Abstract
The purpose of the work is to investigate the contribution of the multiple functions performed by agriculture to the development of rural areas as well as its interconnections with other economic activities of local economies. For this purpose, an attempt is made to investigate the contribution of farmers’ perceptions regarding the contribution of the multiple functions of agriculture to rural areas. A municipal district in the prefecture of Aitoloakarnania was used as a case study. The method of collecting the study material was performed using questionnaires and the method of personal interviews carried out with 80 farmers of both sexes. The analysis carried out shows that farmers recognize the multiple functions performed by agriculture and perceive the importance of its non-market outputs for the development of their region.
1. Introduction
Rural development until the 1980s was based on exogenous development. Defining the concept of exogenous development, it is stated that the countryside is defined as a region that moves around the central axis of urban centers [1]. However, this specific development model presented serious problems, which concerned subsidies and policies outside the region, the emphasis given by policies to specific sectors and businesses, the homogenization of rural diversity and the creation of environmental problems, and finally the planning and management of development policies [2]. It therefore resulted that it was a dependent, unequal and exogenous development of the countryside. The crisis that occurred in the exogenous growth model led to the endogenous growth model, the main feature of which was the increasing multi-activity of households and the change in socio-economic structures from agricultural development to rural development [3].
That said, there has been a growing number of researchers [4,5,6] and case studies [7,8,9] (on the approach to multifunctional agriculture and its contribution to the economy, society, and the environment, exploring how it can be assessed and defined.
Multifunctional agriculture constitutes the “core” of the European Agricultural Model as it incorporates in its concept the interdependent objectives of farmers and society [10]: (a) providing safe and quality food to consumers with sustainable production methods while ensuring the competitiveness of the EU in international markets, (b) providing environmental services that are highly valued by society and preventing deforestation and abandonment of mountainous and disadvantaged areas and (c) contributing to strengthening economic and social cohesion between population groups and regions by reducing inequalities between rich and poor/lowland and mountainous regions.
The purpose of this work is to investigate the contribution of the multiple functions performed by agriculture to the development of rural areas as well as its interconnections with other economic activities of local economies.
The research was carried out in two phases. In the first phase, extensive bibliographic research was carried out during which all available information was collected from relevant articles, books and special publications of services and organizations of Greek and foreign bibliography, regarding the multifunctionality of the countryside. In the second phase, data was collected through personal interviews with a questionnaire conducted with 80 farmers of both sexes.
The findings in the study area indicate a situation where farmers recognize the multiple functions performed by agriculture and understand the importance of its non-market outputs for the development of their region.
2. Methods
The municipal district of Thestie in the prefecture of Aitoloakarnania was used as a case study. It was chosen because it consists of mountainous, semi-mountainous and lowland areas with a subtropical climate influenced by its proximity to Lake Trichonida. More specifically, regarding the municipal district of Thestie, it is reported that its population reached 5874 residents in 2021, decreasing by 9% since 2011 [11]. The method of collecting the study material was performed using questionnaires and the method of personal interviews carried out with 80 farmers of both sexes (10 women and 70 men).
The type of interview used is the semi-structured interview, using, where required, a four-point scale of importance [12], which, apart from the advantage of ease of design and conclusion, contributes to the existence of clear differentiations between the perceptions of the respondents in the sample.
3. Results and Discussion
Characteristics of respondents analyzed in this work include gender, age, level of education, Annual Income and Ownership status. The gender distribution showed that 87.5% of respondents were men. The agricultural holdings in the study area are generally small in size, while the majority of their land is privately owned, reaching 71% of the holdings in the sample.
Regarding the survival strategies and multifunctionality of households, the research revealed that these strategies are correlated with the size of the household and the altitude of the area where they live. Regarding their intention to strengthen the role of multifunctional agriculture in the future, most of the producers declare that they are interested in developing new activities such as joining the organic farming and livestock farming regime and the direct sale of products on their farm. There is also interest in joining Quality Agreements as well as in creating agrotourism activities.
Finally, it is worth noting the low interest of farmers in the direct management of the landscape and the natural environment. It was also investigated whether farmers strengthen the multifunctional role of agriculture through their response and participation in policy measures.
4. Conclusions
Examining the phenomenon of multi-employment among farmers and its effects on the social restructuring of the countryside, the research showed that the development of multi-employment functions as a cause of transformation of the countryside.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, A.P. and A.K.; methodology, A.P. and A.M.; software, A.P. and A.M.; validation, A.P. and A.K.; formal analysis, A.P.; investigation, A.P.; resources, A.P.; data curation, A.P., A.K. and A.M.; writing—original draft preparation, A.P.; writing—review and editing, A.P.; visualization, A.P. and A.M.; supervision, A.P. and A.K.; project administration, A.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of University of Patras (30-4-2025).
Informed Consent Statement
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Kizos, T.; Spilanis, I. Survival Strategies of Rural Households in Less Favoured Areas (LFAs): The Case of Lesvos. In Proceedings of the 7th Panhellenic Conference on Rural Economics, entitled Rural Society in a Changing Rural Space, Athens, Greece, 21–23 November 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Pliakoura, A.; Beligiannis, G.N.; Mavrommati, A.; Kontogeorgos, A. Strengths and weaknesses for the young farmers to abide in the Greek countryside: A triangulation approach. J. Agribus. Dev. Emerg. Econ. 2024, 14, 733–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- CEC. Commission of the European Communities. The Future of Rural Society; CEC: Brussels, Belgium, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Wilson, G.A. Multifunctional Agriculture: A Transition Theory Perspective; CABI: Wallingford, UK; Cambridge, MA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Alonso, A.D.; Northcote, J. Investigating farmers’ involvement in value-added activities. Br. Food J. 2013, 115, 1407–1427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, B.; Robinson, G.M.; Bardsley, D.K. Measuring Multifunctional Agricultural Landscapes. Land 2020, 9, 260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leakey, R.R.B. Multifunctional Agriculture: Achieving Sustainable Development in Africa; Academic Press: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Spataru, A.; Faggian, R.; Docking, A. Principles of multifunctional agriculture for supporting agriculture in metropolitan peri-urban areas: The case of Greater Melbourne, Australia. J. Rural Stud. 2020, 74, 34–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, B.; Robinson, G.M. Multifunctional agriculture: Policies and implementation in China. Geogr. Compass 2020, 14, e12538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pliakoura, A.; Mavrommati, A.; Beligiannis, G. How does entrepreneurship contribute to regional development and well-being? A conceptual approach. Agric. Econ. Rev. 2025, 26, 105–122. [Google Scholar]
- Hellenic Statistical Authority (ELSTAT). Population-Housing Census: Methodology and Basic Results; ELSTAT: Athens, Greece, 2021; Available online: https://www.statistics.gr/en/2021-census-pop-hous (accessed on 30 August 2025).
- Stathakopoulos, V. Market Research Methods; Stamoulis Publications: Athens, Greece, 2005. [Google Scholar]
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. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.