【正文】 本科畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)（論文） 外 文 翻 譯 原文 ： Rural diversi?cation in the Baltic countryside: a local perspective Abstract Today ‘‘rural diversification’’ is high on the agenda in rural development. This article analyses rural diversification under conditions of postsocialist economic transition using case areas in Latvia and Estonia. The study shows that transition from centrally planned economy to market economy has had an enormous impact in the rural areas. Agricultural production and employment has decreased dramatically and rural unemployment is high. The conditions for rural diversification the first years after independence depended a lot on the local presence of nonfarm activities before the split up of collective farming, in both production facilities but also in the skills and relations people had. Since independence, markets for traditional rural services and products have decreased. The extent to which local businesses find markets outside the local area and people have been able to integrate into the new labour market of service and construction jobs often in urban areas are essential for the diversification of the rural economy. Most rural inhabitants only have skills in largescale agriculture and limited contacts to outside the local area which makes exploiting new opportunities difficult. The local capacity for withholding, developing and inducing new activities is weak. The challenge for rural development policy is to extend the possibilities of the rural inhabitants to exploit new opportunities. Introduction Decreasing employment opportunities in agriculture is an allEuropean problem. In Western Europe the proportion of the rural population during most of the twentieth century has fallen steadily. In Eastern Europe this fall has been more dramatic. About 20% of the populations were employed in agriculture in the Baltic States 10 years ago, only 5% are employed today. This is similar to the EU average. However, still 30% of the population lives in rural areas (Rural Development Programmes 2021a, b). In Latvia and Estonia many rural areas suffer from persisting unemployment and poverty (Alanen 2021。 Tisenkopfs 1999). Rural diversification seems essential to avoid increasing poverty and is high on the agenda for rural development in the years to e. The EU Common Agricultural Policy 2021–2021 focuses on three thematic axes laid down in the new rural development regulation of which ‘‘diversification of the rural economy’’ is one of them (European Commission 2021). This article analyses the rural diversification under conditions of postsocialist economic transition and discusses opportunities and constraints for rural diversification. The project is an exploratory study into how people make a living and rural business development in two study regions in Latvia and Estonia respectively. Theoretical background and approach In diversification studies the centre of attention is dominantly the farm household and its abilities for finding new activities and employment. There are two types of activities。 ‘‘farm diversification’’ which are onfarm activities like tourism activities or alternative farm production and ‘‘employment diversification’’ which is employment away from the farm (Bryden et al. 1992。 Chaplin et al. 2021). Policy makers assume that ‘‘farm diversification’’ makes a significant contribution to rural development. Alternative activities on farms are expected to help absorbing some of the excess farm labour, alleviate poverty and contribute to the development of employment in rural areas (. Council Regulation 1999). The funding for ‘‘diversification’’ within the EU focuses dominantly on farm diversification stimulating tourism activities and alternative farm products at individual farms. However, most empirical studies still shows that farm diversification are smallscale activities related to conventional agriculture such as machinery services and add little ines. ‘‘Employment diversification’’ is much more widespread (. McNally 2021). As my focus is rural development, my working definition of ‘‘rural diversification’’ and the ‘‘nonfarm economy’’ also includes the broader rural economy not confined to agriculture and the farm household. Some rural areas in Western Europe, particularly around cities and popular resorts, have experienced an increase in population and economic activities not involved or related to the farm sector. It has often been connected to an increasing movement of people, tourists and investments from urban to rural areas. This observed trend has been described as the ‘‘urbanrural shift’’ or the ‘‘rural turn around’’ (. Murdoch et al. 2021。 North 1998). The transition and diversification Research into rural issues in postsocialist countries has mainly focused on agricultural restructuring. The following part examines the emerging research on postsocialist rural change and tries to