newsletter - sazp.skold.sazp.sk/public/index/open_file.php?file=ctk/gm/green_mountain... ·...

No. 2 | February 2012 Jointly for our common future 1

NewsletterA Sustainable Development Model for Green Mountain Areas

Green Mountain

www.greenmountain-see.eu

News & Upcoming Events

- 4th Working Group meeting – Region of Epirus, Greece, 26 - 27 April 2012

- Transnational Study Visits for WG.-members and Green Mountain stakeholders are soon to be launched

- European dissemination conference, Bucharest, Romania, mid-June 2012

The Green Mountain project continues

The first project outcomes are now available, i.e.: the Existing Situation Analysis (see page 2), which describes the different mountain territories involved in the project, and; the Good Practice Report (see page 3) whose aim is to add value and bring innovation and knowledge in relation to the project’s three key topics through the identification of already successfully and innovative implemented practices and initiatives in Europe. These reports give the idea to all partners about the different situation of the partner territories and are of great help for future implementation of project activities, since they define the existing situation, problems, innovative practices in use, etc. both locally (“at home”) and at a European level.

Several project meetings have been carried out since the publication of the first newsletter, both SC-metings and thematic working group meetings: The second SC-meeting of the Green Mountain project took place on the 20th and 21st September 2011 in Bulgaria and the host organisation was the Regional Administration Smolyan. The meeting was opened by a short speech of the Deputy Regional Governor Mr. Nedyalko Slavov, and followed by a welcome message by the Regional Governor eng. Mr. Stefan Staykov (see also the interview on page 8). Two days of intensive work took place where, apart from general project coordination, partners could continue their work with regards to the development of the common “Sustainable Development and Management Model”. In fact, the project’s 3 transnational Working Groups (WG), responsible for the development of the Sustainable Development and Management Model, met in Smolyan for the first time, with the aim to launch their common work. Each working group worked separately under the guidance of WG leaders and have established a work programme in order

to come out with concrete solutions and results that will be integrated into a common Model, the Sustainable Development and Management Model. More information about the working groups can be found on page 4. The second working group meetings took place on the 23rd and 24th November 2011 and was hosted by the Hungarian partner, Kőszeg Micro-Region (more about Kőszeg Micro-Region on page 9). The meeting was opened by Mr. Huber László, the President of Kőszeg Micro-Region. WG leaders reviewed work done since the last meeting, together with WG members, and together they continued work according to the planned agenda. An interview with the respective working group leader can be found at page 5. On the 26th and 27th February 2012 the third SC-meeting was carried out. The meeting took place in the Austrian Alps and was hosted by AREC, the Agricultural Research and Education Centre Raumberg-Gumpenstein. In the framework of this meeting the working groups came together for the third time in order to continue their respective work programme with regards to the common Model. Working group leaders also started to discuss the work regarding the integration of the common Model, i.e. how the results of the three thematic working groups should be put together into one common Model. The working groups are now continuing their work and the last meeting of the thematic working groups will take place in Greece in April 2012.

The meeing in Austria was also attended by representatives of three Good Practices useful for regional development, as identified by the Green Mountain project (see the Good Practice Report): Ms. Marie Guidon from the European Network EUROMONTANA, presented the Good Practice EuroMarc, Ms. Ruth Moser from the Great Walser Valley Biosphere Reserve Management presented

No. 2 | February 2012

In this Issue

1 The Green Mountain project continues2 The Existing Situation Analysis is now available3 The Good Practice Report is now available 4 A presentation of the three Working Groups5 Interview with the three working group leaders 8 Interview with Mr. Staykov (Regional Governor of

Region Smolyan)

9 A presentation of Kőszeg Microregion

the Good Practice Biosphere Reserve Great Walser Valley and the former Mayor Karl Sieghartsleitner presented the Good Practice The Steinbach Way (a model for local Agenda 21, Austria), for which he also was the initiator and promoter.

http://www.greenmountain-see.eu



Green Mountain


The Existing Situation Analysis Report is now available

The ESA (Existing Situation Analysis) Report is a key activity within the Green Mountain Project. The analysis was done in the respective test areas which were chosen for regional sustainable development projects within the partner countries Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Romania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Italy, Montenegro, Bulgaria and Greece. The size and type of the concerned areas vary, Romania for example chose two National Parks in different parts of the country as test regions, both covering together more than 850 km2. The biggest area to be developed is Smolyan in Bulgaria, which extends to more than 3194 km2, the smallest region is the Hungarian Köszeg Microregion with a size about 43 km2. As every region meets different conditions it was very important to get an overview on the various legislations and regulations, already existing protected areas, established or planned activities, etc.

The respective regions were thoroughly analysed considering the following aspects:

1. The territory (e.g. relevant legislations, geographic situation, protected and sensitive areas, etc.).

2. Already existing and planned economic sustainable activities and products.

3. Coordinated management policies and plans (status quo, stakeholders, etc.).

4. Information, training and awareness raising (existing programmes, participants, etc.).

The complete ESA Report is available HERE or it can be downloaded at: www.greenmountain-see.eu

Sharing information, knowledge and experience among all partners gives the possibility to identify the state of the art, existing problems, needs, challenges and opportunities. On the one hand it provides the basis for developing adapted regional development projects, on the other hand the collected information and experience will be an essential part for the elaboration of the Common Sustainable Development and Management Model. To work out this model which is supposed to be successfully implemented in mountainous areas under different conditions is a big challenge. Therefore a big variety of conditions within the test regions is important, to elaborate the basic aspects which are overall essential for sustainable development. They will be included into the Common Model.

Silke Heinrich (AREC)

Regions analysed in the ESA Report





Green Mountain


The European Good Practice Report is now available

Within the frame of the Green Mountain Project, best practices for sustainable regional development in mountain areas all over Europe were collected and summarised into a Report. Good Practices have to meet some requirements, e.g. they need to have a demonstrable effect on improving people´s quality of life. Further on, they have to be sustainable in many ways as regional development includes different aspects like economy, culture, environment and social aspects. Having a close look at Good Practices, offers the chance to learn from already gained experiences and may give ideas of developing solutions for other regions and problems.

The European Good Practice Report contains twelve examples which altogether cover the different topics of the three Green Mountain Working Groups (WG):- Identification of economic activities suitable for fragile

mountain areas (WG1).- Development of coordinated and integrated management

plans (WG2).- Methods and strategies for information, training and raising

awareness (WG3).Some projects are specialised in one of the topics mentioned above, e.g. the Slovakian environmental awareness programme; but as sustainable development is very complex, most examples cover more than one topic. Four projects have gained important experiences in all aspects: the development of a National landscape in the Netherlands, a nation-wide added-value-programme in Norway and a Biosphere Reserve as well as a best practice for local Agenda 21 in Austria.

The complete Report is available HERE or it can be downloaded at: www.greenmountain-see.eu

While analysing the different Good Practices some aspects appeared which are essential for successful sustainable regional development. First of all, a positive attitude and the interest of local people in the concerned regions have to be raised. This may be done, for example by involving them in the developing process and by trying to create a regional identity. Good Practices of sustainable development cannot simply be copied to somewhere else, they can only give ideas and show possibilities which have to be adapted to the opportunities and limitations of the region to be developed. Sustainable regional development is a very complex process with a lot of interlinked factors, therefore a wide approach is necessary. Social, economic and ecological aspects as well as their cross-links have to be considered when development concepts and management plans are worked out. Therefore it is very helpful to recapitalise already gained experiences of successful Good Practices and integrate them into new projects, in this case into the Green Mountain Project.

Silke Heinrich (AREC)

Sustainable regional development has to interlink social, economic and ecological aspects


http://www.sazp.sk/public/index/open_file.php?file=CTK/GM/EUROPEAN_GOOD_PRACTICE_REPORT.pdf



Green Mountain


A presentation of the three Working Groups

The development of the Sustainable Development and Management Model, is carried out in the framework of three thematic and transnational Working Groups (WG) which are analysing the three fundamental elements for sustainable territorial development (economic sustainable activities, coordinated and integrated policies and management plans and, information, training and awareness raising, i.e. the three thematic project areas) to come out with strategies and methods which, in a subsequent phase, can be integrated into one common and integrated Sustainable Development and Management Model, final outcome of the project.

WORKING GROUP 1 – IDENTIFICATION OF ECONOMIC SUSTAINABLE ACTIVITIES AND PRODUCTSMountain regions often face various problems linked to depopulation, demographic change, abandonment of traditional activities, etc. This makes it often difficult for such communities to prosper or even “survive” as economic development declines, unemployment is increasing, depopulation continues, social and cultural services and opportunities are decreasing, etc. At the same time efforts may be done to revive these communities, but without a sustainable development strategy; management and economic growth attempts can instead result in over exploitation of natural resources for economic profit with negative consequences on the preservation of natural heritage and on a balanced economic and social development.

The aim of WG1 is to identify economic sustainable activities and products able to conciliate growth with the valorisation, preservation and protection of highly sensitive areas. This will be made through the identification and analysis of activities and products that are specifically adequate for the preservation, protection and valorisation of natural mountain territories and that can transform their territorial “mountain character” in a comparative advantage and/or added value.

WORKING GROUP 2 – METHODS AND STRATEGIES FOR COORDINATED MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND PLANSOften there is a lack of a global vision of environmental problems, threats and opportunities. This results in decisions and actions which are not consistent, impeding a sound and coordinated management of economic and natural resources which in the end obstructs a sustainable and balanced socio-economic and environmental development of the mountain area. A strategic and political coordination involving different actors is necessary in order to take consistent decisions and to develop appropriate actions having concrete and sustainable effects.

The aim of WG2 is to develop methods and strategies to support coordinated actions and decisions among the different institutions and actors responsible for the management of the mountain territory including its natural assets. A management strategy based on a coordinated approach among all the relevant actors (multi-actor approach) and consideration to various aspects and economic sectors (multi-sector approach) will result in a better use and synergies of territorial and financial resources, more focused and efficient interventions; consistent policies and stronger territorial impact.

WORKING GROUP 3 – METHODS AND STRATEGIES FOR INFORMATION, TRAINING AND AWARENESS RAISINGWG3 is developing common methods and strategies for information, training and awareness raising in respect to the value of the natural resources. The aim is to promote territorial protection and development, and to generate political, economic and public interest and action. In particular:

A) To build awareness on the importance of the natural assets and products of the territory as a socio-economic and cultural development factor; to enhance the territorial identity of natural and protected mountain areas by making aware of the natural, cultural and recreational value of the areas involved, and; to improve responsible environmental behaviour.

B) To develop methods and strategies for specific and targeted information and training activities addressing political and economic actors, in order to build political consensus and to generate economic interest with regards to the feasibility of a sustainable development model.

These methods and strategies, developed and tailored to the needs of the different target groups, will be tested and applied in the framework of the different project activities that are foreseen to be implemented, e.g. Info days for citizens, workshops for decision-makers, seminars and training modules for economic actors. It is also foreseen that partners will produce concrete tools and instruments, built upon the methods and strategies developed by WG3, that will be tested and used in the framework of the above described activities.

WG members in Lukácsháza, Kőszeg Microregion, Hungary




Green Mountain


Working Group 1 Leader InterviewBernhard KrautzerAgricultural Research and Education Centre (AREC) [email protected] www.raumberg-gumpenstein.at

Bernhard Krautzer is leading the Department of Ecological Restoration at the Agricultural Research and Education Centre Raumberg-Gumpenstein, a research entity of the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management. The research work focuses mainly on forage crop breeding and production, grassland management, natural resources management, environmental conservation and ecological restoration. He teaches on ecological restoration at the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna. He was co-ordinator and lead partner of the FP4- project “Seed propagation of indigenous species and their use for restoration of eroded areas in the Alps”, the Interreg IIIB project “Successful Restoration and Rehabilitation after Infrastructural Interventions” as well as national co-ordinator of the CENTRAL EUROPE project “Semi-natural grassland as a source of biodiversity improvement”. He has authored several scientific publications and book chapters on ecological restoration and grassland and natural resources management.

1. Your organisation is responsible, apart from being the leader of WG1, for the technical and scientific outcome of the project Green Mountain - A common model for sustainable development of Green Mountain areas. Why have mountain areas been chosen for this project and what problems could be eliminated by the project implementation?

Beside of the organisational responsibility, the common model for sustainable development can only be a synthesis

of interaction, knowledge, discussion, experience and outcome from our three working groups as well as from already achieved activities. Compared to other territories, mountain areas are more exposed and therefore much more vulnerable to social changes. Even if it is too early to give an answer I hope that the Green Mountain project will help us to better tackle some of the above problems.

2. The global aim of your working group is to identify sustainable economic activities and products. What approach did the members of WG1 chose (i.e. partners from different European states and organisations of the South-East Europe region) in order to define the economic activities that could contribute towards sustainable economic, social and cultural development of settlements located in the mountain areas? Is it possible to find an approach that would take into account the specific aspects of the local communities and economies located in different natural and climatic zones?

Based on the big differences between the participating regions, that became visible after the presentation of the Existing Situation Analysis report, we decided to choose a bottom-up process, giving every partner the opportunity to develop his own ideas related to his local stage of development, awareness and potential. As a second step, projects with similarities in view of the main objectives will be grouped together and elaborated following the (developing) structure of our common sustainable model. From this point of view, our regional initiatives could act as the first application models for our outcome of work package 3 (which consists of the joint development of the common Sustainable Development and Management Model).

3. What sustainable economic activities and products, according to you, should be the most proven in the project partners’ mountain areas? Based on your experience, have you witnessed any concrete economic sustainable activity, which could be a good practice for other mountain areas?

A very important topic for the WG1 members is the branding of local products. Other topics could be grouped towards the development of local products and the education and training of local stakeholders. A sustainable activity which I experienced directly, and which started already 18 years ago, focused on the development and production of regional seeds for the ecological restoration in order to reduce the impact of tourist infrastructure, ski lifts, natural erosion etc. in the subalpine and alpine stages of the Central and Eastern Alps. In the meantime, the use of the

developed seed mixtures and restoration techniques has become a standard for scientific and technical knowledge in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. The necessary seeds are produced by farmers without any subsidies and consumers are committed to buy these quality products for a higher price.

4. An integral part of the mountainous region is agriculture. Agriculture is an activity essential to ensure the livelihood of the human society. On the one hand, agriculture depends on the natural conditions of the area, but on the other hand, it can also significantly affect and change these natural resources, both for the better as well as for the worse (soil erosion, fertilizer and pesticide application, pollution of water sources, etc.). Does WG1 work on recommendations for how to carry out agricultural activities in the mountain in a way which respect the conditions of mountain ecosystems functioning, which does not lead to the degradation of their natural resources and which ultimately are, sustainable? Respectively, will these recommendations also be part of the Green Mountain’s management model?

Agricultural activities are strongly connected to topography, climate and social situation. We realised that we have to face very different situations in the participating regions. Depopulation and a lack of available farmers are very often the limiting factor to keep the landscape open, to keep the traditional cultural landscape and to keep it therefore attractive for tourists. And tourism is generally, or at least in most cases, seen as a key factor to create an economic basis for additional income. It is not easy for me to exemplify recommendations that are sustainable because this depends on very different factors (I hope the common Sustainable Development and Management Model will contain some of the answers). However, to answer in a simple way: Sustainability is noticeable often connected to activities that do not continuously depend on financial support.

Work in WG1


No. 2 | February 2012 Jointly for our common future �


Green Mountain


Working Group 2 Leader InterviewLucia VačokováSlovak Environmental [email protected] www.sazp.sk

Lucia Vačoková works for Slovak Environmental Agency (SEA), Centre of Landscape Creation and Environmental Education. She graduated at the Technical University in Zvolen, Faculty of Ecology and Environmental Sciences in the year 2006. At present, her workload is mostly focused on the National Village Renewal Programme, implementation of the European Landscape Convention, development and implementation of projects at national and EU level. Lucia is the manager of the Green Mountain project at the SEA, as well as the leader of Green Mountain’s second working group. Due to the wide scope of SEA activities, she has also participated in educational activities with mayors as a target group, oriented to raise environmental awareness and regional development. She has participated in developing several strategic documents: Integrated Strategy for PPP Horehron (EU programme LEADER), Social and Economic Development Programmes for municipalities and micro-regions and she is currently working with aspects linked to regional development of region Horehron.

1. The task of your working group is to find ways of cooperation and coordination between institutions (actors) responsible for the management of mountain areas and to support them. What type of cooperation would be the most appropriate and acceptable to all stakeholders? Could you also give an example of a good practice in this issue?

Cooperation and coordination between institutions and actors responsible for the management of mountain areas is really

important. However, there are many cases when, on the one hand, strategies and social and economic development programmes of municipalities, regional administrations or Local Active Groups are developed, and on the other hand, management plans are elaborated only for protected areas. Both of them are developed in the best way, from their point of view, but there are not any interactions between them. We are looking for consensus in regional development and in the protection of natural assets through this project. At the beginning of each management process, the most important issue is to listen to the requirements and views of the public (entrepreneurs, NGOs and inhabitants as well) who lives there. This is also suggested by the European Landscape Convention idea “no people, no landscape”. I think the most appropriate type of cooperation would be if all sectors cooperate with each other (public, private and civil) with the aim to find synergies between economic activities and protection of natural assets, and finding the way how to do it, is one of our working group’s aims and outcomes.

2. Do you think countries with different natural and ultimately social and political conditions, can solve specific issues in mountain areas by the same approach? Or is it necessary to treat each country specifically?

From the Green Mountain project point of view, there are groups of countries with common natural conditions and with several common socio-economic problems (for example an aging population, migration of young people or unemployment). The assumption is, that a common approach (integrated and coordinated) could help to solve these specific issues, despite of the different social and political conditions. The main project outcome, a Sustainable Development Model for Green Mountain Areas, should provide guidelines for how to prepare and implement a proper management plan under the different conditions.

3. One of the tasks of WG2 is to define criterion for how to select the stakeholders who should be involved in the development and implementation of the management plan of the mountain area, as well as to define the most appropriate cooperation modalities among those actors. Based on the discussions and outcomes of the WG meetings, how does cooperation “de facto” work among the different stakeholders in the different participating countries?

There is a different reality in every country. Each of them has its

own conventional types of cooperation among actors, authorities and stakeholders. The problems with each type of cooperation are different. In general, all sectors (public, private and civil sector) are involved in the development process of management plans (planning process) in each country. However, the willingness of stakeholders to cooperate and to be active in the development of management plans is different in each country and in each region. The weakest element of this process usually is the public because their interest of cooperation is really low. For this reason the task of WG2 is to find out common methodologies and guidelines including methods and strategies to support the putting into practice of coordinated actions and decisions among the different institutions and actors responsible for the management and protection of the mountain territory.

4. What is the project contribution for each participating mountain area?

A Mountain Charter has been established at European level, but not all SEE countries (from where the Green Mountain project partners come) have their own Mountain Policy. Therefore the main project result and the main project contribution to mountain areas will be a Sustainable Development Model for Green Mountain Areas. The model will provide a support for the management of mountain areas in relation to economic development, preservation of natural and cultural assets and, education, information and awareness raising. This model is currently under development by an international project team and their experts. The subsequent pilot phase, including test activities of the model, could represent a support for National Mountain Policies as well.

Work in WG2


No. 2 | February 2012 Jointly for our common future �


Green Mountain


educated with the value of the mountains. For mountain citizens, raising a sense of pride is fundamental. It is a long process that can be achieved only if institutions will identify a bottom-up long term vision and will persevere – anchored to some positive values - in achieving it. Europe has a long millenary tradition of socio-economic and environmental sustainable development that has been based on some common values and positive visions of the future. We partially lost this direction after the industrial revolution, but there are signals that things are going differently. Contingencies, also negative ones, will facilitate the process. The upcoming global financial crisis will certainly be shocking, but will at the same time help to change the life style and to re-discover real positive values and constructive visions of the future. Real resources - not derivates, bond, options …- that are still abundant in many mountain areas will become more precious. Being more operative, than philosophic, I believe that sustainable development oriented organisations, that develop strategies based on a long term vision, approach and shared international values and principles, as already happened, can be successful in developing many locally significant sustainable development paths in SEE mountain areas. To reinforce sustainable oriented organisations, enabling them to develop and follow a sustainable oriented vision and strategy, is the base of the model. To reorient existing organisations, especially schools and mass media, to a sustainability culture and consequently programmes, is another base of this model. Most of all, sustainability is a cultural challenge: our common model will need to determine a fundamental shift from the actual dominant consumerist and u n s u s t a i n a b l e culture.

Working Group 3 Leader InterviewFederico NiccoliniOrganizational Science Faculty of Economics - Department of Financial and Economical Institutions University of [email protected]

Federico Niccolini is an Associate Professor in Organisational Science at the University of Macerata (Italy) and affiliate to Colorado State University (USA). Professor Niccolini’s research interest focuses on protected areas management and organisation, Corporate Social Responsibility, organisational vision and culture, sustainable and responsible development. He worked for some Italian and US Universities, such as Stanford and Albany. He teaches PhD and master programmes in organisational science and protected areas management at several Universities, such as Camerino and Pisa. He has worked with managerial, economic and organisational aspects of several protected areas in Italy, particularly as a scientific coordinator of organisational, economic and social aspects in the development of management plans. He received several appointments and has authored several scientific publications on organisational science and protected areas management, including books on sustainable tourism management and Corporate Social Responsibility.

1. Your working group has really an attractive position in the Green Mountain project – to develop methods and strategies for information, training and awareness raising with regards to sustainability and the value of natural resources in the mountain area. These areas have a wide range of implementation options. What options, “ways of learning” are you going to prefer?

Presumably, but we are still discussing about it, we can

summarise with this poem: ”we will preserve only what we love, we will love only what we understand, we will understand only what we have learned to know”. Learning– interpretation– taking care of environment and society – and conservation activities are all interrelated processes. To be enacted, they need direct and on field activities. The “value - oriented learning methods”, methods that stimulate the consciousness of the great value of the mountain areas, oriented to create a sense of pride in the young generations, should be preferred. System thinking and generative learning methods need also to be preferred compared to the adaptive ones.

2. Who are the target groups for the outcomes of your working group?

Presumably, but we are still discussing it, our 3 main target groups could be, in order of relevance:- school teachers,- school children and teenagers,- entrepreneurs,- policy makers.

3. In today’s hectic ages, do you think mountain inhabitants, entrepreneurs and governmental institutions have an interest to educate and raise themselves aware in aspects related to sustainable development? And then, to live according to it?

Not at all, the world seems to be governed by forces and powers that are driving in a direction that is not so ethic and sustainable. Mountain areas are, from some points of view, even if less, still strongly involved in this process. Looking at the future with the necessary optimism, we need to believe that mountain inhabitants, entrepreneurs and governmental institutions are interested to educate themselves. Looking at the future with the necessary realism, the process is long and, for most of the people, it will probably start more from a necessity than from a real will.

4. What is your personal idea of a Sustainable Development Model of mountain areas and regions?

Social migration processes from mountain areas happened because of the different opportunities that these regions had in the current industrial era compared to the urban territories. In the post modern era, this may be different. If mountain areas will be able to conserve their potentialities, they can become more and more rich in the post-modern era. They have forest, less warm climate, water … All the citizens, not only the mountain inhabitants, needs to be

Work in WG3




Green Mountain


Participation of the Regional Administration Smolyan in the Green Mountain projectInterview with Eng. Stefan Staykov, Regional Governor of the Region Smolyan

1. Mr. Staykov, why did the Regional administration - Smolyan, accepted to be a partner of the project GREEN MOUNTAIN of the SEE programme, financed by the European Union?

The Region Smolyan is a mountain area. This project deals with all problems connected with such types of regions both within and outside the European Union, and searches for, and proposes ways to resolve them. The main challenge for mountain areas is a balanced and sustainable development for the benefit of the population and, an economy that is not in conflict with environment and nature, which means that all of us have to find the best balance. The discussions are focused on, for example – depopulation, which is a common problem, caused by the lack of jobs; as well as deforestation, cutting down the forest without any control, maintaining the mountain in order to be attractive for tourism, etc…..These are problems of the Rhodope Mountains too, aren’t they?

2. How does this project help to solve these common, as you said, problems?

The project is developed on the basis of exchange of experience, knowledge, discussions and meetings between partners, where all partners discuss the challenges and difficulties regarding mountain regions, as well as creating strategies and the final product: a sustainable model for mountain areas. In September 2011 the Regional Administration Smolyan hosted the first meeting of the project’s three thematic groups. An open discussion started about the real problems and here was the

place where the idea was born for a proposal to the European Commission for establishing a body at the European Parliament that should deal with a specific legislation for mountain regions in Europe. And during the second meeting in Kőszeg, Hungary, it was finally confirmed as an initiative for the Steering Committee of the project. To promote a specific legislation for mountain regions is the purpose of Regional

Administration Smolyan, as a structure, which executes the national policy of the government. In this respect we are happy to support the project objectives.

3. As a project partner, do you have experts who have the capacity to manage this project on behalf of the institution you manage?

The fact that we were invited to become a project partner by an Italian Lead Partner organisation has to be an indicator that we have already shown enough capacity. On the basis of the management and expertise, used in the previous project RIMADIMA, in which we also were a partner, we are invited again to work together. And with every new project the capacity of the employees increases. In fact, you should know that the completed project RIMADIMA, and the current GREEN MOUNTAIN, SKIPASS, CONECTION and REPORT are firmly and entirely focused on the problems of the mountain, which means that the Regional Administration Smolyan overbuilds the experience with every project, no matter it participates as a partner or as a lead organisation.

4. How will the project contribute to the Region Smolyan?

It will contribute to increase our confidence of being part of a large project, in which are involved leading European countries. It will enable us to understand - where we are compared to the others. We have the chance to be part of a large network of partners which can be the base for new joint projects. Furthermore, promotion of our beautiful region, as a whole, is an incredible contribution to tourism. This is advertisement that we would not have afforded. In September, as I said before, Smolyan hosted the first meeting of the working groups. Representatives from

8 European countries came – Italy, Austria, Hungary, Slovakia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Romania and Greece. We did try, and I think we managed to provide both excellent working conditions, as well as to acquaint the guests with the hospitality of the town, with our traditional cuisine, customs, and to show them the natural beauty of the region. I think and I hope that everybody was extremely satisfied and I am convinced that they all remember us and relate to us with love.

I understood by the members of our team that the meeting in Hungary was attended also by some international students and that after listening carefully to the discussed subject, they asked questions that, I believe, everyone has and wants to know the answer to. For example – what for and to whom is the model for sustainable management for mountain regions necessary? Why has strategies and plans to be developed? And according to me and to my colleges the answer is: because they – strategies and plans – provide guidelines, they indicate the methods and tools that will achieve improvements of the lives of the population in the mountain. I will not miss to mention the shared “best practices” of the participants from different countries, because they are extremely useful and can be applied in other territories. And this is the idea of the joint work in European projects.

The project GREEN MOUNTAIN is unable to make major changes relating to the mountain regions, but we all have to start from somewhere. For example, from awareness, to give announcement, to find the right way to reach the minds of everyone, to start thinking about school programs, or TV programs, how to get our children to have real love to the mountain, to know how valuable it is in order to protect it, and to be adamant to contraventions, to persuade the decision-makers that the mountain is a specific part of the Nature, which needs specific care with specific methods, tools and sustainable strategies.


Green Mountain Newsletter is intended for project partners and project target groups. It appears twice yearly for the project duration in an email circulation. Internal Editors: Lucia Vačoková & Maria Nygren

Graphic Editor: Stanislav Hupian Photographies: Project Partners If you have any ideas or suggestions for the next edition, please let us know via: [email protected]

Contact Green Mountain: Maria Nygren – Project Coordinator Tel: +39 0731 215564, [email protected]



Green Mountain


Kőszeg MicroregionThe Kőszeg Microregion is situated in the West-Transdanubia Region and in the north-western part of Vas county. The area of the Microregion is 185 km2. The settlements in the region are: Kőszeg, Horvátzsidány, Kiszsidány,

Peresznye, Ólmod, Kőszegszerdahely, Cák, Kőszegdoroszló, Velem, Bozsok, Lukácsháza, Gyöngyösfalu, Kőszegpaty, Nemescsó, Pusztacsó.

The centre of the Microregion is Kőszeg. The town is famous for its historical character.

Kőszeg is considered to be a liveable place, where people enjoy living and taking some time off. The town’s old walls, atmospheric streets and squares entice the visitor to take leisurely walks. In our rushing life today, Kőszeg is a place for harmony and tranquillity, the keeper of timeless values.

Sitting in a small restaurant and sipping the juice while admiring the surrounding hills, we can forget about our hectic weekdays and just feel the historical atmosphere enveloping us. Visitors touring the town are usually amazed by the built heritage of the historic town centre, and the harmonic concord and inherent romantics of the friendly little streets.

Stone and Bronze Age implements have been discovered just outside the town and more recently the remains of a Celtic

settlement have been excavated at the advance defences of the town gate.

A series of stone fortresses were built in the Kőszeg Mountains, among them on the Óház Peak. Kuszug was first written in the charter (1248) commemorating this event. The Németújvári family transferred its seat here in the late 13th century.

Henric and his sons started significant constructions under the old fortress on the bank of the Gyöngyös River where they built their stronghold, the representative Lower Castle. They established the

town of Kőszeg partly with German settlers and they granted favours and privileges to its citizens. Only in 1327 did Charles Robert of Anjou finally break the power of the Kőszegi (Aba) family in Western Transdanubia, and a year later in (1328), elevated the town to Royal status. The town boundaries were fixed during the Anjou dynasty (1347–1381). In 1392 the Royal town became a fiefdom, when the Palatinate Nicolas Garai repaid a bond paid to King Sigismund of Luxembourg by the Ellerbach family from Monyorókerék. The Garai era ended in 1441.

In 1677 the secondary School Jurisics Miklós Gimnázium (JMG) was founded. It is the oldest operating International School in Hungary. The International Baccalaureate (IB) program, which most English-speaking students at the school follow, was created at the Grande Boissière campus. It is a multilingual school, with instruction in Hungarian, French, German, Italian and English. The International School is a testing center for the US college boards (SAT, ACT, etc.), as well as the British IGCSE Exam. In 2006, the Herald Tribune listed it as one of the top ten international schools in the world.

According to the Good Schools Guide International, “Students receive a truly international education and as a result leave as rounded and worldly young people”.

Since 1992 Kőszeg is living under a normal administrative system and a market economy. The financially feeble town is looking at

options for renewal through an injection of capital from outside investors and is seeking support from government agencies and the European Union. Kőszeg has managed to retain its natural charm and the beauty of its architecture. Only the bastion gates have been damaged significantly.

The structure of the town remains unaltered.

Today Kőszeg is one of the most attractive towns in Hungary (also called Hungary’s Jewel Box) and is a tourist destination. Kőszeg was awarded the Hild Prize (Hungarian architecture prize) in 1978 for preserving its architectural heritage.

Sights of interest: Jurisics Castle and Castle Museum, Town centre with its medieval atmosphere, Sacred Heart Church, Steierhauser, Pharmacy Museum, Hills around Kőszeg, The Geschreibenstein, Seven fountains, Watchtower

Lukácsháza- Biotájház

In the year of 2008 a perfect copy of a Hungarian rustic peasant farm house from the XIXth century was constructed in Lukácsháza, one of the settlements of Kőszeg Micro-region. A dream has come through by the construction of the Bio Farm House to show the visitors how the peasants of Vas County lived here one hundred years ago. The rooms and the handicraft workshops were furnished after the style of hundred years of traditions. The Bio Land House is a house but more than a building – it is a farm more than an enterprise – it is a tradition which lives in the present. The Bio Land House itself is the picture of the happy but simple life of the traditional Hungarian village.


newsletter - sazp.skold.sazp.sk/public/index/open_file.php?file=ctk/gm/green_mountain... ·...

Documents