[go: up one dir, main page]
Next Article in Journal
Evaluation of Coastal Ecological Security Barrier Functions Based on Ecosystem Services: A Case Study of Fujian Province, China
Next Article in Special Issue
Resilience Evaluation and Renovation Strategies of Public Spaces in Old Communities from a Disaster-Adaptive Perspective
Previous Article in Journal
Air Quality Monitoring and Total Factor Productivity of Polluting Firms in China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Population Aging and the Potential for Developing a Silver Economy in the Polish National Cittaslow Network
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 16
10.3390/su16166786
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Importance of Measures Undertaken to Improve the Quality of Life in the Problem Areas: A Case Study in Warmia and Mazury Region in Poland

by
Hubert Kryszk
1,
Krystyna Kurowska
1,* and
Renata Marks-Bielska
2
1
Department of Land Management, Faculty of Geoengineering, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-720 Olsztyn, Poland
2
Department of Economic Policy, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(16), 6786; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16166786
Submission received: 24 June 2024 / Revised: 26 July 2024 / Accepted: 6 August 2024 / Published: 8 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Development of Regions and Cities: Improvements in Planning and the Inhabitants’ Quality of Life)
Browse Figures
Figure 1
<p>Number of investment developments completed by beneficiaries in municipalities in years 2017–2023.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>Amounts obtained as non-repayable financial support by beneficiaries in municipalities in the years 2017–2023.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Main benefits achieved from projects funded by the NCSA under the framework of non-repayable financial support.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Opinions of inhabitants on the development of rural areas resulting from the projects financed by the Olsztyn Branch of the National Support Centre for Agriculture.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Opinions of residents on the impact of NSCA-funded projects.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Opinions of residents about the investment projects funded by the NCSA as increasing the tourist attractiveness of rural areas.</p> ">
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
State agencies set up to manage the agricultural properties of the State Treasury, in subsequent years of their operation, have been implementing programs that are also intended to improve the social and living situation of the inhabitants of former state-owned farm villages. Such measures include non-refundable financial support distributed by the National Support Centre for Agriculture (NSCA). The research aimed to assess whether non-refundable financial aid improves the quality of life of local communities living in rural areas, particularly in former state-owned farm areas identified as problem areas. Another objective aspect of the research was to indicate the importance of this assistance in the opinion of the beneficiaries of this form of support (district authorities) and local communities. Improvement of the quality of life of rural inhabitants and support for the development of rural areas by local governments can be achieved by taking advantage of potential development factors and opportunities emerging in the environment and by being able to establish effective cooperation with various institutions. For local development to proceed smoothly, especially in rural areas, various institutions and economic players need to reach a consensus, become involved, and work together efficiently. A possible instrument to achieve this is the non-repayable financial support distributed by the National Support Centre for Agriculture (NSCA), which-according to the research-brings measurable effects.

1. Introduction

The situation in rural areas in Poland has changed significantly after 1989. Initially, in the 1990s, the process of economic transformation had many negative consequences, both economic and social ones, in the Polish countryside. Firstly, there was an increase in unemployment, which contributed to the depopulation of rural areas. Many jobs were lost, and people’s incomes dwindled, resulting in a decline in the standard of living of the rural population. Some former state-owned farm employees, with narrow and specific professional qualifications, became permanently excluded from the labour market.
Despite the subsequent positive changes in rural areas, in terms of both available technical infrastructure and standard of living, there is still a gap between urban and rural areas. This is reflected in lower values of indicators characterising the quality of life [1]. The quality of life is shaped by many factors, e.g., housing, employment security, health and life protection, opportunities to learn and improve qualifications, access to culture, retail outlets and technical infrastructure, or the degree to which individual needs are satisfied.
There are many definitions of quality of life in the literature. Kud and Wozniak [2] interpret the quality of life as the degree to which a person’s material and spiritual needs are satisfied. Due to the lack of uniform terminology in the literature, the concept of quality of life is sometimes equated with the concept of standard of living. Usually, however, the concept of standard of living relates to material needs, while the quality of life pertains to the totality of human existence [3].
In its broad sense, the concept of quality of life covers the way in which an individual measures ‘the goodness’ of many aspects of their life. Such evaluations comprise emotional responses of a person to life events, a sense of fulfilment and satisfaction in life, and satisfaction from one’s work and personal relations [4]. In the literature, the term ‘quality of life’ is often referred to as ‘wellbeing’. Nowadays, the distinction between these two notions is largely blurred. Both terms often lack precise definitions or else are used in research inconsistently or interchangeably [5].
It is commonly agreed that quality of life is a multi-dimensional concept, where five dimensions can be distinguished: physical wellbeing, material wellbeing, social wellbeing, emotional wellbeing, and development and activity [6].
Quality of life/wellbeing comprises both objective components, i.e., components external to an individual and measurable by others, and subjective components, i.e., evaluation of one’s life and its particular aspects using measures of satisfaction, happiness or other self-evaluation scales [7].
There are numerous studies reported in the literature dealing with the quality of life in terms of health [8,9,10]. However, as highlighted by Farquhar [8], quality of life is more than good health; in fact, social contacts seem to be as valuable components of a good quality of life as one’s health.
The quality of life is a guiding objective in policies implemented at every level. This issue takes on particular importance in rural areas due to the disparities between urban and rural areas. The population living in rural areas in Poland is characterised by a more difficult material situation because of lower incomes compared to those of urban residents [11]. In turn, infrastructure, in the broadest sense, is an essential factor in the development of any area, not just rural ones. However, as Mickiewicz and Wawrzyniak [12] point out, ‘…rural residents aspire to the standards prevailing in cities, especially in terms of equipping their homes with basic sanitary and hygienic facilities, heating appliance installations, gas and ICT networks. They want to have access to larger metropolitan centres via well-developed roads in order to fully benefit from access to education and culture. A well-equipped village attracts new residents from the cities and enables the development of services and non-agricultural activities’. The quality of life is a major concern in spatial policies, whether at the local, regional, or national level. This issue is particularly relevant for rural areas. Local development is the desired direction of change pursued by local authorities using the available instruments. The overarching objectives of local development traditionally include providing jobs for local people and tackling unemployment and its consequences, thereby striving to improve the material wellbeing and quality of life of the inhabitants. Modern objectives of territorial development, on the other hand, are related to the protection and preservation of the natural environment, innovation, new technologies, and the development of human capital [13,14].
The concept of development is often seen as a positive, desirable, quantitative, qualitative, and structural change in a given system. If it is a separate socio-territorial structure with a set of characteristic economic, spatial, and cultural features, then we are dealing with development on a local scale. Local economic development is the result of thoroughly considered and coordinated actions of many institutions (or even the whole institutional system). Development means a sustainable increase of economic potential, competitive strength, and consequently, the standard of living and quality of life of the inhabitants [15,16,17].
Municipal development is an example of local development. It is a process that takes place on a local territory and is the result of interactions among all the actors operating in and managing a specific area. Municipal authorities, as the body responsible for designing and implementing a local development policy, strive to coordinate the activities of all entities so as to serve the interests of the local community to the greatest possible extent. This is particularly important under conditions of constant pressure to increase the number and quality of services provided by local authorities [18,19]. The purpose of the socio-economic development of rural areas, similar to urban units, is to create such economic and social structures in the local environment that will generate decent incomes, satisfy the aspirations of the community, and improve accessibility to public goods and services while simultaneously limiting unfavourable phenomena (e.g., depopulation, unemployment, poverty, marginalisation, mono-functionality of the local economy and agrarian overpopulation, the latter being a characteristic feature of rural areas). The rural area in each spatial unit is characterised by specific development opportunities, which result, for example, from advantages of the location and characteristics of the resources accumulated in the area, as well as the developed socio-economic structures. The unique character of the socio-economic and natural features of rural areas is also influenced by exogenous development factors and accidental processes [20]. Stimulating rural development at the local level is inextricably linked to the function of local governments, which are charged with the task of management and strategic planning. It is important to cooperate effectively with institutions of the business environment [21] and agriculture, which provides substantive and financial support that contributes to the achievement of objectives, both stipulated in law and arising from the creativity of local government managers [20].
Gibas and Heffner [22] emphasised the specific and important role of infrastructure in development processes, which is primarily due to the functions it performs and its service to other departments of social and economic life. Particular importance in the development processes of rural areas is attributed to the beneficial effects resulting from the expansion and modernisation of environmental protection infrastructure, which has been distinguished from economic infrastructure as a new segment of contemporary infrastructure after the concept of sustainable development gained ground. Its importance increases particularly in non-urbanised areas, not only because of the development of the agricultural sector, but above all because it acts to create and strengthen other forms of activity and enables the so-called multifunctional development of rural areas. Concentrated and compact build-up areas are a particularly important characteristic among all the features of spatial structures in villages and properties of rural areas that are conducive to multi-directional socio-economic development and improvement of the living conditions of rural residents. It facilitates infrastructural and social integration, often enabling the accessibility of villages to external users. Of importance is also the demographic potential of a village, which economically justifies the maintenance of its primary service sector and the creation of public spaces with centre-like characteristics, including elements of a nodal character (a readable and paved system of roads and streets). It is also conducive to the occurrence of service, industrial, and multi-family development in forms that densify the existing spatial structures of the village. The municipality’s spatial development powers make it the legal subject of both spatial development and the form of spatial development (planning authority). In this respect, emphasis may be placed on the municipality’s exclusivity, as no other local government body or government administration unit in Poland has such powers. With the above in mind, local authorities should make continuous efforts towards the rational use and development of space [23].
Undergoing constant transformations, rural space is highly differentiated economically, socially, and environmentally. Local development is a very complex process, the direction of which is influenced by many actors located in a given area and by many factors. The local government is undoubtedly the main actor stimulating development processes; however, as a representative of the local community, it should take into account and define its place in setting the vision and achieving the set goals [24].
Rural areas in Poland possess significant development potential, but they also face many challenges. Large disproportions in economic development between cities and rural areas trigger negative processes, the consequences of which often surpass the local or regional dimension. An example is the depopulation of peripheral rural areas, which in turn impairs investment attractiveness. Another important problem in rural areas is the decreasing importance of agriculture as an economic sector providing employment and expected income to rural residents. The main development problems of rural areas, therefore, have at least several different causes, which lead to the disappearance of the most important economic, but also social, and environmental functions of these areas. At the same time, these are the problems typical of rural areas in most economically developed countries and heralded at least a few decades ago.
Problem areas have been the subject of research for a long time. Their first classification can be found in a study aimed at diagnosing the state of the national economy [25]. Later, problem areas ceased to be a popular topic of research, and it was not until Poland joined the EU that a rationale arose for intensifying such studies [26]. The criteria for distinguishing problem (disadvantaged) regions in the European Community are related to reasons underlying the uneven development of individual areas and to other overlapping phenomena, such as low labour productivity and income disparity, low qualifications of employees, underdeveloped education, infrastructure deficiencies, small population, and capital shortage [27].
Many definitions of problem areas can be found in scientific studies. The following terms are often used: conflict areas, deprivation areas, depressed areas, difficult areas, production reserve areas, handicapped areas, risk areas, areas lagging in development [28], and less developed areas. In many cases, they are treated as synonymous with the term ‘problem areas’. In the most general terms, problem areas are areas with unfavourable socio-economic and/or natural characteristics and processes. Among problem areas, three main types can be distinguished: social, economic and natural ones, although it is possible to apply an even more detailed typology that allows for combinations of these types [26]. According to Niewiadomski [27], problem areas are socially and economically underdeveloped areas with phenomena that hinder or prevent proper functioning. He also stresses that the essence of a problem area consists of several distinctive features, including the fact that a unit of geographical space is characterised by ‘a certain anomaly of regional development, accompanied by several irregularities’ causing conflicts and tensions; the problems created cannot be solved by local authorities and require the state’s intervention.
A perusal of the literature has shown that there is much liberty in defining problem areas, which entails freedom of interpretation and a lack of uniform delimitation criteria. Problem areas are defined within various sciences but always with a spatial reference. There are studies on problem areas of agriculture [29], problem areas in the context of soil erosion risk [30], diversification and perspectives of rural development [31,32], or agriculture itself [33]. Prus [34] identified problem areas in the field of planning and land use. According to the author, activities involving the identification of problem areas at the local level can facilitate making decisions about the target development of land in accordance with the predisposition of a given area or constraints to perform certain functions arising from specific conditions. The spatial reference of problem areas can be considered at local, regional, national and supranational levels. However, to be able to properly diagnose the problem and apply appropriate strategic instruments, one should move away from supra-local scales in the delimitation of problem areas and aim to analyse problems on detailed scales [26].
The study presented in this paper focused on rural areas in Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship, which lie in the area served by the Olsztyn Branch of the National Support Centre for Agriculture. The point of reference was Babuchowska and Marks-Bielska’s [11] research on the importance of the activities implemented by one of the state institutions (the Agricultural Property Agency, currently the National Agricultural Support Centre) for improving the quality of life of inhabitants of the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship. This research shows that the needs of local communities are still inadequately met, especially in terms of public transport, communal housing stock, access to the sewage system, and the state of road infrastructure. Underdeveloped technical infrastructure and its poor state of repair, in particular, determine the quality of life of local residents, being a significant barrier to development, especially in rural areas.
The research and research result analysis aimed to assess whether the non-refundable financial support provided by the NSCA contributed to improving the quality of life of local communities in rural areas, with particular emphasis on former state-owned farm areas. An additional aspect of the research was to indicate the importance of this assistance both in the opinion of the beneficiaries of this form of support (municipal authorities) and local communities.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodship (województwo warmińsko-mazurskie), with its capital in Olsztyn, is situated in the north-eastern part of Poland. It covers an area of 24,173 km2 and is the fourth largest voivodeship in the country. It includes the historic lands of Warmia and Mazury, as well as parts of Powiśle and Żuławy Wiślane.
Following the requirements of the European Union regional statistics, the voivodship has 3 sub-regions: Elbląg, Ełk and Olsztyn. The voivodship is divided into 19 districts (powiat) and 2 cities with district rights (Elbląg and Olsztyn). The districts are divided into 116 municipalities (gmina), including 16 urban, 33 urban-rural, and 67 rural ones. Within the territory of the voivodship, there are 50 towns and 2399 villages. The district towns, together with a network of smaller centres, form a regular settlement network.
Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodship has the highest share of rural areas in the country (97.5%). Each territorial unit (including municipalities) has a specific potential determined by the endogenous resources and the conditions of closer and further environment, which significantly influence the course of the local development process.
In the light of their economic and spatial studies, Łojewski and Skinder [35] distinguished three groups of problem areas that are unsustainable economically and socially. From the point of view of the research undertaken, it is important to take into account rural settlements and small towns in agricultural areas with a large share of former state-owned farms, which cover a significant part of Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship, as these are threatened by high registered unemployment. In this group of problem areas, there are underused resources (human, natural, and often fixed capital after liquidated state agricultural enterprises, production cooperatives, and industrial plants) and undeveloped functions (too specialised and inefficient single-function spatial systems), compounded by the lack of financial capital. Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship’s former state-owned farm municipalities will be among the lagging areas with an unthreatened environment. The area of Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship, in comparison to other Polish voivodeships, is characterised by low air and water pollution and a low degree of surface degradation. At the same time, it has extensive areas of high recreational and landscape value. It is worth noting that these areas are characterised by relatively low population density (42 persons/km2).
A particular barrier to the development of the voivodeship is the quality and condition of the transport infrastructure, which affects the development of tourism, entrepreneurship, and rural areas, but above all is an important measure of the quality of life of the inhabitants.
A high proportion of the population in the Warmia and Mazury Region is composed of former state-owned farms’ employees and their families. This is partly a result of the transformation of the state sector in agriculture, but to a large extent, it is the local community’s conviction of their lost social position. As Niedzielski [36] emphasises, the former state-owned farm employees and their families are characterised by low resourcefulness, low qualifications, poor education, dependence on benefits and social assistance, aversion to work, and a high degree of social pathology. It is therefore widely acknowledged that hermetic and simultaneously internally disintegrated communities have emerged in villages formerly dominated by state-owned farms, whose lives are dominated by immediate and temporary needs, and who replicate cultural and social norms drastically inadequate under the conditions of the dominant free market economy [37].

2.2. Methods and Data

The research analysed the non-repayable financial support granted by the National Support Centre for Agriculture in 2017–2023 in rural areas of the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship for the following purposes:
  • Construction, repairs and conversion of residential and commercial buildings, technical infrastructure facilities and other real property transferred without prior restoration to a proper technical condition;
  • Construction, repairs or conversion of energy, water supply and sewerage, heating and telecommunication devices, facilities or systems transferred prior to their restoration to a proper technical condition;
  • Educational, cultural and tourist projects carried out in rural areas.
To achieve these objectives, a survey was planned and conducted in parallel. Two questionnaires were developed (Surveys available in Supplementary Materials), one of which was addressed to the beneficiaries of support. In this case, questionnaire forms were sent by e-mail to all rural and urban-rural municipalities located within the administrative borders of the Olsztyn Branch of the NSCA. In addition, forms were sent to other support beneficiaries in the analysed period (schools, parishes, associations, foundations, etc.). Several questionnaires were also distributed and returned during field trips. In total, 50 correctly completed forms were collected. It is worth noting that the questionnaires were received only from entities, mainly municipalities, which were beneficiaries of non-repayable financial support.
The other survey was addressed to residents of areas where such funds were implemented. The specific aim of this stage of the research was to find out the residents’ opinions on non-repayable financial support, how they perceived it, whether they were aware of this form of support, and what benefits they could see for their communities from the implementation of the support. Field surveys were conducted in 2023 during open-air events, such as harvest festivals, community days, battles of the regions, celebrations of historical anniversaries, meetings with folklore, etc. One hundred and seven correctly completed forms were received. For the purpose of this study, only the questions directly related to the aim of the research undertaken were processed. Thus, the questions concerning the impact of the non-repayable financial support on the development of rural areas and the main benefits, i.e., the type of impact, were extracted from the first questionnaire addressed to beneficiaries of the support. As regards the questionnaire filled in by residents of rural areas, the questions about the effect of such support on the development of rural areas, improved technical infrastructure, improved aesthetic value of the rural environment, increased economic attractiveness and tourist appeal were considered.
The data obtained from the surveys were submitted for statistical analysis. The choice of statistical methods and the way detailed analyses of the chosen questions were made were dictated by the characteristics of data and the need to carefully analyse the effect of respondents’ education on various aspects of their perception of the NSCA activities. The chi-square test and the Mann–Whitney test were applied.
The spatial scope of the research covered the area of the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship. This is an area where, before the political transformation in Poland, a relatively large percentage (over 60% in some municipalities) of farmland had belonged to state-owned farms. At present, these are the areas where development barriers have accumulated and to which non-repayable financial support for investment and development is addressed. The Olsztyn Territorial Branch of the National Support Centre for Agriculture is a leader in granting this type of funds in Poland.

3. Results

3.1. The Role of State Institutions in the Development of Problem Areas

The time period when state agencies were created in Poland, referred to as the process of agencification of public administration in Poland, began in the late 1980s [38]. Agencies became a new form of public administration organisation in the Polish legal system. Their creation resulted from the need of the state to adapt to performing new public tasks. Agencies were established to carry out innovation, privatisation, and modernisation processes, mainly in the field of agriculture and defence. Agricultural agencies played an important role in rural areas. State agencies which were founded to manage the State Treasury’s agricultural property implemented programs that were also intended to improve the social and living conditions of the inhabitants of former state-owned farm villages (Agricultural Property Agency). The early 21st century marked another opportunity for rural areas following Poland’s accession to the European Union. New agencies, including the Agency for the Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture or the Agricultural Market Agency, were established to act as paying agencies under the Common Agricultural Policy [39]. Owing to financial support from the EU funds and changes in agricultural policy, there have been many positive changes in rural areas. Among others, the EU funds were used to invest in infrastructure in rural areas. As a result, accessibility to roads, waterworks and sewerage systems, as well as to health and cultural centres, has improved.
The National Support Centre for Agriculture is a state legal person which is an executive agency. The NSCA implements the state policy concerning the creation and improvement of the area structure of family farms [40] and the development of strategic companies of the State Treasury, the stabilisation of agricultural markets, the implementation of innovation in agriculture and the agri-food industry, as well as the promotion and improvement of the competitiveness of Polish agri-food products. An important statutory task is the implementation and application of instruments of agricultural support, active agricultural policy and rural development [40,41].
According to Polish law, beneficiaries of non-repayable financial support may be various entities, but the key ones are local government units, which are most active in using this form of support.
The NSCA in Poland has 17 branch offices and the NSCA Head Office. The most active branch office is OT Olsztyn (Table 1), which confirms the legitimacy of undertaking research in the area of activity of this branch office. Another factor is the high demand for non-repayable financial support distributed by the NSCA in rural areas of the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship, which for years has been defined as lagging in development or burdened with problem areas.
Due to the specificity of the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship, as well as the nature and intensity of the system and economic transformation processes that took place in the area, resulting from the large share of state property in the ownership of agricultural land [43], the cooperation of municipal government units with the National Support Centre for Agriculture (NSCA, formerly the Agricultural Property Agency) is very important [18,44].
The cooperation between municipalities and the NSCA mainly focuses on the transfer of land for infrastructure improvement and social purposes, as well as the transfer of ownership of existing infrastructure to municipalities. An important area of cooperation between municipalities and the NSCA for rural development is the transfer of land for investment purposes. Cooperation in this area provides municipal governments with an opportunity to attract new investors, especially in municipalities that have no or very few investment areas of their own.
Previous research [11,45] confirms the importance of the NSCA local branch in Olsztyn in carrying out the tasks assigned to it. Many projects were financed to support residents of former state-owned farm areas so as to counteract poverty and activate local communities. Invariably, for years, the most crucial investments have been infrastructural ones, which local governments would not be able to accomplish without external support.
Although the cooperation of municipal governments with the National Support Center for Agriculture has given tangible benefits for rural areas, there is still great demand for financial support from various institutions for the implementation of tasks that are part of the statutory tasks of local government units.

3.2. Non-Repayable Financial Support Provided by the NSCA Branch Olsztyn

Over the years, various forms of help and support have been undertaken to activate local communities, especially those living in rural areas. A significant part of these areas is identified as areas with an accumulation of development barriers. According to Kłodziński and Dzun [43], a clear answer to the question of how to activate rural problem areas, especially former state-owned farm areas, is very difficult. Despite the passing of time and various programs dedicated to the improvement of technical infrastructure and the activation of residents, these areas still require external support. The spatial and communication isolation of settlements, infrastructural backwardness, decreasing demand for hired workers in agriculture, poor psychosocial and material conditions, and low education of the adult population living in these areas result in their marginalisation and often the development of social pathologies. Attempts to activate these communities, although quite sporadic, indicate that there are opportunities to overcome the stagnation and stagnation in the socio-economic life of these regions, to eliminate a certain isolation of these communities from their surroundings, and to include them in municipal development strategies.
Many former employees of state-owned farms are currently of retirement age. As the years go by, the number of people in this age group increases, contributing to the ageing of the community. This community can maintain strong social and emotional bonds with former farm colleagues. A common past can create a community based on shared experiences and support. The strong social bond is clearly visible and very important. The aid offered by the National Support Center for Agriculture as part of non-repayable financial support is very important for rural residents, all the more so because this support helps to finance both investments related to the construction and modernisation of technical infrastructure devices and soft projects (non-investment projects aimed at the development of human resources, including publishing, research, and scientific activities, training, scholarships, cultural and educational projects).
Considering the spatial distribution of the allocated non-repayable financial support, the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship clearly divides into its eastern part (less active) and western part (very active in terms of the number of completed projects) (Figure 1). The municipalities in the Elbląg, Ostróda and Działdowo Districts are particularly active. Noteworthy are also municipalities in Braniewo District, where the socio-economic situation is on a much lower level than in the other municipalities characterised by showing much interest in the acquisition of non-repayable financial support from the NSCA.
It is worth recalling an earlier study by Babuchowska and Marks-Bielska [11], who analysed non-repayable financial grants allocated from 2012 to 2016 and concluded that the main beneficiary of such support was local governments. In the years 2012–2015, the local branch of ANR in Olsztyn allocated non-repayable financial support for the total amount of EUR 3,199,719.26 to municipalities in the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship. At that time, the number of municipalities granted such support varied from 8 in 2012, 10 in 2013 and 2014, and 14 in 2015. It is worth underlining that in the most recent years, from 2017 to 2023, the non-repayable financial support offered by the Olsztyn Branch of the NSCA attracted much interest.
The current analysis of the non-repayable financial support distributed by the NSCA Olsztyn Branch shows that grants were given to 14 independent groups of entities, including those which have legal personality and those which do not, for example, municipalities, foundations, rural housewives’ association, fire brigades (volunteer units), parishes, and religious associations; schools and universities.
Among the entities mentioned above, municipalities are the main beneficiary, having acquired the non-repayable financial support during the period 2017–2022 in the amount of nearly EUR 10.9 million, which corresponds to 96% of the whole sum dedicated to the support of rural areas [45]. Housing cooperatives come second, with a total support of EUR 127,907. The year 2023 was a record year. The financial support obtained in just the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship was at the level of approximately EUR 2 million.
The funds acquired by both municipalities and housing cooperatives were mostly allocated to investments related to technical infrastructure. Amounts obtained as non-repayable financial support by individual municipalities in the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship during the analysed time period are shown in the following diagram (Figure 2).

3.3. Survey Research

The beneficiaries who participated in our survey expressed a very positive opinion about the impact of the projects completed under the non-repayable financial support framework and awarded by the NSCA on the development of rural areas. As many as 70% of beneficiaries evaluated this impact as very large, while another 24% agreed that it was big. This points to the strong conviction in the need to support the construction and modernisation of technical infrastructure or initiatives supporting the education or culture of local communities. Lower (sporadic) scores may suggest that, in some specific cases, the awarded financial support did not bring about the expected benefits for the development of rural areas, and this most often concerns soft projects. The average score was 4.8, which is a very good result, indicating that the financial support in the form of non-repayable funds awarded by the NSCA is perceived as very beneficial and producing a strong impact on the development of rural areas.
The answers to the question about the main benefits of non-repayable financial support distributed by the Olsztyn Branch of the National Support Centre for Agriculture demonstrated the diversity of positive effects. The respondents could choose more than one answer given as well as write their own answers.
The answer most often chosen by the survey participants is ‘support to education and cultural activities’, which indicates that the financial support provided by the NSCA had a significant influence on the cultural and educational development of the local community. This is the benefit that appears in nearly every returned questionnaire, which emphasises its importance. Another benefit which was indicated by nearly all respondents was ‘the forming of social bonds’. Many respondents underline the fact that owing to the financial support, they were able to create stronger bonds in communities, which is a key factor in long-term social development and cohesion. ‘Improvement of the quality of life’ is another advantage often mentioned by respondents. This benefit can encompass different aspects of life, from the improvement of technical infrastructure to access to better education. Another interesting finding was that many respondents marked such answers as ‘raising social awareness’ and ‘raising environmental awareness’ as the benefits obtained from the financially supported projects. This suggests that projects funded by the NSCA affect not only material aspects of life but also the level of awareness and education of society.
Opinions of beneficiaries of non-repayable financial support grants awarded by the NSCA, and the benefits they pointed to in the survey are presented in the diagram below (Figure 3).
In order to analyse the dependencies between the type of project financed by the NCSA and the effect of this project on the development of rural areas, a chi-square test was applied. The data are categorised, observations are independent, and the sample is large, which means that the outcome of the statistical test is reliable.
The results of the chi-square test are unambiguous and statistically significant (Table 2). The chi-square value is 61.08, and the p-value is much smaller than the standard level of significance, i.e., 0.05, which suggests that there is a significant difference in the effects achieved by different types of projects financed by the NCSA on the development of rural areas. This dependence is extremely important because it implies that not all types of projects are equally effective in attaining the set aim, which is to help develop rural areas. This finding may have implications for future strategies and allocation of funds by the NCSA, suggesting that some types of projects can be more successful than others in attaining the goals related to the development of rural areas, which is the overarching objective in every area.
Equally important are the opinions of people living in rural areas, who were direct addressees of non-repayable financial support awarded by the NCSA. The survey questionnaires were distributed in the localities where, over the years 2017–2023, such investment projects were completed as the construction of technical infrastructure (transportation routes, pedestrian paths and roads for motor vehicles, waterworks, water treatment facilities) as well as soft projects (in education, culture or local traditions, etc.). In total, 107 people, 58% of women and 42% of men responded to our questionnaire. Most questionnaires were filled in by middle-aged respondents (31–50 years of age–45% of respondents) and older ones (51–70 years of age–42% of respondents). Just 10% of the respondents were aged up to 30 years, and 3% were more than 70 years old. The prevalent age of respondents correlates with the increased socio-economic activity of these dominant age groups. Moreover, they are the two age categories that can identify themselves as a former state-owned farm environment. Hence, their opinions can largely reflect the actual effect of financial aid programmes on local communities and their needs. As regards the education of respondents, the largest shares were composed of people with secondary education (45%) and secondary vocational education (36% of respondents). People with higher education made up 12% of the total population, and the remaining group (8%) had basic vocational education. This is valuable demographic information because it coincides with the general situation in the Warmińko-Mazurskie Voivodeship, where the entire population is dominated by people with vocation and secondary education aged over 50 years. This social group is more engaged in different local initiatives. The data concerning education may be of significance for organisations which would wish to adjust their programmes to needs and the level of understanding demonstrated by different social groups.
The first analysed question refers to the contribution of the implementation of projects on the development of rural areas, and the results are illustrated in the following diagram (Figure 4).
Most residents believe that the projects performed under the non-repayable financial support scheme have contributed to the development of rural areas. This opinion is shared by as many as 72% of respondents. Quite many respondents (32%) assessed this influence as a slight one, but 40% indicated that it was considerable. This suggests that investment projects and other activities financed by the Olsztyn Branch of the NSCA play a very important role but may not be sufficiently big or complex to assert without doubt that they contribute to the development of rural areas. This could be due to the fact that a large percentage of support is allocated to projects serving to build social bonds (all kinds of special events). It would also be unwise to neglect the group of residents who admitted to not having any opinion on the influence of NSCA-funded projects on the development of their localities. As many as 18% of respondents said they did not have an opinion on this matter. This can indicate that some projects were not relevant or understandable enough for the general public to be properly evaluated. It can also mean that some members of a given community do not consider these projects to be a priority or to have a considerable impact on their lives.
The three questions that followed referred to the improvement of technical infrastructure and roads, improved aesthetic value of the rural landscape, and growth in economic activity (Figure 5).
Investment projects financed by the National Support Centre for Agriculture in Poland appear to be positively received by residents as regards such effects as the improvement of technical infrastructure and roads. The surveys conducted in this study prove that the vast majority of respondents gave such projects a score of 4 or 5 on a five-point scale (73% of the residents of rural areas who participated in the study) (Figure 5), which indicates that the projects in question are usually carried out properly and they can successfully satisfy the needs of local communities.
The investment projects also seem to have a positive effect on the aesthetic value of rural areas. The respondents mostly awarded scores of 4 (strong effect) and 5 (very strong effect), and these two choices comprised 65% of all opinions. The influence of the investment projects funded by the NCSA on the growth of economic activity in rural areas within the analysed region was evaluated slightly differently. The collected opinions indicate that the development projects funded by the NCSA under the non-repayable financial support programme have a moderate impact on the economic activity in rural areas. The most frequent score awarded to this type of influence was 3 (neutral effect, according to 34% of respondents), which suggests that these development projects are perceived as having some, albeit not considerable, stimulating influence on the local economy. It is worth noting that the answers given to this question were quite diverse, which attests to the fact that any impact on economic activity is a complex issue, dependent on several factors, including the specific nature of a given area, type of development projects performed, and the extent of their impact.
Finally, another important question included in our survey referred to the influence of investment projects funded by the National Support Centre for Agriculture on the appeal of rural areas to tourists. This aspect is particularly relevant in the analysed region of Poland, which has outstanding potential for the development of tourism (picturesque landscapes, many lakes, a large forest cover, and clean air). However, some barriers to unleashing this potential consist of poor accessibility and poorly developed technical and social infrastructure. Opinions of residents participating in our study are gathered in the following diagram (Figure 6).
The chi-square test applied to analyse relationships between categorical variables, such as education (primary, vocational, secondary, higher) and opinions about the NCSA-funded measures revealed interesting dependences. For example, a statistically significant relationship (p < 0.05) was determined between the level of education and the opinion about NCSA-funded development projects as influencing the aesthetic value of rural areas. Detailed analyses supported by the U Mann-Whitney test enabled us to gain better insight into how representatives of different subpopulations grouped according to education levels differed in their opinions on the impact of NCSA-funded projects. For instance, significant differences (p < 0.05) were determined between respondents with primary education and those with higher education in how they assessed the impact of NSCA-supported projects on economic activity.
It is worth emphasising that there are differences in the perception of the influence of NSCA-funded projects on tourism in rural areas. Although some respondents acknowledged positive effects, some voiced their doubts or the belief that these effects were almost negligible. Analysis of these data could help financing institutions (the NCSA) and beneficiaries of support (mainly municipalities) to adjust their projects more faithfully to the actual needs of rural communities and to ensure that completed projects are more effective in endowing rural areas with tourist attractiveness. Another conclusion is that there is a need for dialogue with inhabitants of rural areas in order to understand better their expectations and needs.

4. Discussion

Quality of life is a complex, multifaceted construct whose research calls for many approaches from different theoretical perspectives. In order to gain a subjective understanding of wellbeing, we need knowledge about how objective conditions influence one’s assessment of one’s life. Likewise, a thorough understanding of objective indicators and how they are selected for studies requires researchers to understand the values held by people and to know how objective indicators affect the way people perceive their wellbeing [5]. In order to arrive at an effective explanation, it is necessary to perceive the quality of life as a concept composed of a series of social, environmental, psychological and physical values.
Research on the level and quality of life is carried out using various methods, including surveys, interviews, statistical analyses, and field observations [46,47]. A useful method for assessing the quality of life of residents may be the Difference-in-Differences (DID) method [48]. The DiD method is a powerful tool which can be employed to evaluate the influence of various types of interventions on the quality of life (e.g., construction of new infrastructure) on condition that the data for analysis are properly catalogued and the assumptions of the model are satisfied [49,50]. The results of this research enable a better understanding of society’s needs and can serve as a basis for improving public policies that are aimed at improving the quality of life of residents [51]. Meeting the needs of local communities is combined with creating conditions for the best possible socio-economic development [52].
Perception of the quality of life is highly individualised and shaped by a variety of factors. It depends on the age, education and current living standards of residents. Older, poorer people will have totally different expectations than young, educated people [8,10,53]. However, the rural areas in the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship stand out in this respect. The ageing population prevails, burdened with the load of past events caused by the collapse of State Agricultural Farms and the consequences of the agricultural reform.
The NSCA carries out the measures defined in specific legal regulations, which directly or indirectly contribute to the improvement of living conditions of countryside residents. An example of such activities is the programme of providing support to the development of technical and social infrastructure in its broad sense. These include the free-of-charge transfer of some land from the Agricultural Property Stock of the State Treasure for the purposes of infrastructural development projects or the transfer of funds to support repairs and modernisation of technical facilities in rural areas [11,45]. Not all projects and undertakings have a direct impact on the development of rural areas. They contribute to the greater awareness of local populations and to building stronger social bonds.
Local governments, which by their nature and functions are close to social and individual needs, are the main partners of the state in achieving development goals, thus promoting civic activity and involvement and counteracting social marginalisation. Municipalities are responsible for the execution of infrastructural projects and, therefore, consume most of the project’s budget by implementing one or two infrastructure developments. However, considering the number of projects, the dominant share is composed of soft projects for small amounts (from 1000 to 10,000 euros). Both residents of rural areas and beneficiaries of projects draw attention to the positive impact of such projects on various aspects of the quality of life in rural areas previously dominated by state-owned farms (backward areas). This is particularly important in former state-owned farm areas [11,45].
Human capital is an important aspect of the development of rural areas. Its significance for economic development is confirmed by numerous empirical studies. Studies by Polish authors show that areas inhabited by well-educated people are characterised by high economic potential, measured, for example, by the entrepreneurship ratio, unemployment rate, or local government income.
In relation to Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship, it should be noted that the inhabitants of the northern part of the region are characterised by a much lower level of education, which, given the phenomenon of depopulation occurring there, may mean the deepening of intra-regional differences in development and a widening gap between this and more developed regions of the country [21]. In such areas, additional external financial resources (public and private) can have significant multiplier effects if they stimulate the multifunctional development of such regions, including rural areas and associated towns [35]. A significant limitation arises from the assumptions underlying the projects, including the time period assigned to the implementation of a project (development) from the moment the funds are acquired through the implementation of development and the settlement of the project’s budget, which must be completed within a calendar year [45].
In a more recent study on the typology of rural areas, Śleszyński et al. [54,55] classified problem areas, mainly former state-owned farm areas (the northern part of Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship) into the so-called transformation shock sub-areas, which underwent a serious socio-economic collapse as a result of the political transformation after 1989. In the face of complex challenges which problem areas keep struggling, there is an urgent need to provide residents of such localities with financial and technical support. Problem areas are often characterised by inadequate infrastructure, limited access to basic services, and a low level of social and technical capital. Financial support is essential for the successful accomplishment of investments into the modernisation of infrastructure, improvement of housing conditions, and development of the local economy. Simultaneously, technical support, including advisory services and know-how transfer, is of key importance to achieve efficient project management and to build institutional local communities. Integration of these two forms of support can make a considerable contribution to the sustainable development of problem areas, improvement of the quality of life of their inhabitants, and the diminishing of disparities between regions [35].
The condition of technical infrastructure affects the level and quality of life of rural residents. It should be stated, however, that the changes that have taken place and are still taking place in rural areas, primarily investments in the development of technical infrastructure, may increasingly influence the increase in the standard of living and the subjective feeling of satisfaction with living conditions and quality of life. Poorly developed technical infrastructure also affects investment opportunities in rural areas. Investments financed by NSCA are one of the activities aimed at improving the living conditions of the rural population, the aesthetics of these areas, and above all, stimulating the activity of the local community. NSCA’s activities also concern investments such as construction, modernisation of water supply networks, sewage networks, sewage treatment plants, construction of road lighting, etc. These are extremely important elements that determine the quality of life of residents.

5. Conclusions

The principal goal of this study has been to understand how investment projects funded by the National Support Centre for Agriculture affect the life of rural populations in several areas, such as infrastructure, aesthetic value of rural landscapes, economic activity, tourist attractiveness, and adjustment of projects to local needs. Inhabitants of localities where projects supported by the NSCA Olsztyn Branch funds have been carried out are satisfied with the improvement of the quality of life achieved as a result of modernisation, repairs or hardening of roads.
Strategically oriented municipal authorities strive to cooperate with various institutions, including the National Support Center for Agriculture, by taking actions aimed at improving the investment and social climate of the units in the area they manage. They make efforts, among others, towards improving technical and social infrastructure because they are aware that there is still a lot to do in this area. In rural areas, there is still poorly developed technical infrastructure, which is one of the most important barriers to their development.
The results of our research prove that the financial support provided by the Olsztyn Branch of the NSCA as non-repayable grants is perceived as being very beneficial in many aspects of the life of local communities and the development of rural areas (72% of respondents). Nearly one-third of the respondents evaluated the effect of the above support as insignificant, while 40% considered it to be considerable.
The effects are diverse and relate to both material and non-material aspects of life. This opinion is shared by both beneficiaries of financial support and inhabitants of rural areas to which the support is provided.
This study, dealing with the impact of measures implemented under the framework of non-repayable financial aid provided by the NSCA and aiming at the improvement of quality of life in problem areas, such as found in the region of Warmia and Mazury, showed their significant influence of living conditions, and hence the improvement of quality of life. The development of rural communities is achieved through investments in technical infrastructure, education, culture, etc. Such projects also contribute to the strengthening of social bonds and to the raising of ecological awareness. Despite all these evident benefits, the challenges arising from the persistent disparities between urban and rural areas, as well as the need for further cooperation between local authorities and institutions, remain crucial factors in the pursuit of sustainable local development. The research results shed light on the need for further implementation and intensification of support measures, which will enable permanent growth and improvement of the quality of life in the mentioned areas. Considering the fact that quality of life (QoL) can be defined in many ways, which makes it difficult to measure and integrate QoL in scientific research, studies related to the above problem will be continued and expanded.
New research directions should focus on analysing the long-term effects of these interventions, including the socio-economic dynamics, such as migrations of populations and demographic changes. It is also essential to expand the research area by analysing the effect of infrastructure refurbishment on the development of social capital and social integration. Future investigations could also employ mixed methodologies (e.g., DiD method), combining quantitative studies with qualitative ones so as to obtain a more complete picture of the effects of interventions. Moreover, research should also involve an assessment of the cost efficiency of such investments and their impact on the sustainable development of problem areas. Such a complex approach should enable us to gain a better understanding of the multi-dimensional effects of infrastructure modernisation and will allow us to propose more precise recommendations for public policies in rural areas.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su16166786/s1, The questionnaire concerns the non-repayable financial aid distributed by the Olsztyn Branch of the National Support Centre for Agriculture in rural areas in the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, H.K. and K.K.; methodology, H.K., K.K. and R.M.-B.; software: H.K.; validation, K.K. and R.M.-B.; formal analysis, H.K. and K.K.; investigation, H.K., K.K. and R.M.-B.; resources, H.K. and K.K.; data curation, H.K. and R.M.-B.; writing—original. draft preparation, H.K., K.K. and R.M.-B.; writing—review and editing, K.K. and R.M.-B.; visualization, H.K. and K.K.; supervision, H.K. and K.K.; project administration, H.K. and K.K.; funding acquisition, H.K. and K.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Olsztyn Branch of the National Support Centre for Agriculture, grant number 2/2024/EDU, Agreement of 15 February 2024.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Murawska, A. Zmiany w poziomie i jakości życia ludności na obszarach wiejskich w Polsce. J. Agribus. Rural. Dev. 2012, 3, 169–180. [Google Scholar]
  2. Kud, K.; Woźniak, M. Percepcja środowiskowych czynników jakości życia na obszarach wiejskich w województwie podkarpackim. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2013, 18, 63–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Stanaszek, O. Badanie jakości życia w Polsce. Pr. Nauk. Uniw. Ekon. Wrocławiu 2015, 392, 99–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Diener, E.; Suh, E.M.; Lucas, R.E.; Smith, H.L. Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychol. Bull. 1999, 125, 276–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Available online: https://nursesoncall.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/quality-of-life.pdf (accessed on 15 June 2024).
  6. Felce, D.; Perry, J. Quality of life: Its definition and measurement. Res. Dev. Disabil. 1995, 16, 51–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Campbell, A.; Converse, P.E.; Rogers, W.L. The Quality of American Life: Perceptions, Evaluations and Satisfaction; Russell-Sage: Troy, NY, USA, 1976. [Google Scholar]
  8. Farquhar, M. Definitions of quality of life: A taxonomy. J. Adv. Nurs. 1995, 22, 502–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Fallowfield, L. What is quality of life. Health Econ. 2009, 1, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  10. Cai, T.; Verze, P.; Bjerklund Johansen, T.E. The quality of life definition: Where are we going? Uro 2021, 1, 14–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Babuchowska, K.; Marks-Bielska, R. Znaczenie działań podejmowanych przez Agencję Nieruchomości Rolnych dla poprawy jakości życia mieszkańców gmin na przykładzie województwa warmińsko-mazurskiego. In Przekształcenia Własnościowe w Rolnictwie—25 Lat Historii i Doświadczeń; Niedzielski, E., Kisiel, R., Eds.; Wydawnictwo Towarzystwo Naukowe Współczesnego Zarządzania: Kraków, Poland, 2017; pp. 75–93. [Google Scholar]
  12. Mickiewicz, A.; Wawrzyniak, B.M. Znaczenie infrastruktury technicznej dla kształtowania obszarów wiejskich. Pr. Nauk. Uniw. Ekon. Wrocławiu Polityka Ekon. 2011, 166, 470–482. [Google Scholar]
  13. Gawroński, H. (Ed.) Zarządzanie Strategiczne w Samorządach Lokalnych; Wolters Kluwer: Kraków, Poland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  14. Lewandowski, M. Public managers’ perception of performance information: The evidence from polish local governments. Public Manag. Rev. 2019, 21, 988–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Mayer, H.; Knox, P. Slow cities: Sustainable places in a fast world. J. Urban Aff. 2006, 28, 321–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Glaeser, E.L.; Ponzetto, G.A.M.; Zou, Y. Urban networks: Connecting markets, people, and ideas. Natl. Bureau Econ. Res. Work. Pap. 2015, 95, 17–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Melcher, K.; Stiefel, B.; Faurest, K. (Eds.) Community-Built: Art, Construction, Preservation, and Place; Taylor & Francis: Abingdon, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  18. Milczarek-Andrzejewska, D.; Zawalińska, K.; Czarnecki, A. Land-use conflicts and the Common Agricultural Policy: Evidence from Poland. Land Use Policy 2016, 73, 423–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Marks-Bielska, R.; Kurowska, K. Institutional efficiency of communes in Poland in respect of space management. In Proceedings of the International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference: SGEM, Albena, Bulgaria, 29 June–5 July 2017; Volume 17, pp. 521–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Stanny, M. Przestrzenne Zróżnicowanie Rozwoju Obszarów Wiejskich w Polsce; IRWiR, PAN: Warszawa, Poland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  21. Godlewska, M.; Morawska, S. Development of local and regional entrepre-neurship–which institutions matter? Evidence from Poland. Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraz. 2020, 33, 1017–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gibas, P.; Heffner, K. Koncentracja zabudowy na obszarach wiejskich. Wieś Rol. 2018, 2, 189–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Marks-Bielska, R.; Wojarska, M.; Lizińska, W.; Babuchowska, K. Local Economic Development in the Context of the Institutional Efficiency of Local Governments. Eng. Econ. 2020, 31, 323–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Guzal-Dec, D.; Zbucki, Ł.; Kuś, A. Good governance in strategic planning of local development in rural and urban-rural gminas of the eastern peripheral voivodeships of Poland. Bull. Geogr. Socio-Econ. Ser. 2020, 50, 101–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kukliński, A. Diagnoza Gospodarki Przestrzennej Polski; Wstępne wyniki badań, PWN: Warszawa, Polnad, 1983. [Google Scholar]
  26. Bański, J.; Degórski, M.; Komornicki, T.; Śleszyński, P. The delimitation of areas of strategic intervention in Poland: A methodological trial and its results. Morav. Geogr. Rep. 2018, 26, 84–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Niewiadomski, K. Evolution of criteria for selecting agricultural backward areas. An example of Podlaskie voivodesihip. Zagadnienia Ekon. Rolnej 2006, 4, 15–34. [Google Scholar]
  28. Krisztian, R. Possibilities of Local Economic Development (Led) in Lagging Rural Areas. Acta Carolus Robertus 2014, 4, 101–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Filipiak, K.; Jadczyszyn, J. Kryteria wyboru i ocena obszarów problemowych rolnictwa w Polsce. Stud. Rap. IUNG-PIB 2008, 12, 103–111. [Google Scholar]
  30. Jadczyszyn, J. Ocena warunków przyrodniczo-ekonomicznych na obszarach zagrożonych erozją wodną w Polsce. Stud. Rap. IUNG-PIB 2008, 12, 155–164. [Google Scholar]
  31. Bański, J. (Ed.) Analiza zróżnicowania i perspektyw rozwoju obszarów wiejskich w Polsce do 2015 roku. In Studia Obszarów Wiejskich, XVI; Instytut Geografii i Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania PAN: Warszawa, Poland, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  32. Leszczyńska, M. System wspomagania decyzji optymalizujących rozwój marginalnych obszarów wiejskich. Acta Sci. Pol. Geod. Descr. Terrarum 2010, 9, 37–48. [Google Scholar]
  33. Brodzinski, Z. Obszary problemowe w rolnictwie na przykładzie województwa warmińsko-mazurskiego. Fragm. Agron. 2002, 19, 201–212. [Google Scholar]
  34. Prus, B. Wybrane przykłady zastosowania informacji przestrzennej na potrzeby identyfikacji obszarów problemowych. Infrastrukt. I Ekol. Teren. Wiej. 2014, I/1, 49–60. [Google Scholar]
  35. Łojewski, S.; Skinder, Z. Uwarunkowania ekonomiczno-przestrzenne rozwoju obszarów wiejskich. In Regionalne Uwarunkowania Ekonomicznego Rozwoju Rolnictwa i Obszarów Wiejskich; Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego: Rzeszów, Poland, 2003; pp. 157–165. [Google Scholar]
  36. Niedzielski, E. Marginalizacja środowiska popegeerowskiego–przejściowe zjawisko czy trwały proces. In Środowisko Popegeerowskie–Diagnoza Sanu; Niedzielski, E., Kisiel, R., Eds.; Wydawnictwo UWM: Olszyn, Poland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kroczak, H. Od wyuczonej bezradności do uaktywnionej zaradności–determinanty aktywizowania i ”przełamywania” syndromu kultury ubóstwa. Studium przypadku popegeerowskiej wsi Kubanki. In Więzi Społeczne, Sieci Społeczne w Perspektywie Procesów Inkluzji i Wykluczenia Społecznego; Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego: Łódź, Poland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  38. Bieś-Srokosz, P. Agencje Rządowe Jako Szczególne Podmioty Administracji Publicznej; seria Monografie Prawnicze; Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck: Warszawa, Poland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  39. Grucza, B.; Kapuściński, A. The use of stakeholder concept in project practice. Res. Enterp. Mod. Econ. Theory Pract. 2018, 3, 21–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kryszk, H.; Kurowska, K.; Marks-Bielska, R. Legal and socio-economic conditions underlying the shaping of the agricultural system in Poland. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Niewiadomski, A. Status prawny Krajowego Ośrodka Wsparcia Rolnictwa. Stud. Iurid. 2018, 72, 279–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Annual Reports on the Activities of KOWR. Available online: https://www.gov.pl/web/kowr/sprawozdania (accessed on 15 June 2024).
  43. Kłodziński, M.; Dzun, W. Aktywizacja Wiejskich Obszarów Problemowych; Instytut Rozwoju Wsi i Rolnictwa Polskiej Akademii Nauk, Katedra Rozwoju Obszarów Wiejskich i Organizacji Gospodarki Żywnościowej WEiOGŻ Akademii Rolniczej w Szczecinie: Warszawa, Poland, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  44. Cegielska, K.; Noszczyk, T.; Kukulska, A.; Szylar, M.; Hernik, J.; Dixon-Gough, R.; Jombach, S.; Valánszki, I.; Kovács, K.F. Land use and land cover changes in post-socialist countries: Some observations from Hungary and Poland. Land Use Policy 2018, 78, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kurowska, K.; Podciborski, T.; Kryszk, H.; Konieczny, D.; Kowalczyk, C.; Kaźmierczak, R.; Kil, J. Znaczenie Bezzwrotnej Pomocy Finansowej Realizowanej Przez KRAJOWY Ośrodek Wsparcia Rolnictwa na Obszarach Wiejskich Województwa Warmińsko-Mazurskiego; Wydawnictwo Naukowe Tygiel: Lublin, Poland, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  46. Ross, H.L. The local community: A survey approach. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1962, 27, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Cella, D.F. Quality of life: Concepts and definition. J. Pain Symptom Manag. 1994, 9, 186–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Fredriksson, A.; Oliveira, G.M.D. Impact evaluation using Difference-in-Differences. RAUSP Manag. J. 2019, 54, 519–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Stuart, E.A.; Huskamp, H.A.; Duckworth, K.; Simmons, J.; Song, Z.; Chernew, M.E.; Barry, C.L. Using propensity scores in difference-in-differences models to estimate the effects of a policy change. Health Serv. Outcomes Res. Methodol. 2014, 14, 166–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Zhou, H.; Taber, C.; Arcona, S.; Li, Y. Difference-in-differences method in comparative effectiveness research: Utility with unbalanced groups. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 2016, 14, 419–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Cantarelli, P.; Belle, N.; Hall, J.L. Information use in public administration and policy decision-making: A research synthesis. Public Adm. Rev. 2023, 83, 1667–1686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Glasser, M.; Holt, N.; Hall, K.; Mueller, B.; Norem, J.; Pickering, J.; Brown, K.; Peters, K. Meeting the needs of rural populations through interdisciplinary partnerships. Fam. Community Health 2003, 26, 230–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Vanleerberghe, P.; De Witte, N.; Claes, C.; Schalock, R.L.; Verté, D. The quality of life of older people aging in place: A literature review. Qual. Life Res. 2017, 26, 2899–2907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Śleszyński, P.; Bański, J.; Degórski, M.; Komornicki, T. Delimitation of problem areas in Poland. Geogr. Pol. 2017, 90, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Śleszyński, T.; Herbst, M.; Komornicki, T.W.; Wiśniewski, R.; Bański, J.; Biedka, W.; Wojnar, K. Studia Nad Obszarami Problemowymi w Polsce; Polska Akademia Nauk: Warszawa, Poland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 16 06786 g001
Figure 1. Number of investment developments completed by beneficiaries in municipalities in years 2017–2023.
Figure 1. Number of investment developments completed by beneficiaries in municipalities in years 2017–2023.
Sustainability 16 06786 g001
Sustainability 16 06786 g002
Figure 2. Amounts obtained as non-repayable financial support by beneficiaries in municipalities in the years 2017–2023.
Figure 2. Amounts obtained as non-repayable financial support by beneficiaries in municipalities in the years 2017–2023.
Sustainability 16 06786 g002
Sustainability 16 06786 g003
Figure 3. Main benefits achieved from projects funded by the NCSA under the framework of non-repayable financial support.
Figure 3. Main benefits achieved from projects funded by the NCSA under the framework of non-repayable financial support.
Sustainability 16 06786 g003
Sustainability 16 06786 g004
Figure 4. Opinions of inhabitants on the development of rural areas resulting from the projects financed by the Olsztyn Branch of the National Support Centre for Agriculture.
Figure 4. Opinions of inhabitants on the development of rural areas resulting from the projects financed by the Olsztyn Branch of the National Support Centre for Agriculture.
Sustainability 16 06786 g004
Sustainability 16 06786 g005
Figure 5. Opinions of residents on the impact of NSCA-funded projects.
Figure 5. Opinions of residents on the impact of NSCA-funded projects.
Sustainability 16 06786 g005
Sustainability 16 06786 g006
Figure 6. Opinions of residents about the investment projects funded by the NCSA as increasing the tourist attractiveness of rural areas.
Figure 6. Opinions of residents about the investment projects funded by the NCSA as increasing the tourist attractiveness of rural areas.
Sustainability 16 06786 g006
Table 1. Non-repayable financial support provided by the NSCA branches in 2017–2023.
Table 1. Non-repayable financial support provided by the NSCA branches in 2017–2023.
OrdinalNSCA BranchNon-Repayable Financial Support in Years [%]
2017201820192020202120222023
1OT Białystok0.000.000.000.000.000.000.00
2OT Bydgoszcz0.770.002.801.783.791.936.91
3OT Częstochowa0.000.000.000.000.000.000.00
4OT Gorzów Wielkopolski0.290.552.800.924.175.813.58
5OT Kielce0.004.082.390.550.903.521.18
6OT Koszalin0.000.240.001.533.570.001.95
7OT Kraków0.000.000.000.000.000.000.00
8OT Lublin0.250.172.140.001.710.584.94
9OT Łódź0.000.460.740.471.901.771.77
10OT Olsztyn43.3634.2327.6950.0642.0943.3741
11OT Opole1.314.414.332.664.242.701.29
12OT Poznań7.580.410.000.200.000.000.00
13OT Pruszcz Gdański8.8817.0921.737.736.578.172.23
14OT Rzeszów5.225.611.835.641.1612.539.51
15OT Szczecin7.2310.588.275.223.386.114.50
16OT Warszawa9.602.043.262.901.790.975.40
17OT Wrocław11.4612.7914.5715.144.296.476.69
18NSCA Head Office4.057.357.465.1920.436.069.25
TOTAL [%]100100100100100100100
TOTAL [thousands of EUR]6909487348364562454339126487
Source: the authors, based on the NSCA 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 annual reports [42].
Table 2. The chi-square test was applied to make a comparison of the effect of an NCSA-financed project on the development of rural areas, depending on the type of implemented project.
Table 2. The chi-square test was applied to make a comparison of the effect of an NCSA-financed project on the development of rural areas, depending on the type of implemented project.
Chi-Square Valuep-ValueDegrees of Freedom
61.080.0021
(statistically significant)		33
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.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kryszk, H.; Kurowska, K.; Marks-Bielska, R. The Importance of Measures Undertaken to Improve the Quality of Life in the Problem Areas: A Case Study in Warmia and Mazury Region in Poland. Sustainability 2024, 16, 6786. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16166786

AMA Style

Kryszk H, Kurowska K, Marks-Bielska R. The Importance of Measures Undertaken to Improve the Quality of Life in the Problem Areas: A Case Study in Warmia and Mazury Region in Poland. Sustainability. 2024; 16(16):6786. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16166786

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kryszk, Hubert, Krystyna Kurowska, and Renata Marks-Bielska. 2024. "The Importance of Measures Undertaken to Improve the Quality of Life in the Problem Areas: A Case Study in Warmia and Mazury Region in Poland" Sustainability 16, no. 16: 6786. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16166786

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop