000169348 001__ 169348
000169348 005__ 20260225105429.0
000169348 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.24294/jipd7769
000169348 0248_ $$2sideral$$a148316
000169348 037__ $$aART-2025-148316
000169348 041__ $$aeng
000169348 100__ $$aLiu, Zhaoyang
000169348 245__ $$aRural sustainable development planning under the rural re-vitalization strategy: A comparative perspective between China and Europe
000169348 260__ $$c2025
000169348 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000169348 5203_ $$aIn the context of globalization and urbanization, rural development faces many challenges, such as population loss and uneven distribution of resources. This paper analyzes the similarities and differences in sustainable rural development strategies between China and Europe through a comparative perspective. China has optimized land use by relying on land policy innovations, such as the household contract responsibility system and the “separation of three rights”, as well as the construction of small towns; while Europe focuses on private ownership and market mechanisms, and supports agricultural and rural development through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Using literature review, comparative research and policy analysis, the study shows that the policy innovations in China and Europe, each with its own focus, have been effective in promoting agricultural output and rural social development. Particularly noteworthy is that the “three rights” policy has increased agricultural productivity through the liberalization of management rights, while the European CAP has contributed to the diversification of the rural economy and environmental protection through continuous reforms. This study emphasizes that through policy innovation and international cooperation, combining the strengths of China and Europe, it is possible to provide a new model of sustainable development for the global countryside. Specifically, through the establishment of Sino-European R&D centers for agricultural science and technology, exchange of talents, and cooperation in green infrastructure development, technology transfer and application can be accelerated, cultural exchange and understanding can be promoted, and the sustainable development agenda for global rural areas can be jointly advanced.
000169348 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aby$$uhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.es
000169348 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
000169348 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0002-5282-1930$$aEsteban Rodríguez, Samuel$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000169348 7102_ $$13006$$2435$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Geograf. Ordenac.Territ.$$cÁrea Geografía Humana
000169348 773__ $$g9, 2 (2025), 7769 [19 pp.]$$tJournal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development$$x2572-7923
000169348 8564_ $$s753348$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/169348/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yVersión publicada
000169348 8564_ $$s2474920$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/169348/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yVersión publicada
000169348 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:169348$$particulos$$pdriver
000169348 951__ $$a2026-02-24-14:47:14
000169348 980__ $$aARTICLE