• No results found

Spatial Planning; Ecosystem Services; Center-Periphery; Landscape

5 THE RESULTS

The exemplar study includes Bratsigovo municipality and Bratsigovo town as part of the settlement network of the South Central region in Bulgaria and beyond the country borders. Fig. 2 shows the assumptions about the location of the central places (urban centers) in the hierarchical order outlined in the hexagonal model.

Fig. 2 Hexagonal network model and assumptions about the central places

The resulting image after the application of the Thin Plate Spline georeferencing (Fig. 3) demonstrates the distortion of the ‘ideal’ hexagonal network of the assumed central places. In the specific case of the region, the Sofia-Edirne(Odrin)-Istanbul axis was chosen as the main setting, which is a permanent axis of historical and current development.

The position of Bratsigovo in the graphic shows contraction of the triangle overlaying the northern part of the municipality and the contrary for the triangle over the southern part of it. This represents the fact that the northern area of the municipality is in proximity to other neighboring urban centers and much better connected to the region.

Fig. 3 Overlaying the hexagonal networking model and the contemporary network of central places

Fig. 4 Extents of the central urban areas (central municipalities (NCRD, 2012) with diagonal X red hatch; functional urban areas (EC, 2016) with solid red hatch) and the peripheral rural areas in the South Central region and the distorted hexagonal settlement network

The southern area is part of the Rhodope Mountains which is very isolated due to steep slopes, high altitude climate and less agricultural opportunities, low density of infrastructure but also previous state borders at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century.

The application of the criteria for peripherality of the land areas of the settlements (Fig. 4) is compared to the extents of the nationally defined central municipalities in the National Concept for Spatial Development (NCRD, 2012) as well as to the boundaries of the functional urban areas (FUA) with urban centers of at least 50000 residents from the Urban Atlas (EC, 2016). The map shows as well the availability or lack of relevant road or rail connections along the distorted ‘ideal’ web of axes linking the separate nodes.

The influence of the polycentric criteria for determination of peripherality is obvious. The municipality of Bratsigovo is intermediate rural area being at the edge of more central functional urban areas and part of it can be described as peripheral rural area – that is the high altitude village of Ravnogor.

Further on an aggregated interpretation of the demographic potential, urbanization and connectivity is made (Fig. 5) through the heat map based on the location of the population, the major urban centers and the communication infrastructure in the South Central region. It synthesizes well the regional (dis)integration of the whole territory and also the variable demographic potential in the territory of Bratsigovo municipality.

Fig. 5 Aggregation of the demographic potential along with the urban centers and the connectivity infrastructure

Finally the extents of meso and micro socio-ecological systems are compared to the range of different administrative units at regional and local level with regard to Bratsigovo municipality (Fig. 6). The following socio-ecological systems are illustrated:

Batashka mountain and Besaparski hills in the massif of the Rhodope Mountains;

the surface basin of the Stara Reka, its tributaries and tributaries of the river Vacha in the Maritsa river basin;

the municipalities and districts in the South Central Region.

Fig. 6 Extents of socio-ecological systems and administrative units: geological systems (orange), river basins (blue)

The landscape classification and the ecosystem services are initially well described by two separate studies from the ‘Rhodope Project’ (‘Preservation of the Globally Significant Biodiversity in the Landscape of the Rhodope Mountains’). A map of contemporary landscapes on a scale of 1:75 000 has been prepared thanks to the so called ‘Rhodope Project’ as part of the publication Atlas of the Contemporary Landscapes of the Rhodopes (Gikov & Nedkov, 2008). Most of the variety found in the Rhodope Mountains which is considered hot spot for biological and landscape diversity in Europe is found also on the territory of Bratsigovo municipality. Natural, slightly and moderately modified landscapes dominate the contemporary landscape, which is typical for the intermediate areas along the urban-rural gradient. Another contribution of the ‘Rhodope Project’ is the review of ecosystem services and benefits in the Rhodope municipalities which outlines the following characteristics for Bratsigovo municipality (Zervudakis et al., 2007). That initial assessment gives an overall orientation on the high value of ecosystems in the municipality of Bratsigovo. The need for further studies, both at national, regional, and local level, is linked to the many methodological issues of assessment and valuation, which often involve more general assumptions and arbitrary values. Nevertheless these two studies from the ‘Rhodope Project’ reveal well the unique position of Bratsigovo and its rich landscape variety.

Yet, the contemporary conditions of Bratsigovo municipality in social-ecological terms can be described through these characteristics (OUPO Bratsigovo, 2035, 2017):

aging and shrinking especially in the upper altitude settlements;

seasonally intensive visitation by second home owners;

architectural heritage loss and new greenfield urbanization in parallel;

less economic activity and entrepreneurship with decaying industrial sites from the Socialist past;

agricultural (arable and pasture) land abandonment in the medium and higher altitude belts;

ecological succession over the longer term abandoned land;

intensive and sometimes illegal lodging at certain spots even in protected natural areas.

6 DISCUSSION

The long term possibilities for multifunctional land stewardship or the added value of clusters that need a more integrated and holistic way of thinking are hardly achievable due to the missing culture of collaboration and cooperation which are rear and almost extinct in the municipality.

The local communities are more importing than exporting in terms of goods and services with the typical for rural areas help of the national transfers for pensions of the retired. Local entrepreneurship is not enough to

enforce the endogenous development on the basis of the various and rich local resources. Certainly aging is the main constraint with the addition that local elites have occupied key assets around which there is stagnation or deadlock going on. The involvement of politically powerful age stratified groups does not allow the easy entrance of new independent actors either internally or externally.

Thus a big amount of the biocapacity of the municipality is not being utilized. Even though the population is shrinking the community goes into ecological debt due to diminishing levels of subsistence or semi-subsistence agriculture. The few farms are oriented less towards the local and regional market and prolonged distribution of primary goods can be observed.

All these strokes try to briefly describe the significant mismatch that leads more generally to low local and regional integration. There is high demand for the establishment of regional socio-spatial networks organized around market relations and demand, development frameworks and promotion approaches, conservation projects and protection activities, emotional attachment and search for new experiences, solidarity ventures and transition for the improved integration of the rural areas and the urban centers.

7 CONCLUSION

Here rests the conclusion that internal regional integration is likely to shorten links, internalize the footprint and contribute to the circular metabolism of a region. All this can be in parallel to the preservation and development of the levels of external connectivity and exchange within the thresholds of reproduction of renewable resources. It can happen through the creation of prerequisites for network and local initiatives based on contextualized research and innovation.

REFERENCES

Burov, A. (2015). Spatial Planning of the Peripheral Rural Areas in Bulgaria. The Example of the South Central Region.

(Doctoral dissertation, UACEG, Sofia, Bulgaria).

Christaller, W. (1933). Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland. Eine ökonomisch-geographische Untersuchung über die Gesetzmäßigkeit der Verbreitung und Entwicklung der Siedlungen mit städtischen Funktionen. Darmstadt, D: WBG.

Crossman, N. D., Burkhard, B., Nedkov, S., Willemen, L., Petz, K., Palomo, I., ... & Alkemade, R. (2013). A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services. Ecosystem services, 4, 4-14. doi:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.02.001

EC (European Commission) (2016). Urban Atlas. Retrieved from http://land.copernicus.eu/local/urban-atlas/urban-atlas-2012/view.

Fisher, B., R. K. Turner, P. Morling (2008). Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making, Ecological Economics, 68, 643-653. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.09.014

Fisher, J. A., Patenaude, G., Giri, K., Lewis, K., Meir, P., Pinho, P., ... Williams, M. (2014). Understanding the relationships between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: A conceptual framework, Ecosystem Services, 7, 34–45. doi:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.08.002

Gikov, A., & Nedkov, S. (2008). Atlas na s vremennite landshafti v Rodopite (Atlas of the Contemporary Landscapes of the Rhodope Mountains). Programa na OON za razvitie, Bulgaria.

Lai, S. (2016). Ecosystem services within the appropriate assessment of land-use plans: exploring a potential integration.

In G. Colombo, P. Lombardi and G. Mondini, INPUT 2016 e-agorà/e- for the transition toward resilient communities.

Conference Proceedings Book (pp. 202-207). Turin, IT: INPUT. ISBN: 9788890529641

Lele, S. (2013). Environmentalisms, justuces and the limits of Ecosystem Services Frameworks. In T. Sikor (Ed.), The Justices and Injustices of Ecosystem Services (pp. 119-139). London, UK: Routledge.

Müller, F., R. de Groot, R. de, Willemen, L. (2010). Ecosystem Services at the Landscape Scale: The Need for Integrative Approches. Landscape Online, 23, 1-11. doi: https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.201023

NCRD (National Centre for Regional Development). (2012). National Concept for Spatial Development for the period 2013-2025. Retrieved from http://www.bgregio.eu/media/Programirane/NKPR_28012013_Last_en.pdf

Nicolas, G. (2009). Walter Christaller From “exquisite corpse” to “corpse resuscitated”. SAPI EN. S. Surveys and Perspectives Integrating Environment and Society, (2.2). Retrieved from https://journals.openedition.org/sapiens/843 OUPO Bratsigovo 2035. (2017). Obsht ustro stven plan na Obshtina Bratsigovo (General Spatial Development Plan of Bratsigovo Municipality). Retrieved from http://www.bratsigovo.net/documents.php?id=147

Vizzari, M., Antognelli, S., Sigura, M., & Modica, G. (2016). Urban-rural-natural gradient analysis using CORINE data: an application to the Italian regions of Friuli Venezia Giulia, Umbria, and Calabria. In G. Colombo, P. Lombardi and G.

Mondini, INPUT 2016 e-agorà/e- for the transition toward resilient communities. Conference Proceedings Book (pp.

454-460). Turin, IT: INPUT. ISBN: 9788890529641

Zervudakis, M., Rashev, B., & Germer, K. (2007). Review of Ecosystem Services and the values they provide, UNDP, Bulgaria.

AUTHOR’S PROFILE

Angel Burov is chief assistant professor at the Urban Planning department, part of the Architectural faculty in the University of Architecture Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Sofia, Bulgaria. The research interests include in principle the bridging between various disciplines and the more holistic approaches in development, urbanization and landscape studies.

How to cite item in APA format:

In A. Leone & C. Gargiulo (Eds.), Environmental and territorial modelling for planning and design.

(pp. 52 - 55). Naples: FedOAPress. ISBN: 978-88-6887-048-5, doi: 10.6093/978-88-6887-048-5

ABSTRACT

Historical land use change studies and modelling support the analysis of current land use