Bania, North Macedonia, and Turkey, identify their regions’ position in relation
Bania, North Macedonia, and Turkey, decide their regions’ position in relation to EU regions. The originality on the investigation was reflected in the strategy, which, in relation to rural regions of Serbia, just isn’t extensively represented within the literature. The analysis from the rural area of Serbia was mostly sector-oriented, when the spatial method was still within the background. Furthermore, essentially the most complete investigation that analysed the rural locations of Serbia was carried out by Bogdanov et al. [57], but there was no study that dealt with all the socioeconomic traits of rural regions of Serbia and their comparison with EU countries. Thus, this paper filled the gap within the literature. It really is clear that the analysis into improvement processes in rural places implies an integrated method using the use of a much PHA-543613 Technical Information bigger quantity of indicators. Nevertheless, as a result of the available data in databases, this paper’s primary limitation was the usage of a scarce number of variables. Future investigation will move towards identifying other variables contributing towards the heterogeneity of rural regions, such as demographic and spatial components. This would imply responding appropriately to the demand for multidimensional access to rural places so that you can create a rural typology that would encompass Serbia and the EU at the regional level. Rural typology at the regional level could point to particular spatial patterns in the development of Serbia’s rural areas relative towards the EU countries.Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Z.J. and S.Z.; methodology and investigation, Z.J., D. and S.Z.; writing–original draft preparation, critique and editing, Z.J., S.Z., D. and B.M.; visualization, Z.J. and B.M.; supervision, S.Z. and D. All authors have read and agreed towards the published version of your manuscript. Funding: This study received no external funding. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.Land 2021, ten,12 ofInformed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Acknowledgments: The paper presents a a part of the investigation in the Erasmus + Jean Monnet project Agricultural Policy of European Union and its influence on competitiveness of agri-food merchandise of Serbia griCOM (620128-EPP-1-2020-1-RS-EPPJMO-MODULE). Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
landArticleDynamic Amazonia: The EU ercosur Trade Agreement and DeforestationEugenio Arima 1, , Paulo Barreto two , Farzad Taheripour three and Angel AguiarDepartment of Geography as well as the Atmosphere, University of Texas at Austin, 305 E. 23rd St., A3100, Austin, TX 78712, USA Amazon Institute of People and also the Environment (IMAZON), Ed. Zion Small business, IEM-1460 medchemexpress Television. Dom Romualdo de Seixas, 1698, Bel 66055-200, Brazil; [email protected] Division of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, 403 West State St., West Lafayette, IN 47907-5056, USA; [email protected] (F.T.); [email protected] (A.A.) Correspondence: [email protected]: The trade agreement amongst the European Union and the Mercosur countries will improve deforestation inside the Mercosur nations and Brazil, in distinct, if ratified by member countries. We use a computable common equilibrium model to analyze how trade, land use, and agricultural production will adjust because of the agreement. We then use a statistical model to spatially allocate the predicted deforestation within the Brazilian Amazon. The models estimate that the agreement will result in more deforestation in Brazil ranging from 56 to 173 thousand ha t.