Working Group Recreation, Tourism and Landscape Development: Difference between revisions
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
== Synthesis of core questions == | == Synthesis of core questions == | ||
The synthesis will evolve at the end of the seminar | The synthesis will evolve at the end of the seminar | ||
Every group presented its case study and what they intend to do. | |||
1. Golija - Studenica, Serbia | |||
development of eco tourism in Biosphere Reserve, sustainable eco tourism, link nature, culture and community | |||
2. Kemeri National Park, Latvia | |||
landscape development, management in tourism,participation of people, wetlands, dunes, meadows are landscape elements, unique landscape and diversity | |||
3.Salvati Rosia Montana, Romania | |||
mining; geology and architecture are treasures, mining area will destroy all the heritage, settlements, cultural monuments, rural landscape should be protected, search for other ways of develepment of the area that wouldn t deteriote the environment | |||
4.The land of Buzau, Romania | |||
geopark, protected area, the idea is to work on strategies of harmonious development of the area(infrastructure, tourism, nature protection) | |||
5. Hebron, Palestine | |||
ecotourism and cultural landscape conservation, | |||
Than, participants put cards with the core themes they would like to cope with in their case studies. | |||
The core themes are clustered in groups: CONSERVATION (of cultural landscape), MANAGEMENT (related to tourism, infrastructure, etc.), PARTICIPATION (of local communities). | |||
== Minutes of this Working Group == | == Minutes of this Working Group == | ||
Revision as of 18:46, 27 May 2009
Case Studies of this working group
Attention: These are 2 dynamic page lists, do not edit this paragraph as it is created automatically. Text added to the first two chapters of your case study pages will automatically appear here.
Rationales:Why are these case studies interesting?
<DPL>
category=WG Recreation, Tourism and Landscape Development mode=ordered include = #Rationale: Why is this case study interesting?
</DPL>
The Landscape Context
<DPL>
category=WG Recreation, Tourism and Landscape Development mode=ordered include = #Landscape and/or urban context
</DPL> Back to top
Cross-Cutting Questions of this Working Group
Please list the cross-cutting questions identified during group discussion.
Synthesis of core questions
The synthesis will evolve at the end of the seminar
Every group presented its case study and what they intend to do. 1. Golija - Studenica, Serbia development of eco tourism in Biosphere Reserve, sustainable eco tourism, link nature, culture and community 2. Kemeri National Park, Latvia landscape development, management in tourism,participation of people, wetlands, dunes, meadows are landscape elements, unique landscape and diversity 3.Salvati Rosia Montana, Romania mining; geology and architecture are treasures, mining area will destroy all the heritage, settlements, cultural monuments, rural landscape should be protected, search for other ways of develepment of the area that wouldn t deteriote the environment 4.The land of Buzau, Romania geopark, protected area, the idea is to work on strategies of harmonious development of the area(infrastructure, tourism, nature protection) 5. Hebron, Palestine ecotourism and cultural landscape conservation,
Than, participants put cards with the core themes they would like to cope with in their case studies. The core themes are clustered in groups: CONSERVATION (of cultural landscape), MANAGEMENT (related to tourism, infrastructure, etc.), PARTICIPATION (of local communities).
Minutes of this Working Group
Please add the minutes of your group discussions