Secondary language: |
English |
Secondary title: |
Defining the typology of rural areas in Slovenia |
Secondary abstract: |
This thesis deals with determining the typology of rural areas on the basis of internationally
established methodological approaches. The attempt to define the rural areas in Slovenia is
made on the basis of two selected methodological approaches. The first analysis employed the
OECD methodology of classification of urban-rural areas. In order to adapt this methodology
to Slovenian territory, another, indicator-based analysis was conducted, where by the
indicators were selected according to a previously created typology of rural areas and
according to Slovene legal bases. After the review and analysis of the indicators, individual
types of rural areas were defined. The classification of rural areas was carried out in two
steps. Firstly, three types of areas were determined: typical rural areas, transitional rural areas
and areas of urban character. In the second step, areas were divided into demographically
restricted areas, structure-restricted areas, moderately structure-restricted areas and
predominantly developed areas. The comparison of these two approaches to defining rural
areas showed that the urban-rural classification is more suitable for Slovenian conditions and
that the differences between the two approaches are minimal. In both cases, the majority of
areas are classified as intermediate and transitional rural areas. On the national level, both
classifications show similar results. All urban areas are located close to the main highway
cross with its centre in Ljubljana, the capital of the country. Rural areas as well as
intermediate and transitional rural areas are scattered over the rest of the country’s territory
without any specific pattern. Based on the comparison of the two classifications, we found out
that it is impossible to define homogeneous areas on the basis of only one indicator and that a
combination of several indicators is necessary. |
Secondary keywords: |
graduation thesis;geodesy;rural areas;typology of rural areas; |
File type: |
application/pdf |
Type (COBISS): |
Undergraduate thesis |
Thesis comment: |
Univ. Ljubljana, Fak. za gradbeništvo in geodezijo |
Pages: |
X, 61 str. |
Type (ePrints): |
thesis |
Title (ePrints): |
Defining the typology of rural areas in Slovenia |
Keywords (ePrints): |
podeţelje;podeţelska območja;tipologija podeţelskih območij |
Keywords (ePrints, secondary language): |
rural areas;typology of rural areas |
Abstract (ePrints): |
Diplomsko delo obravnava določitev tipologije podeţelskih območij na podlagi študija mednarodno uveljavljenih metodoloških pristopov. Poskus določitve podeţelskih območij za Slovenijo je nato izveden na podlagi dveh izbranih metodoloških pristopov. Prva analiza je izvedena po OECD-jevi metodologiji členitve urbano-podeţelskih območij. Z namenom nadgradnje te metodologije je bila za potrebe slovenskega prostora izdelana tudi analiza na podlagi kazalnikov, ki so bili izbrani glede na ţe izdelane tipologije podeţelskega prostora ter na podlagi zakonskih podlag v Sloveniji. Po pregledu in analizi kazalnikov so bili določeni tipi podeţelskih območij. Členitev podeţelskih območij je bila izvedena v dveh korakih. Najprej so bili določeni trije tipi območij: tipična podeţelska območja, prehodna podeţelska območja ter območja mestnega značaja. V drugem koraku pa je bila izvedena še dodatna členitev na demografsko omejevana območja, strukturno omejevana območja, strukturno zmerno omejevana območja ter preteţno razvita območja. Primerjava obeh pristopov k odločanju podeţelskih območij je pokazala, da je primernejša členitev urbano-podeţelskih območij, ki je prilagojena slovenskim razmeram in se minimalno razlikuje od delne členitve na podlagi izbranih kazalnikov. V obeh primerih je največ območij razvrščenih v vmesna območja ter prehodno podeţelska območja. Obe členitvi glede na celotno Slovenijo sta si med seboj zelo podobni. Vsa urbana območja se nahajajo blizu glavnega prometnega kriţa v Sloveniji, ki ima središče v samem glavnem mestu Ljubljana. Ostala podeţelska območja ter vmesna in prehodno podeţelska območja pa so brez posebnega vzorca razvrščena po preostalem območju Slovenije. Na podlagi primerjave obeh členitev smo ugotovili, da ni mogoče določiti homogenih območij le na podlagi enega kazalnika, temveč je potrebno uporabiti kombinacijo večih kazalnikov. |
Abstract (ePrints, secondary language): |
This thesis deals with determining the typology of rural areas on the basis of internationally
established methodological approaches. The attempt to define the rural areas in Slovenia is
made on the basis of two selected methodological approaches. The first analysis employed the
OECD methodology of classification of urban-rural areas. In order to adapt this methodology
to Slovenian territory, another, indicator-based analysis was conducted, where by the
indicators were selected according to a previously created typology of rural areas and
according to Slovene legal bases. After the review and analysis of the indicators, individual
types of rural areas were defined. The classification of rural areas was carried out in two
steps. Firstly, three types of areas were determined: typical rural areas, transitional rural areas
and areas of urban character. In the second step, areas were divided into demographically
restricted areas, structure-restricted areas, moderately structure-restricted areas and
predominantly developed areas. The comparison of these two approaches to defining rural
areas showed that the urban-rural classification is more suitable for Slovenian conditions and
that the differences between the two approaches are minimal. In both cases, the majority of
areas are classified as intermediate and transitional rural areas. On the national level, both
classifications show similar results. All urban areas are located close to the main highway
cross with its centre in Ljubljana, the capital of the country. Rural areas as well as
intermediate and transitional rural areas are scattered over the rest of the country’s territory
without any specific pattern. Based on the comparison of the two classifications, we found out
that it is impossible to define homogeneous areas on the basis of only one indicator and that a
combination of several indicators is necessary. |
Keywords (ePrints, secondary language): |
rural areas;typology of rural areas |
ID: |
8309393 |