Skip to Content
MDPIMDPI

Advanced

AgricultureAgriculture
PDF
  • Editorial
  • Open Access

13 January 2026

5 Pages

Economic Development of Rural Areas in Border Territories: Threats and Opportunities

,
,
and
1
Economy Department, University of Extremadura, 10071 Cáceres, Spain
2
VALORIZA-Research Center for Endogenous Resource Valorization, 7300-555 Portalegre, Portugal
3
Department of Economic and Organizational Sciences, Polytechnic Institute, 7300-555 Portalegre, Portugal
4
Department of Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences, Polytechnic Institute, 7350-092 Elvas, Portugal
Agriculture2026, 16(2), 204;https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture16020204
This article belongs to the Special Issue Economic Development of Rural Areas in Border Territories: Threats and Opportunities
Version Notes
Order Reprints
Given the focus of this publication, most of the works included are case studies that address different issues related to the development of border areas: energy transition, food sufficiency, tourism development, social capital, the balance between innovation and tradition in primary production systems, digital economy, etc. This multitude of topics is complemented by an enriching international perspective, derived from 14 contributions that analyze territories with heterogeneous characteristics belonging to more than 10 different countries.
Regardless of their national focus, the case studies included in this publication refer to rural areas. It is therefore not surprising that, from their different perspectives, endogenous rural development processes are the main object of study in many of the articles presented. In this sense, with its frontier character, this Special Issue could be considered a second edition of the one entitled “Rural Areas Facing the Challenge of Economic Diversification: Threats and Opportunities” [1].
Within this set of works analyzing rural development policies, Castellano-Álvarez et al. [2], based on a case study of the Sierra de San Pedro-Los Baldíos region (Extremadura, Spain), conclude that European rural development programs do not seem to have taken the border nature of this region into account when implementing their development strategy. If this approach is repeated in other border territories, it would jeopardize not only their development potential, but also the effectiveness of this type of program. In their analysis of the development strategy, the authors also note the excessive importance of tourism projects within the total investments made. This would constitute a second paradox in the conclusions of this study, since this type of investment has the highest number of failed projects; these results would be in line with those achieved by these same authors in their previous studies [3,4,5,6]. In all of these studies, as in the study on the Sierra de San Pedro-Los Baldíos, the region constitutes the geographical scope of the study [7].
The analysis of the circumstances under which rural tourism constitutes an element of development for border areas is a prominent theme in this Special Issue. In fact, in addition to the contribution by Castellano-Álvarez et al. [2], the publication also includes research by Monaco et al. [8], Vujko et al. [9], Gherdan et al. [10], Gkoltsiou [11], and Robina-Ramírez et al. [12], who address this issue from different perspectives.
Monaco et al. [8], taking Vesuvius National Park as a reference, analyze how traditional agriculture can boost rural tourism and local development, given its capacity to preserve biodiversity and strengthen territorial identity. Similarly, Vujko et al. [9] confirm the possibilities offered by the transformation of primary products in environments of special natural value. Based on the example of Roquefort-sur-Soulzon cheeses (France), these authors confirm the relevance of the production of these cheeses in strengthening the cultural identity of the territory and rural tourism. Both contributions highlight the relevance of traditional production practices as an instrument of development. Along the same lines is the contribution by Gherdan et al. [10] on the practice of agrotourism in a mountainous region of Romania. For all these authors, in these rural border areas of special environmental value, the practices of tourism and agrotourism are essential drivers of economic development, while also ensuring the preservation of cultural and natural heritage. In their conclusions, these three studies agree that one of the challenges for tourism development in these regions is the balanced distribution of tourism across the entire territory and not just in certain enclaves with special tourist significance.
Robina-Ramírez et al. [12] also address the delicate balance between tourism, heritage preservation, and residents’ perceptions in their analysis of the phronetic management of tourist accommodations located along the Portuguese–Spanish border. In their conclusions, the authors emphasize the importance of integrating ethical leadership with operational excellence to ensure sustainable tourism in rural border areas. Like Monaco et al. [8] in some of their previous work, Robina-Ramírez et al. [13] are interested in analyzing rural tourism in areas of special environmental value.
The analyses by Gkoltsiou [11] and Arana and Pérez [14], evaluating the capacity of natural and heritage resources to drive economic development in different border areas, complete the research gathered in this Special Issue on a question that is highly relevant to the main topic addressed in this publication. Gkoltsiou [11] takes the Ano Mirabello area in Crete as a reference, while Arana and Pérez [14], like Robina-Ramírez et al. [12], study various regions along the south of the Portuguese–Spanish border. The conclusions of both analyses highlight the importance that traditional productive activities have had historically, and continue to have today, for the conservation of these areas.
Mendoza and Domínguez-Mujica [15] study the role of international immigration in sustaining the economies of two border regions in Spain and analyze how these border conditions influence their demographic dynamics. The authors suggest that international migration, in addition to strengthening the social fabric of these territories, can drive their economic, social, and demographic revitalization. In their analysis, the authors also use the European rural development programs as a reference, within which the so-called intangibles of rural development [16] and the activation of social capital [17,18,19,20] are undoubtedly relevant. Closely related to this issue of social capital is the work by Albornoz-Arias et al. [21], who, focusing on the structural and sociocultural constraints faced by women in rural areas, study their leadership experiences based on a case study of the cocoa production chain in Tibú, Norte de Santander (Colombia).
From an international perspective, a comprehensive study of rural development in border regions requires the incorporation of research on the impact of agriculture in these territories. This is addressed in the contributions by Mabugu and Fofana [22] and Maharjan et al. [23], who, using different approaches, focus on agricultural practices in less developed countries. The former [22], applying an approach based on the Sustainable Development Goals, assess the levels of economic growth that South Africa would need to achieve in order to alleviate poverty and eradicate hunger in its rural areas. However, the conclusions of this work highlight that the achievement of these goals requires the integration of agricultural, labor, and welfare policies. Maharjan et al. [23] focus on the continuity of Environmental Conservation Agriculture (ECA) practices among rice terrace in the Ifugao region (Philippines). The findings of this study reveal that while access to resources such as high-yield seeds, modern agricultural machinery, and financial support is important for the adoption of CEA, the transition to high-yield varieties has contributed to a decline in the cultivation of Tinawon rice, which is vital for preserving biodiversity, soil health, and cultural identity. In addition, the authors highlight the role of community support systems, market access, and financial incentives as key factors in maintaining CA practices. Climate change presents both challenges and opportunities for adaptation, making it essential to integrate traditional knowledge with modern techniques. Based on two case studies, these two contributions represent a small sample of the challenges facing agriculture in Asian and African countries. As is well known, the paradigm of primary production systems in these types of economies is very different from that of rich countries with powerful agricultural stimulus policies [24,25].
Three cross-cutting contributions complete this Special Issue. One consists of a bibliometric analysis of the rural economy and family businesses. In this work, Al-cázar-Blanco et al. [26] use scientific maps to visualize the intellectual structure of these topics and evaluate scientific output using bibliometric indicators to extract the main research topics through an analysis of keyword co-occurrence. Their results show that research on family businesses and the rural economy is booming, especially focusing on family businesses with higher productivity and performance. Regarding the main topics studied, land management in cross-border environments emerges as a potential line of research. Bibliometric analyses have repeatedly shown [27,28] that they can be a very useful tool for defining the theoretical framework of the subject to be analyzed.
Deng et al. [29], using county-level panel data from China, defined a Rural Revitalization Index and conducted empirical tests in combination with the Digital Village Index. The authors frame this initiative in a context in which the digital economy is fundamental to driving strong economic growth, which is essential for achieving comprehensive rural revitalization. Their results show that the establishment of digital villages improves the progress of rural revitalization significantly. A more detailed analysis shows that the enabling effect of building digital villages on rural revitalization is more pronounced in counties that are not major grain producers and have extensive road networks. Therefore, it is essential to promote digital villages, identify integration points based on rural functional roles and resource endowments, and explore ways to fully leverage their enabling effects on rural revitalization.
Finally, energy sufficiency and transition processes, two issues of considerable relevance for many remote and poorly connected rural areas (also from an energy perspective), are studied by Kozera [30] based on a case study of the eastern regions of Poland.
Having summarized the different contributions that make up this Special Issue, their methodological heterogeneity deserves a final comment, as it shows how case studies often require the adaptation of research methodologies without compromising scientific rigor: TOPSIS models, qualitative analyses based on semi-structured interviews, in-depth interviews, factor analyses, structural equation models (SEMs), statistical inference, and correspondence analysis are good examples of this diversity of approaches.

Author Contributions

All authors wrote, reviewed, and commented on the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The Guest Editors would like to express their sincere gratitude to all the authors who submitted their work to this Special Issue, as well as to the reviewers of these articles for their constructive comments and thoughtful suggestions, and to the editorial staff at Agriculture, who have been very easy to work with.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Robina-Ramírez, R.; Silva, F. Rural Areas Facing the Challenge of Economic Diversification: Threats and Opportunities. Agriculture 2024, 14, 623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  2. Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Márquez Mateo, A.J.; Durán-Pacheco, M. Rural Development Strategies in Border Areas: The Case of Sierra de San Pedro-Los Baldíos (Extremadura, Spain). Agriculture 2025, 15, 2604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  3. Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; del Río-Rama, M.C.; Álvarez-García, J.; Durán-Sánchez, A. Limitations of Rural Tourism as an Economic Diversification and Regional Development Instrument. The Case Study of La Vera. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  4. Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Robina Ramírez, R.; Nieto Masot, A. Tourism Development in the Framework of Endogenous Rural Development Programmes-Comparison of the Case Studies of the Regions of La Vera and Tajo-Salor (Extremadura, Spain). Agriculture 2023, 13, 726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  5. Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Robina-Ramírez, R. Long-Term Survival of Investments Implemented under Endogenous Rural Development Programs: The Case Study of La Vera Region (Extremadura, Spain). Agriculture 2023, 13, 2130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  6. Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Durán-Sánchez, A.; del Río Rama, M.; Álvarez-García, J. Innovation and entrepreneurship as tools for rural development. Case study region of La Vera (Extremadura, Spain). In Enterpreneurship and the Community. A Multidisciplinary Perspective on Creativity, Social Challenges and Business; Ratten, V., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 125–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  7. Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Robina-Ramirez, R. Relevance of Territorial Identity in the Rural Development Programs-The Case Study of Tajo-Salor (Extremadura, Spain). Economies 2024, 12, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  8. Monaco, S.; Freire Varela, A.; Guarino, G.; Corbisiero, F. The European Charter for Sustainable Tourism (ECST) as a Tool for Development in Rural Areas: The Case of Vesuvius National Park (Italy). Agriculture 2025, 15, 2322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  9. Vujko, A.; Arsić, M.; Bojović, R. From Local Product to Destination Identity: Leveraging Cave-Aged Cheese for Sustainable Rural Tourism Development. Agriculture 2025, 15, 1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  10. Gherdan, A.E.M.; Bacter, R.V.; Ciolac, R.; Iancu, T.; Maerescu, C.M.; Dodu, M.A.; Chereji, A.I.; Herman, V.G.; Ungureanu, A.; Bacter, D.P. Sustainable Agritourism Development in Romania’s North-West Mountain Region: A TOPSIS-Based Evaluation of Strategic Priorities. Agriculture 2025, 15, 601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  11. Gkoltsiou, A. Landscape Character Assessment for Sustainable Rural Development in Border Insular Areas: A Case Study of Ano Mirabello, Crete. Agriculture 2025, 15, 1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  12. Robina-Ramírez, R.; Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Ferreira, P.; Loures, L. Tourism Development in Rural Border Territories: A “Phronetic” Approach to Threats and Opportunities. Agriculture 2025, 15, 524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  13. Robina-Ramírez, R.; Martín-Lucas, M.; Dias, A.; Castellano-Álvarez, F.J. What role geoparks play improving the health and well-being of senior tourist? Heliyon 2023, 9, e22295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  14. Arana, A.M.; Pérez Cano, M.T. Agricultural and Industrial Heritage as a Resource in Frontier Territories: The Border Between the Regions of Andalusia–Extremadura (Spain) and Alentejo (Portugal). Agriculture 2025, 15, 956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  15. Mendoza, C.; Domínguez-Mujica, J. Immigration and Local Endogenous Development in Rural Border Areas: A Comparative Study of Two Left-Behind Spanish Regions. Agriculture 2025, 15, 806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  16. Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Nieto Masot, A.; Castro-Serrano, J. Intangibles of Rural Development. The Case Study of La Vera (Extremadura, Spain). Land 2020, 9, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  17. Putnam, R.D. Bowling alone. American’s declining social capital. J. Democr. 1995, 6, 65–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  18. Woolcock, M. Social capital and economic development: Toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework. Theory Soc. 1998, 27, 151–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  19. Granovetter, M. Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. Am. J. Sociol. 1985, 91, 493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  20. Shucksmith, M. Endogenous development, social capital, and social inclusion: Perspectives from Leader in the UK. Sociol. Rural. 2002, 40, 208–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  21. Albornoz-Arias, N.; Rojas-Sanguino, C.; Santafe-Rojas, A.K. Rural Women’s Leadership Within the Cocoa Production Chain in Tibú, Norte de Santander, Colombia: A Gender Perspective. Agriculture 2025, 15, 370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  22. Mabugu, R.E.; Fofana, I. Addressing Hunger and Poverty Eradication: Recursive Dynamic CGE Modelling Analysis Using South Africa as a Case. Agriculture 2025, 15, 1836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  23. Maharjan, K.L.; Gonzalvo, C.M.; Baggo, J.C. Balancing Tradition and Innovation: The Role of Environmental Conservation Agriculture in Sustainability of Ifugao Rice Terraces. Agriculture 2025, 15, 246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  24. Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Parejo-Moruno, F.M.; Rangel-Preciado, J.F.; Cruz-Hidalgo, E. Regulation of Agricultural Trade and Its Implications in the Reform of the CAP. The Continental Products Case Study. Agriculture 2021, 11, 633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  25. Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Robina Ramírez, R. Relevance of the Uruguay and Doha Rounds in the Evolution of International Agricultural Trade: The Case Study of Latin American Countries and Continental Products. Economies 2023, 11, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  26. Alcázar-Blanco, A.; Paule-Vianez, J.; Rangel-Preciado, J.F. The Rural Economy and Family Firms: A Bibliometric Analysis Through Scientific Maps. Agriculture 2024, 14, 2218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  27. Sánchez, F.T.; Castellano-Álvarez, F.J.; Robina-Ramírez, R. Industrial Diffusion Processes in Peri-Urban Environments: A State-of-the-Art Analysis Current and Future Dimensions. Urban Sci. 2025, 9, 378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  28. Durán-Sánchez, A.; del Río-Rama, M.d.l.C.; Álvarez-García, J.; Castellano-Álvarez, F.J. Scientific Coverage in Water Governance: Systematic Analysis. Water 2019, 11, 177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  29. Deng, J.; Li, X.; Zhang, N. The Impact of Digital Rural Construction on Rural Revitalization-Empirical Evidence from Chinese County Panel Data. Agriculture 2024, 14, 1903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  30. Kozera, A. Energy Transition at the EU Peripheries: Investment of Rural and Urban–Rural Communes in Border Regions of Eastern Poland. Agriculture 2025, 15, 2590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Ecosystem Service-Based Eco-Efficiency of Cultivated Land Use in Plateau Lake Regions: Spatial Dynamics and Nonlinear Drivers
Previous
Calibration of Discrete Element Method Parameters for Cabbage Stubble–Soil Interface Using In Situ Pullout Force
Next