(2), 513–518. https://doi.org/10.9788/TP2013.2-16 DOI: https://doi.org/10.9788/TP2013.2-16
  13. Carvalho, D. N. R., Aguiar, V. F. F., Apolinário, D. B., Bendelaque, D. F. R., Pereira, L. C. G., Figueira, S. A. S., & Orlandi, F. S. (2024). A glance at the use of IRaMuTeQ® software in scientific research: a bibliometric study. Revista de Enfermagem da UFPI, 13, 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.26694/reufpi.v13i1.4280 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26694/reufpi.v13i1.4280
  14. Casini, L., Boncinelli, F., Contini, C., Gerini, F., & Scozzafava, G. (2019). A Multicriteria Approach for Well-Being Assessment in Rural Areas. Social Indicators Research, 143, 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1978-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1978-0
  15. Casini, L., Boncinelli, F., Gerini, F., Romano, C., Scozzafava, G., & Contini, C. (2021). Evaluating rural viability and well-being: Evidence from marginal areas in Tuscany. Journal of Rural Studies, 82, 64–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.01.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.01.002
  16. Castro, A., Koelzer, L. P., Camargo, B. V., & Bousfield, A. B. S. (2014). Representações sociais na internet sobre cotas para negros em universidades federais. Cadernos de Pesquisa Interdisciplinar em Ciências Humanas, 15(106), 202–220. https://doi.org/10.5007/1984-8951.2014v15n106p202 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5007/1984-8951.2014v15n106p202
  17. Chaves, M. M. N., dos Santos, A. P. R., dos Santos, N. P., & Larocca, L. M. (2017). Use of the Software IRAMUTEQ in Qualitative Research: An Experience Report. In Costa, A., Reis, L., Neri de Sousa, F., Moreira, A., & Lamas, D. (Eds.). Computer Supported Qualitative Research. Cham, Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43271-7_4
  18. Chaves, S. M. A., Calado, R. D., Bourguignon, S. C., Viera, L. E. V., Ramos, J. R. S., Rodrigues, L. E. M., Saldanha, A. D., & Braga Neto, O. O. (2022). Fast-Track 24-Hour UPA: Analysis of opportunities and continuous improvements through IRAMUTEQ. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 55(10), 221–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.09.627 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.09.627
  19. Christiaensen, L., Rutledge, Z., & Taylor, J.E. (2021). Viewpoint: The future of work in agri-food. Food Policy, 99, 101963. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODPOL.2020.101963 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101963
  20. Contzen, S., & Häberli, I. (2021). Exploring dairy farmers’ quality of life perceptions – A Swiss case study. Journal of Rural Studies, 88, 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.11.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.11.007
  21. Corbetta, P. (2015). La ricerca sociale, metodologie e tecniche. Le tecniche qualitative. Vol. III. Bologna, Il Mulino.
  22. Cozzi, M., Prete, C., Viccaro, M., Sijtsma, F., Veneri, P., & Romano, S. (2022). Understanding the Role of Nature in Urban-Rural Linkages: Identifying the Potential Role of Rural Nature-Based Attractive Clusters That Serve Human Well-Being. Sustainability, 14, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141911856 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su141911856
  23. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications.
  24. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications.
  25. Crociata, A., Pinate, A. C., & Urso, G. (2025). The cultural and creative economy in Italy: Spatial patterns in peripheral areas. European Urban and Regional Studies, 32(1), 53–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/09697764231222221 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09697764231222221
  26. Cummins, R. A. (2000). Objective and subjective quality of life: An interactive model. Social Indicators Research, 52, 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007027822521 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007027822521
  27. DePaolo, C. A., & Wilkinson, K. (2014). Get Your Head into the Clouds: Using Word Clouds for Analyzing Qualitative Assessment Data. TechTrends, 58, 38–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0750-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0750-9
  28. ESPON (2017). Policy brief: Shrinking rural regions in Europe. Luxembourg, ESPON.
  29. European Commission (2021a). Long-term vision for rural areas: for stronger, connected, resilient, prosperous EU rural areas. Brussels, European Commission.
  30. European Commission (2021b). Commission staff working document. A long-term Vision for the EU’s Rural Areas. Brussels, European Commission.
  31. European Commission (2024). The long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas: key achievements and ways forward. Brussels, European Commission.
  32. European Parliament and Council (2021). Regulation (EU) 2021/241 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility. Brussels, European Parliament and Council.
  33. European Union (2016). Cork 2.0 declaration. A better life in rural areas. Luxembourg, European Union. https://doi.org/10.2762/618522
  34. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2002). What can economists learn from happiness research? Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 402–435. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.40.2.402 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.40.2.402
  35. Galli, I., & Fasanelli, R. (2020). Public understanding of science and common sense: Social representations of the human microbiome among the expert and non-expert public. Health Psychology Open, 7(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2055102920913239 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2055102920913239
  36. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, Aldine Publishing Co. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014
  37. Guite, H. F., Clark, C., & Ackrill, G. (2006). The impact of the physical and urban environment on mental well-being. Public Health, 120(12), 1117–1126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2006.10.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2006.10.005
  38. Hijmans, J., & Kuyper, L. (2020). Conducting semi-structured interviews: Practical guidelines for novice researchers. Neurological Research and Practice, 2(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z
  39. ISTAT (2023). Bes 2022: il benessere equo e sostenibile in Italia. Roma, ISTAT.
  40. ISTAT (2019). Rapporto BES 2018: il benessere equo e sostenibile in Italia. Available at: https://www.istat.it/it/archivio/224669 (Accessed 31 July 2024).
  41. Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2006). Developments in the Measurement of Subjective Well-Being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 3–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/089533006776526030
  42. Karim, N., Mustapha, B., & Oumlil, R. (2024). Impact of social innovation on value in cooperatives: a systematic literature review and a modeling attempt. Procedia Computer Science, 237, 477–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2024.05.130 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2024.05.130
  43. Lahlou, S. (2012). Text Mining Methods: An answer to Chartier and Meunier. Papers on Social Representations, 20, 38.1–38.7.
  44. Li, Y., Westlund, H., & Liu, Y. (2019). Why some rural areas decline while some others not: An overview of rural evolution in the world. Journal of Rural Studies, 68, 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.03.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.03.003
  45. Liu, L., Cavaye, J., & Ariyawardana, A. (2022). Supply chain responsibility in agriculture and its integration with rural community development: A review of issues and perspectives. Journal of Rural Studies, 93, 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRURSTUD.2020.07.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.07.003
  46. Lopolito, A., Prosperi, M., Sisto, R., & De Meo, E. (2015). Translating local stakeholders’ perception in rural development strategies under uncertainty conditions: An application to the case of the bio-based economy in the area of Foggia (South Italy). Journal of Rural Studies, 37, 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.12.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.12.005
  47. Mäki-Opas, T., Pieper, R., & Vaarama, M. (2022). Exploring the capability approach to quality of life in disadvantaged population groups. Scientific Reports, 12, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-18877-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-18877-3
  48. Maggino, F., & Zumbo, B. D. (2012). Measuring the quality of life and the construction of social indicators. In Land, K., Michalos, A., & Sirgy, M. (Eds.). Handbook of Social Indicators and Quality of Life Research. Dordrecht, Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2421-1_10
  49. Makri, C., & Neely, A. (2021). Grounded Theory: A Guide for Exploratory Studies in Management Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211013654 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211013654
  50. Mallach, A. (2017). What we talk about when we talk about shrinking cities: The ambiguity of discourse and policy response in the United States. Cities, 69, 109–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.01.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.01.008
  51. Marsden, T. (2016). Exploring the Rural Eco-Economy: Beyond Neoliberalism. Sociologia Ruralis, 56, 597–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12139 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12139
  52. Marsden, T. (2009). Mobilities, vulnerabilities and sustainabilities: Exploring pathways from denial to sustainable rural development. Sociologia Ruralis, 49, 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2009.00479.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2009.00479.x
  53. Martins, J. R., & Davino, C. (2023). Local Migration Governance in European Shrinking Areas: a German and an Italian Case. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 24, 863–888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-023-01029-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-023-01029-5
  54. Mastronardi, L., Giagnacovo, M., & Romagnoli, L. (2020). Bridging regional gaps: Community-based cooperatives as a tool for Italian inner areas resilience. Land Use Policy, 99, 104979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104979 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104979
  55. McCrea, R., Walton, A., & Leonard, R. (2016). Developing a Model of Community Wellbeing and Resilience in Response to Change. Social Indicators Research, 129, 195–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1099-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1099-y
  56. McLeod, S. (2024). Open coding in qualitative research. ResearchGate. Available at: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.32424.89608 (Accessed 20 July 2024).
  57. Meloni, C., Rocchi, B., & Severini, S. (2023). A systematic literature review on the rural-urban well-being gap in Europe. Bio-based and Applied Economics, 12, 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.36253/bae-13178 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-13178
  58. Mendes, F. R., Zangão, M. O., Gemito, M. L., & Serra, I. C. (2016). Social representations of nursing students about hospital assistance and primary health care. Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem, 69(2), 343–350. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7167.2016690218i DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7167.2016690218i
  59. Mennani, S., & Attak, Y. (2024). Application of IRaMuTeQ in qualitative textual analysis: Tools, strategies, and outcomes. In Chakraborty, A. (Ed.). Advanced Research Methodologies for Digital Transformation in Societal and Organizational Contexts. Hershey, IGI Global.
  60. Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca (2022). Centro Nazionale per le Tecnologie dell’Agricoltura AGRITECH. Roma, Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca. Available at: https://www.mur.gov.it/sites/default/files/2022-06/22_06_28 Scheda_centro nazionale agritech_PNRR_MUR.pdf (Accessed 21 January 2026).
  61. Moseley, M. J., & Owen, S. (2008). The future of services in rural England: The drivers of change and a scenario for 2015. Progress in Planning, 69, 93–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2007.12.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2007.12.002
  62. Musella, M. (2015). Teoria Economica dello sviluppo umano. Una introduzione. Santarcangelo di Romagna, Maggioli Editore.
  63. Nussbaum, M. C. (2000). Women and Human Development: the Capabilities Approach. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841286
  64. Nussbaum, M. C. (1999). Sex and Social Justice. Oxford, Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195112108.001.0001
  65. OECD (2020a). Rural Well-being: Geography of Opportunities. Paris, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/d25cef80-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/d25cef80-en
  66. OECD (2020b). How’s Life? 2020: Measuring well-being. Paris, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9870c393-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9870c393-en
  67. Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri (2021). Piano nazionale di ripresa e resilienza. Roma, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri. Available at: https://www.governo.it/sites/governo.it/files/PNRR.pdf (Accessed 21 January 2026).
  68. Pugh, R., & Dubois, A. (2021). Peripheries within economic geography: Four “problems” and the road ahead of us. Journal of Rural Studies, 87, 267–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.09.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.09.007
  69. Ratinaud, P. (2008). IRAMUTEQ: Interface de R pour les Analyses Multidimensionnelles de Textes et de Questionnaires. Available at: http://www.iramuteq.org/ (Accessed 20 July 2024).
  70. Reinert, M. (1983). Une méthode de classification descendante hiérarchique : application à l’analyse lexicale par contexte. Les Cahiers de l’Analyse des Données, 8(2), 187–198.
  71. Rodríguez, J., Reguant, M., & Ortega, D. (2024). A practical case study of qualitative data analysis with IRaMuTeQ: lexicometric analysis of narratives of bisexual men and women. Journal of Educational Research, 42(2), 1–20.
  72. Salviati, M. E. (2017). Manual do Aplicativo IRaMuTeQ (versão 0.7 Alpha 2 e R versão 3.2.3). Planaltina, The author. Available at: http://www.iramuteq.org/documentation/fichiers/manual-do-aplicativo-iramuteq-par-maria-elisabeth-salviati (Accessed 20 July 2024).
  73. Sardaro, R., La Sala, P., De Pascale, G., & Faccilongo, N. (2021). The conservation of cultural heritage in rural areas: Stakeholder preferences regarding historical rural buildings in Apulia, southern Italy. Land Use Policy, 109, 105662. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2021.105662 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105662
  74. Scott, K. (2012). Measuring Wellbeing: Towards Sustainability?. London, Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203113622
  75. Segev, E. (2022). Semantic Network Analysis in Social Sciences. London, Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003120100
  76. Sen, A. (1984). The living standard. Oxford Economic Papers, 36, 74–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a041662 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a041662
  77. Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam, North Holland.
  78. Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  79. Shucksmith, M., & Brown, D. L. (2016). Rural Studies: The Challenges Ahead. In Shucksmith, M., & Brown, D.L. (Eds.). Routledge International Handbook of Rural Studies. London, Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315753041
  80. Shucksmith, M., Shucksmith, J., & Watt, J. (2006). Rurality and social inclusion: A case of preschool education. Social Policy and Administration, 40, 678–691. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2006.00526.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2006.00526.x
  81. Sgroi, F. (2022). Evaluating the sustainability of complex rural ecosystems during the transition from agricultural villages to tourist destinations and modern agri-food systems. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 9, 100330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2022.100330 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2022.100330
  82. Souza, M. A. R., Wall, M. L., Thuler, A. C. M. C., Lowen, I. M. V., & Peres, A. M. (2018). The use of IRAMUTEQ software for data analysis in qualitative research. Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, 52, e03353. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1980-220x2017015003353 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/s1980-220x2017015003353
  83. Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J. -P. (2009). Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/8131721/8131772/Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi-Commission-report.pdf (Accessed 31 July 2024).
  84. Sutton, J., & Austin, Z. (2015). Qualitative research: Data collection, analysis, and management. The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 68(3), 226–231. https://doi.org/10.4212/cjhp.v68i3.1456 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4212/cjhp.v68i3.1456
  85. Tarozzi, M. (2008). Che cos’è la grounded theory. Roma, Carocci.
  86. Tashakkori, A., Johnson, R. B., & Teddlie, C. (2020). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications.
  87. Thomas, D. R. (2003). A general inductive approach for qualitative data analysis. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748
  88. Tricarico, L., Jones, Z. M., & Daldanise, G. (2022). Platform Spaces: When culture and the arts intersect territorial development and social innovation, a view from the Italian context. Journal of Urban Affairs, 44, 545–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2020.1808007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2020.1808007
  89. United Nations (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, A/RES/70/1. New York, United Nations. Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/sites/default/files/publications/21252030 Agenda for Sustainable Development web.pdf (Accessed 21 January 2026).
  90. Vendemmia, B., Pucci, P., & Beria, P. (2021). An institutional periphery in discussion. Rethinking the inner areas in Italy. Applied Geography, 135, 102537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2021.102537 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2021.102537
  91. Veréb, V., Marques, C., Madureira, L., Marques, C., Keryan, T., & Silva, R. (2024). What Is Rural Well-Being and How Is It Measured? An Attempt to Order Chaos. Rural Sociology, 89, 239–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12536 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12536
  92. Viccaro, M., Romano, S., Prete, C., & Cozzi, M. (2021). Rural planning? An integrated dynamic model for assessing quality of life at a local scale. Land Use Policy, 111, 105742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105742 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105742
  93. Viganó, F., Grossi, E., & Blessi, G.T. (2019). Urban – Rural dwellers’ well-being determinants: When the city size matters. The case of Italy. City, Culture and Society, 19, 100293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2019.100293 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2019.100293
  94. Voukelatou, V., Gabrielli, L., Miliou, I., Cresci, S., Sharma, R., Tesconi, M., & Pappalardo, L. (2021). Measuring objective and subjective well-being: dimensions and data sources. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics, 12, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41060-020-00224-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41060-020-00224-2
  95. Woods, M. (2005). Rural Geography: Processes, Responses and Experiences in Rural Restructuring. London, SAGE Publications.
  96. Woods, M. (2006). Redefining the ‘Rural Question’: The New ‘Politics of the Rural’ and Social Policy. Social Policy and Administration, 40, 579–595. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2006.00521.x
  97. Yin, X., Chen, J., & Li, J. (2022). Rural innovation system: Revitalize the countryside for a sustainable development. Journal of Rural Studies, 93, 471–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRURSTUD.2019.10.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.10.014

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 > >>