Abstract

The analysis and management of innovation of the economic potential of the rural enterprises are currently the limiting factors of the stability and development of the enterprises; on the other hand, it is a condition for maintaining rural viability. Innovation is a catalyst for the growth of the enterprises, both within their internal environment and in the rural areas and the settlements established in such areas. Only the interconnection of the two levels of innovation (corporate and territorial) ensures stability and profitability for the enterprise. The paper focuses on the latter-mentioned part of innovation, both in terms of the methodology and research. The method for determining the innovative economic potential of rural settlements is presented in the paper, defined as the existential and development base for different enterprises. In relation, the paper discusses the issue of quantification of the economic potential of the clusters. The data acquisition is based on secondary data of the LAGs of the South Bohemian Region and the data from Ekotoxa. All municipalities of Trebonsko LAG (Czech Republic) are included in the data collection. The method for clustering the municipalities by their specifics, is supposed to be the most important result of the research, together with defining the areas suitable for innovation processes. Four models – Economic Cluster, Social Cluster, Cluster of Infrastructure, and Cluster of Environment – are defined based on four groups of the variables (economic, social, infrastructure, and environmental). A municipality is classified into an appropriate group based on the group (pillar) in which the municipality scored the highest average order. The average order of the municipality in each pillar is calculated as well. The method is followed by a verified procedure for defining the business potential of the clusters. The stepwise backward regression method is used to define the index of progressivity of the economic structure, determining the socio-economic differentiation of the regions in the Czech Republic. Regarding both the methodological procedure and the analytical tool, it is possible to state their suitable choice; the research results are relevant, valid, and usable in practice. The activities with high economic and innovation potential in the tested area include transport services, availability of the services, municipal infrastructure, drinking water supply, the occurrence of water bodies, and the structure of the population.

Keywords: municipality, economic potential, rural area, cluster, Stepwise backward regression, models, LAG of Trebonsko

JEL Classification: O18, O21, M21, C40.

Cite as: Partlova, P., Strakova, J., Vachal, J., Pollak, F & Dobrovic, J. (2020). Management of innovation of the economic potential of the rural enterprises. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 2, 340-353. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2020.2-25

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

References

1. Bernard, J. (2010). Endogenní rozvojove potencialy malych obcí a místní samosprava. Sociologicke studie, 10(1).
2. Bernard, J. (2011). Endogenní rozvojove potencialy malych venkovskych obcí–obtízne hledaní a merení jejich vlivu. Sociologicky casopis/Czech Sociological Review, 47(04), 745-775. [Google Scholar]
3. Binek, J., Galvasova, I., Svobodova, H., Chabicovska, K., & Holecek, J. (2012). Prístupy k posílení spoluprace a synergie ve venkovskych mikroregionech. [Google Scholar]
4. Binek, J., Svobodova, H., Holecek, J., Galvasova, I., & Chabicovska, K. (2009). Synergie ve venkovskem prostoru: akteri a nastroje rozvoje venkova. Brno: GaREP. [Google Scholar]
5. Blazek, J. (1996). Meziregionalní rozdíly v Ceske republice v transformacním období. Geografie-Sborník Ceske geograficke spolecnosti, (4), 265-277. [Google Scholar]
6. Blazek, J., & Csank, P. (2007). Nova faze regionalního rozvoje v CR?. Sociologicky casopis/Czech Sociological Review, 43(5), 945-966. [Google Scholar]
7. Blazek, J., & Netrdova, P. (2012). Regional unemployment impacts of the global financial crisis in the new member states of the EU in Central and Eastern Europe. European Urban and Regional Studies, 19(1), 42-61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
8. Bosworth, G., Annibal, I., Carroll, T., Price, L., Sellick, J., & Shepherd, J. (2016). Empowering Local Action through Neo‐Endogenous Development; The Case of LEADER in England. Sociologia Ruralis, 56(3), 427-449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
9. Christaller, W. (1933). Die zentralen Orte in Suddeutschland (the central places in southern Germany). Jena: Gustav Fischer.
10. Christensen, R. (2002). Plane answers to complex questions (Vol. 35, No. 1). New York: Springer. [Google Scholar]
11. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American journal of sociology, 94, S95-S120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
12. Faludi, A. (2006). From European spatial development to territorial cohesion policy. Regional Studies, 40(6), 667-678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
13. Friedmann, J. (1966). Regional development policy: a case study of Venezuela (No. HT395. V4 F7). [Google Scholar]
14. Hampl, M. (2005): Geograficka organizace spolecnosti v Ceske republice: transformacní procesy a jejich obecny kontext. Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Prírodovedecka fakulta, Katedra socialní geografie a regionalního rozvoje, Praha. Retrieved from https://www.natur.cuni.cz/geografie/socialni-geografie-a-regionalni-rozvoj/other/files/hampl-geograficka-organizace
15. Hampl, M., & Marada, M. (2016). Metropolizace a regionalní vyvoj v Cesku v transformacním období (Metropolization and regional development in Czech Republic during the transformation period–in Czech). Geografie, 121(4), 566-590. [Google Scholar]
16. Hirschman, A. O. (1959). The Strategy of Economic Development. Yale University Press, New Haven. [Google Scholar]
17. Hocking, R. R. (1976). A Biometrics invited paper. The analysis and selection of variables in linear regression. Biometrics, 32(1), 1-49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. Hoggart, K., Buller, H. (2016): Rural development. Routledge, New York. [Google Scholar]
19. Jancak, V., Havlícek, T., Chromy, P., & Marada, M. (2008). Regional differentiation of selected conditions for the development of human and social capital in Czechia. Geografie. Sbornik Ceske geograficke spolecnosti, 113(3), 269-284. [Google Scholar]
20. Kóródi, M., Dávid, L.D. (2019). The Uniqueness Of The Hungarian Rural Tourism Supply. Journal of Tourism and Services, 10(19): 24-39. [CrossRef]
21. Kucerova, S., & Kucera, Z. (2009). Vztah periferiality a vzdelavaní: Lze definovat periferní oblasti na zaklade vyvoje síte zakladních skol. Acta geographica Universitatis Comenianae, 52, 59-73. [Google Scholar]
22. Marada, M., & Kveton, V. (2016). Transport supply and demand changes in relation to unemployment: Empirical evidence from the Czech Republic in a time of crisis. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 107(5), 611-627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
23. Marsden, T., & Sonnino, R. (2008). Rural development and the regional state: Denying multifunctional agriculture in the UK. Journal of Rural Studies, 24(4), 422-431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
24. Moon, H. Y., & Chang, S. J. (2015). A Study on the Effect of Innovation Performance Through Business Innovation Activities and Techniques for the Small & Medium Size Company. Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management, 43(2), 151-168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
25. Muhlinghaus, S., & Walty, S. (2001). Endogenous development in Swiss mountain communities. Mountain Research and Development, 21(3), 236-242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
26. Muilu, T., Gilbert, A., Phimister, E., Shucksmith, M. (2004). The changing rural context. In Jentsch, B., Shucksmith, M. (Eds.): Young people in rural areas of Europe. The Arkleton Centre for Rural Development Research. Ashgate Publishing, 26-62.
27. Neverauskiene, L. O., & Rakauskiene, O. G. (2018). Identification of employment increasing possibilities in the context of the EU socioeconomic environment evaluation: The case of Lithuania. Economics & Sociology, 11(4), 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
28. Novak, J., & Netrdova, P. (2011). Prostorove vzorce socialne-ekonomicke diferenciace obcí v Ceske republice. Czech Sociological Review, 47(4), 717-745. [Google Scholar]
29. Novotna, M. (2005). Problemy periferních oblastí, UK v Praze. PrF, Praha, KSGRR.
30. Ourednícek, M., & Temelova, J. (2011). Nove socialne prostorove nerovnosti, lokalní rozvoj a kvalita zivota. Czech Sociological Review, 47(4), 625-631. Retrieved from http://urrlab.cz/sites/default/files/ourednicek_m._temelova_j._2011_nove_socialne_prostorove_nerovnosti_lokalni_rozvoj_a_kvalita_zivota.pdf
31. Ourednícek, M., Spackova, P., & Fertrova, M. (2011). Zmeny socialního prostredí a kvality zivota v depopulacních regionech Ceske republiky. Sociologicky casopis/Czech Sociological Review, 47(4), 777-804. [Google Scholar]
32. Perlín, R., Kucerova, S., & Kucera, Z. (2010). Typologie venkovskeho prostoru Ceska. Geografie, 115(2), 161-187. [Google Scholar]
33. Pospech, P. (2014). Vynalezaní venkova v CR po roce 1989. Centrum pro studium demokracie a kultury.
34. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. In Culture and politics (pp. 223-234). Palgrave Macmillan, New York. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
35. Skala, V. (2017). Vliv socialního kapitalu na rozvojovy potencial venkovskych obcí. Acta Politologica, 9(2), 40-56. [Google Scholar]
36. Svobodova, H. (2009). Development of rural regions–on example of hrotovicko microregion. New Economic Challenges, 234. [Google Scholar]
37. Svobodova, H. (2011). Synergie ve venkovskem prostoru. GaREP, Brno.
38. Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research policy, 34(8), 1203-1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
39. Vaishar, A., Sťastna, M., Trnka, P., Dvorak, P., & Zapletalova, J. (2013). South-Moravian rural borderland. European Countryside, 5(2), 115-132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
40. Van der Ploeg, J. D., Renting, H., Brunori, G., Knickel, K., Mannion, J., Marsden, T., … & Ventura, F. (2000). Rural development: from practices and policies towards theory. Sociologia ruralis, 40(4), 391-408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
41. Woods, M. (2004). Rural geography: Processes, responses and experiences in rural restructuring. Sage. [Google Scholar]
42. Woods, M. (2011). Rural. Taylor & Francis Book, Routledge.