No 7. A participatory approach to planning the management of

Transcription

NO.7: A PARTICIPATORY APPROACH
TO PLANNING THE MANAGEMENT OF
THE PROPOSED YILDIZ MOUNTAINS
BIOSPHERE
S
Seem
maa A
Allp
paan
nA
Attaam
meerr,, S
Seevvg
gii G
Gü
üll aan
nd
dO
Okkaan
nC
Caan
n
A
Ap
prriill 22001100
Y
YIIL
LD
DIIZ
ZM
MO
OU
UN
NT
TA
AIIN
NS
SB
BIIO
OS
SP
PH
HE
ER
RE
EP
PR
RO
OJJE
EC
CT
T
R
RE
EP
PO
OR
RT
TS
SE
ER
RIIE
ES
S
A PARTICIPATORY APPROACH TO PLANNING THE MANAGEMENT OF THE PROPOSED YILDIZ MOUNTAINS BIOSPHERE
This document may be cited as:
YMBP (2010). A participatory approach to planning the management of the proposed Yildiz Mountains
Biosphere. Report prepared on behalf of AGRER-Agriconsulting-AGRIN by S. Alpan Atamer, Sevgi Gül and
Okan Can for the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ankara. Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project
Report Series No. 7.
Other documents in this series of reports prepared by the Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project are as
follows:
Land and vegetation cover, habitat and landscape mapping of the Yildliz Mountains, using satellite remote
sensing and GIS techniques. A report prepared on behalf of AGRER-Agriconsulting-AGRIN by S. Berberoğlu, C.
Donmez, O. Şatir for the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ankara. Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project
Report Series No. 1.
Eco-hydrology of Yıldız Mountains. A report prepared on behalf of AGRER-Agriconsulting-AGRIN by Yusuf
Serengil for the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ankara. Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project Report
Series No. 2.
Flora of Yildiz Mountains. A report prepared on behalf of AGRER-Agriconsulting-AGRIN by N. Özhatay, E.
Akalin, Y. Yeşil, S. Demirci, N. Güler, and H. Ersoy for the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ankara. Yildiz
Mountains Biosphere Project Report Series No. 3.
Fauna of Yildiz Mountains. A report prepared on behalf of AGRER-Agriconsulting-AGRIN by M. Sözen and A.
Karataş for the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ankara. Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project Report
Series No. 4.
Caves of the Yildiz Mountains and their fauna. Report prepared on behalf AGRER-Agriconsulting-AGRIN by
BUMAD (E. Çoraman, Y. Özakin, Y. Çelik, M. Döker, K. Kunt, and E. Özel) for the Ministry of Environment and
Forestry, Ankara. Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project Report Series No. 5.
Diversity and distribution of birds in the Yildiz Mountains. Report prepared on behalf of AGRER-AgriconsultingAGRIN by Korhan Özkan for the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ankara. Yildiz Mountains Biosphere
Project Report Series No. 6.
Resource management in the proposed Yildiz Mountains: a community-based approach. Report prepared on
behalf of AGRER-Agriconsulting-AGRIN by Francis Hurst for the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ankara.
Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project Report Series No. 8.
Identification and valuation of ecosystem goods and services in the Yildiz Mountains. A report prepared on
behalf of AGRER-Agriconsulting-AGRIN by Dominic Moran for the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ankara.
Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project Report Series No. 9.
Social profiling of villages in the Yildiz Mountains. A report prepared on behalf of AGRER-Agriconsulting-AGRIN
by Dominic Moran and Axel Tarisse for the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ankara. Yildiz Mountains
Biosphere Project Report Series No. 10.
Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... 1
YÖNETİCİ ÖZETİ .............................................................................................................................. 1
1.
INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 2
2.
PHASE 1 .................................................................................................................................. 3
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
3.
PHASE 2 .................................................................................................................................. 8
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
4.
INVOLVING NGOS ............................................................................................................... 9
INVOLVING AGENCIES .......................................................................................................... 9
DIALOGUE WITH VILLAGE COMMUNITIES ................................................................................. 9
SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY ................................................................................................. 13
OTHER EVENTS ................................................................................................................. 13
PHASE 3 ................................................................................................................................ 14
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
5.
IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF STAKEHOLDERS .................................................................. 3
DESIGNING THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS ............................................................................... 4
STRATEGY ......................................................................................................................... 5
ACTION PLAN ...................................................................................................................... 7
INITIAL TRAINING OF THE AGENCY STAFF FOR THE PROCESS ..................................................... 8
ESTABLISHING THE SWG ................................................................................................... 14
W ORK OF SWG ................................................................................................................ 15
OUTPUTS OF THE SWG ..................................................................................................... 15
OTHER EVENTS ................................................................................................................. 16
CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................................... 17
ANNEXES ....................................................................................................................................... 19
ANNEX 1: YILDIZ DAĞLARI SOSYO-EKONOMIK ANALIZ IÇIN SORU KAĞIDI ............................................. 19
ANNEX 2: TRAINING MATERIALS ....................................................................................................... 27
ANNEX 3: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE NGO WORKSHOP (17 MARCH 2009) ...................................... 43
ANNEX 4: AGENCIES’ STAFF WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE FIRST ROUND OF VILLAGE MEETINGS ................. 44
ANNEX 5: OUTPUTS OF THE VILLAGE VISITS AND ‘DROP-IN EVENTS’ ..................................................... 45
ANNEX 6: SWOT ANALYSIS FOR THE EXISTING COOPERATIVES IN YILDIZ MOUNTAINS ........................... 66
ANNEX 7: EXAMPLE OF VILLAGE PROFILE .......................................................................................... 70
ANNEX 8: SWG MEMBERS AND THEIR ATTENDANCE IN THE MEETINGS ................................................. 76
ANNEX 9: CONTACT DETAILS OF SWG AND MPU MEMBERS ............................................................... 81
Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An intensive participatory process was established with the stakeholders for management
planning, including 31 settlements inside or peripheral to the Project area. The process involved
the following steps:

Phase 1:
o
identification and analysis of stakeholders;
o
establishing a team of facilitators and planning the process to engage stakeholders
in planning a sustainable future for Yildiz Mountains;

Phase 2:
o
establishing a dialogue with stakeholder groups, based on exchanging information
about the Project with their visions and aspirations for Yildiz Mountains;
o
developing a community-based approach to managing natural resources within the
Yildiz Mountains, based on existing management systems such as cooperatives and
hunting associations; and

Phase 3:
o
establishing a Stakeholder Working Group (SWG), representative of villages,
government agencies and NGOs, to become directly involved with the Management
Planning Unit (MPU) in the management plan process for the Yildiz Biosphere.
YÖNETİCİ ÖZETİ
Planlama sürecinde, Projenin içinde ve yakın çevresinde yer alan 31 yerleşimden paydaşların
dahil edildiği yoğun bir katılım süreci oluşturulmuştur. Süreç aşağıdaki adımları içermiştir:

1. Safha:
o
Paydaşların belirlenmesi ve analiz edilmesi;
o
Bir kolaylaştırıcı ekibinin oluşturulması ve Yıldız Dağları için sürdürülebilir bir gelecek
planlamak üzere paydaşları katmak için sürecin planlaması;

2. Safha:
o
Paydaş gruplarıyla Yıldız Dağlarına dair vizyonlarına ve emellerine dair, Projeye
ilişkin bilgi değişimine dayanan bir diyalogun oluşturulması;
o
Kooperatifler, avcı dernekleri gibi mevcut yönetim sistemlerine dayanılarak Yıldız
dağlarındaki doğal kaynakların yönetilmesi için halka dayalı bir yönetim yaklaşımının
geliştirilmesi; ve

3. Safha:
o
Köylerden, kuruluşlardan ve STK’lardan temsilcilerin katılımıyla, Yıldız Dağları için
yönetim planının hazırlanması sürecinde Planlama Birimi ile doğrudan ilişkilenecek
bir Paydaşlar Çalışma Grubunun oluşturulması.
Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project Report Series No. 7
1
1. INTRODUCTION
Article 4 of the Statutory Framework of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves gives the
general criteria for an area to be qualified for designation as a biosphere reserve. Criterion 6 in
the Article says: “Organizational arrangements should be provided for the involvement and
participation of a suitable range of inter alia public authorities, local communities and private
interests in the design and carrying out of the functions of a biosphere reserve”. Therefore, a
Biosphere is essentially an area managed by broad consensus, rather than any strict regime of
enforcement, it is indeed critical that there is an inclusive and meaningful engagement of
stakeholders in the planning process and subsequent management of the Biosphere.
The dialogue must begin as soon as possible (Beuret, 2006a; Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2004),
before any decisions are made concerning the creation of the biosphere reserve. It is important
to ensure that all options remain open when the dialogue starts, and that the possible scenario
for the future of the land is not fixed in advance. Opening the dialogue before the process starts
ensures a maximum level of involvement and establishes trust between the different participants,
at the same time enabling the latter to acquire a full understanding of the object of the dialogue.
The overall aim of the participatory process put in place in the Yildiz Mountains Biophere Project
was to establish and maintain a genuine dialogue with stakeholders having an interest in the
future conservation and sustainable management of the proposed Yildiz Mountains Biosphere
(Project area), so that they can fully participate in the planning and management of its natural and
cultural resources. This process would not only enable capacity to be built among the numerous
stakeholders, but would also ensure their ownership of the Preliminary Yildiz Mountains
Biosphere Management Plan, thereby fulfilling two essential conditions for its completion and
implementation after the end of the Project.
Objective II.1.5 of The Seville Strategy for Biosphere Reserves points to surveying the interests
of the various stakeholders and to fully involve them in planning and decision-making regarding
the management and use of the biosphere reserve. Therefore identification and analysis of the
stakeholders was the first step.
Already at the proposal stage, and in a more detailed way in the Inception report, the Consultant
had indicated his intention to substantiall strengthen the stakeholder participation in his approach
towards the development of the Biosphere management plan. The materialisation of this
intention is the subject of the present report.
2
2.
PHASE 1
3 expert/facilitators, namely, Sema Alpan (Coordinator), Okan Can (biodiversity expert) and
Sevgi Gül (community expert) were identified for the process.
2.1
IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF STAKEHOLDERS
An analysis of stakeholders was based on previous work undertaken for the İğneada Longoz
Forest National Park Management Plan, as part of the GEF II Biodiversity and Natural Resources
Management Project. This list was updated and developed with respect to the much wider scope
of the present Project, reviewed at a process plan design workshop and re-analyzed. In broad
terms these stakeholders can be classified in 3 groups:
1. Primary stakeholders: Yildiz Biosphere (within the proposed boundary)
Those residing in village communities within or immediately peripheral to the boundary of the
proposed Biosphere may be considered to be the primary stakeholders because they are likely to
be the most dependent on the area’s natural resources. These are:
o
o
o
o
o
o
Village communities and their representatives (muhtars, imams, teachers, chairs
of the cooperatives)
local NGOs
local Private sector
Forestry District Directorate (FDD)
Nature Conservation & National Parks Directorate
Visitors.
2. Secondary stakeholders: Yildiz Catchment (outside proposed Biosphere Reserve
boundary)
Those living and working within the catchment area beyond the proposed Biosphere Reserve
may be the secondary stakeholders, having a vested interest in the Yildiz Mountains, but in most
cases probably less direct dependence on their natural resources. These are:
o
o
o
o
o
o
other Government agencies – at the provincial level
regional NGOs
Universities
Media/press
Private sector
Investors and secondary householders
3. Tertiary stakeholders: (at national and international level)
National and international agencies and NGOs may be the tertiary stakeholders, distant from the
resource but often having considerable influence over the way in which primary stakeholders are
able to interact with the resource. These may be sub-categorized as follows:
3
a) International
o UNESCO/MAB
o Bulgaria – national park, government, consulate
o EU (donor)
o PEEN/Green Belt
o Tourists /tourism agencies
b) National
o Government agencies – Ministry of Environment & Forestry etc
o NGOs
o Universities
o Media/press.
2.2
DESIGNING THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS
In designing a participatory process it is important to be clear about the different types of
engagement with stakeholders, ranging from information provision with no opportunity for
stakeholders to influence the outcome to open dialogue in which stakeholder aspirations can be
met and decisions shared (see Table below). Processes should be designed to be as open as
possible, beginning with dialogue bounded only by existing legislation and policies, then moving
into consultation mode as outputs (e.g. management plan) are being drafted.
ENGAGEMENT
FEATURES
Open dialogue
Decisions shared by
stakeholders
Bounded dialogue
Decisions influenced by
stakeholders
Consultation
Stakeholders have limited
influence
Info gathering
Stakeholders provide info to
inform decisions - no influence
Info giving
Stakeholders have opportunity
to react
RESPONSES
Needs/aspirations
Opinions
Reactions
The guiding principles of the process should be “inclusive” and “transparent”.
The participatory planning process was carried out in 3 phases:

Phase 1: identification and analysis of stakeholders; establishing a team of facilitators and
preparing the strategy and action plan for the process to engage stakeholders in planning a
sustainable future for Yildiz Mountains;
4
Phase 2: establishing a dialogue with stakeholder groups, based on exchanging information
about the Project with their visions and aspirations for Yildiz Mountains; analyzing the
existing system for developing a community-based approach to managing natural resources
within the Yildiz Mountains;
Phase 3: establishing a Stakeholder Working Group (SWG), representative of villages,
government agencies and NGOs, to become directly involved with the Management Planning
Unit (MPU) in the Yildiz Biosphere management planning process and developing a
community-based approach to managing natural resources within the Yildiz Mountains based
on existing management systems such as cooperatives; farmers’ organisations.


The strategy and action plan were prepared for the participatory process; that is presented in the
following section.
2.3
STRATEGY
There are 25 villages, 3 counties and 1 sub-province within the proposed biosphere reserve area.
Following phase 1, as indicated above, the subsequent phases were implemented from midMarch until the end of the project in order to involve communities living and working in the
proposed area, through:
Phase 2: Initial dialogue with the NGOs, agencies and village communities
3 teams were mobilised for facilitation of the process for purposes of engaging with village
communities. Each team, comprising one villager and as far as possible one national and
one/two provincial Ministry of Environment & Forestry or other public agency staff, was led by an
Expert/Facilitator.
(a) The relevant local public institutions were contacted both through formal correspondence and
by paying visits to them in order to explain and get their support for the process, as well as
identifying potentially assigned staff. Initial training was carried out by the expert facilitators
for the team of facilitators-cum-resource persons, and the training process continued during
the process, focusing on facilitation principles, practice and techniques, as well as providing a
sound understanding of the purpose and objectives of the Project, including Biosphere
Reserve concepts of conservation and sustainable development. Training was undertaken in
an interactive and participatory manner so that trainees can experience first-hand some of the
techniques of engagement and the value of experiential learning.
(b) Up to a total of 5 days was spent by a team in each village during the 2.5 month period, i.e.
each village was visited approximately every fortnight. Each team was assigned a group of
villages, so that mutual trust was gradually built. The mayor and/or mukhtar were briefed in
advance of the first visit and his support was solicited to publicise a ‘kick-off event’ that
marked the start of the dialogue. The facilitation process was carried out separately for
women and men in order to ensure uninhibited participation. As the timber cutting season had
started the men worked in the forest during the day, so their meetings were scheduled in the
evenings. For relatively big settlements (with a population of over 1000) two facilitators were
assigned.
5
(c) The process was discussed with local NGOs in a workshop in Kirklareli in order to get their
comments, support and to identify resource persons. The ‘agricultural development
cooperatives’ were considered as NGOs.
(d) The aim of the kick-off ‘drop-in event’ was to provide an opportunity for all members of the
community to learn about the Project, to formulate first questions and comments, and for the
team to provide initial clarifications on the concerns expressed. The kick-off event started with
a film show, covering the true stories from civil society organisations, so that the dialogue
could start with a discussion on the benefits for the civil society of getting organised for
empowerment. Village resource persons and community leaders were identified in the first
meetings.
(e) The ‘drop-in’ event was followed up by a series of visits to explore views, perceptions,
concerns about the values of the natural and cultural context in which the villagers live and
work, the threats to such values (resources) and ways in which such threats may be
alleviated, reduced or mitigated. Such information was recorded on post-its and displayed on
walls, boards, flip charts etc to share with the others participating in the event. Subsequently,
it was collated, fed back to the community to contribute to the formulation of a draft vision for
Yildiz Mountains and objectives for achieving that vision identified from the threats. These
visits were also intended to allow the facilitator teams to gradually develop a socio-economic
profile of the village, focused on identifying levels of livelihood dependency on natural
resources among different sectors of the community. Potential income-generating activities
were explored with the villagers, especially those that can be linked to existing skills,
initiatives and interests among the community. Various facilitation techniques including social
and land use mapping, which are culturally acceptable by the participants, were used.
(f) Outputs were to include preliminary ideas on a mechanism, such as an eco-development
committee/working group that is representative of the village’s socio-economic structure,
intended to ensure the participation of the community to the management planning process
for the proposed Biosphere (see phase 3).
(g) Follow-up visits involved a variety of meetings, focus groups, workshops etc., ensuring
inclusion of the socially disadvantaged/excluded members of the community. The meetings
also included feed-back to the communities of the socio-economic data collected and collated
to verify, discuss and validate them and to allow the definition of village profiles.
Phase 3: Consolidating the dialogue with village communities and establishing a dialogue with
other stakeholders in the Yildiz Mountains catchment
a) Village working groups (or similar) were established to provide a mechanism and action plan
for continued participation in the Yildiz Biosphere management planning process. Their
chosen representatives were to constitute a Stakeholder Working Group (SWG).
b) Collation and analysis of the data/information gathered from each community during Phase 2
served as input into the management plan in terms of community values/vision for Yildiz
Mountains, issues/threats and opportunities (e.g. income –generating activities).
6
c) A series of events were planned and implemented within the Project area to help maintain
and consolidate the dialogue through active participation and to broaden it to other
stakeholders located outside the Yildiz mountains but within its catchment. This included
presentations from the scientific community of the results of their research in the Yildiz
Mountains, and seminars/workshops on specific issues (e.g. water transfer to Istanbul), as
well as films, exhibitions, drama and music to raise environmental awareness.
d) A range of stakeholder events were planned and facilitated, such as focus groups and
meetings in concert with the Stakeholder Process Plan, directly linking the stakeholders,
through the SWG, with the formulation of the draft strategy/management plan and its
subsequent completion.
2.4
ACTION PLAN

The process started with a pilot implementation on 20 March in Dereköy, with the
participation of all the team members.

The process was revised on the basis of the feedbacks of the team members.

The the kick-off events in each village started on 23rd March 2009, on the basis of weekly
programs.

Each team leader was responsible for contacting and informing muhtars and other team
members about the timing of the meeting, organising the venue, equipment and other
materials as well as transportation.

The teams evaluated the process and outputs once a week; and then decided on the next
week’s program.

The facilitation team leaders filled in the village meeting evaluation form, wrote minutes of
meeting and collected socio-economic data and information in the framework of the socioeconomic survey questionnaire (see Annex 1).

The facilitation team leaders reported outputs of each meeting as well as evaluations of
the meeting once a week, so that the coordinator could consolidate these reports and
send them to the TA Team Leader.

The approach was adaptive, meaning that process and facilitation techniques were
revised if and as necessary.

Meanwhile public institutions (Provincial directorates, agricultural development
cooperatives, muhtars, FDD staff) were interviewed to collect data and information for the
socio-economic analysis.
7
2.5
INITIAL TRAINING OF THE AGENCY STAFF FOR THE PROCESS
In accordance with the strategy, training materials were prepared as well. This initial orientation
training covered the following subjects, and the training materials are in Annex 2:
3.

Biosphere reserve concept

Sustainable development concept

Facilitation principles, practice and techniques.
PHASE 2
Strategy implementation is illustrated in Figure 1.
Participatory planning process
Introduce
project, identify
issues&needs
March
Village
meeting
s
(28
villages)
Open
house
meetings
3
settlemen
ts)
Focus
group
meetings
Mayors+
muhtars
1st round of
village meetings
Identify
vision,
values,
threats
SWOT on cooperative mechanism
- generate consensus for
community-based natural
resource management
April
Village
meetings (28
villages)
May
June
Meetings with Meeting with
community
provincial
representative agencies
s
Workshop for
community reps
(coops, women,
youth) +
provincial
agencies
Outputs from SWG workshops=
inputs to management planning
process
July-November
9 SWG workshops
SWG study tour to Bulgaria
Study tour to coops in Izmir and Aydin
Feedback
Muhtars+
Cooperative
Heads
Muhtars+
provincial
agencies
2nd round of village
meetings
Women
MPU
Youth
Workshops with community +
cooperative representatives
Stakeholder Working Group
workshops
Figure 1: Participatory process of engaging with village communities, government agencies and NGOs, leading
to the preliminary management plan
8
3.1
INVOLVING NGOS
The participatory process was first discussed with local NGOs in a workshop carried out in
Kirklareli in order to obtain their comments. This was an opportunity to inform them about the
project and the process, to get the support of the NGOs and to identify some resource persons.
In this context, the ‘agricultural development cooperatives’ are considered as NGOs. The
participants list of this workshop is in Annex 3.
3.2
INVOLVING AGENCIES
The initial training was carried out for the team of facilitators-cum-resource persons, and the
training process continued on a day-to-day basis during the process.
The relevant local public institutions were contacted both through formal correspondence and by
paying visits to them on 19 and 26 March 2009 in order to inform them about the project and the
process, to get their support and to identify staff to become team members. The agencies and
the dates of visits paid are in Table 1.
Table 1: Agencies contacted
Date
Agency
Contacted
person
Zeki Koçberber
19.3.2009
Demirköy Forestry
District Director
Sub-governorship of
Demirköy
Sub-governorship of
Vize
Date
19.3.2009
Kırklareli Governorship
19.3.2009
Kırklareli Forestry
District Director
Kırklareli Provincial
Directorate of Culture
and Tourism
Şahin Aybal
19.3.2009
Naci Gürbüz
26.3.2009
Provincial Directorate of
Agriculture and Rural
Affairs
Murat Yıldız
26.3.2009
19.3.2009
19.3.2009
Agency
Contacted
person
Enver Kara and
Mustafa
İşçioğlu
Fatih Yılmaz
Savaş Ünlü
Sub-governorship of
Pınarhisar
The agencies’ staff who actively participated in the village visits are listed in Annex 4.
3.3
DIALOGUE WITH VILLAGE COMMUNITIES
A series of village visits were organized in accordance with the strategy and action plan. The
objectives of the village visits were:
o
To inform the local community about the project
o
To explore views, perceptions, concerns about the values of the natural and cultural
context in which they live and work in the Yildiz Mountains;
o
To get their views and perceptions about the threats to such values (resources) and ways
in which such threats may be alleviated, reduced or mitigated;
o
To collect socio-economic data and information directly from the settlements in order to
identify levels of livelihood dependency on natural resources among different sectors of
9
the community; and to explore potential income-generating activities with villagers,
especially those that can be linked to existing skills, initiatives and interests among the
community;
o
To establish focus group(s)/working group(s) representative of the village’s socioeconomic structure, to link the community to the management planning process for the
proposed Biosphere Reserve.
The work in establishing a dialogue with each of the 31 settlements concerned (24 within the
Project area and a further 5 peripheral to the tentative boundary of the proposed biosphere
reserve) began on 18 March. During the course of the project 2 other villages (Çukurpınar and
Armağan) expressed their willingness to be included in the project, and this was accepted since
they have some forest activities and relations with the Yildiz Mountains. The location of the
settlements can be seen in Figure 2; where the pink area on the map shows the proposed
biosphere area.
Figure 2: Map of Project area showing village locations
The settlements (27 villages, 3 counties and 1 sub-province) that were included in the process
are listed in Table 2, together with the schedule of visits/events.
10
Table 2
Village
Aksicim*
Armağan*
Armutveren
Avcılar
Balaban
Beğendik
Beypınar*
Boztaş
Cukurpınar*
Demirköy
Dereköy
Evciler*
Gökyaka
Hamdibey
Hamidiye
Incesırt
Number of visits to villages during the initial phase of the participatory process
March
April
May
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
Village
İğneada
Karacadağ
Karadere
Kışlacık
Kıyıköy
Kızılağaç
Kurudere*
Limanköy
Sarpdere
Sislioba
Sivriler
Şükrüpaşa
Yenice*
Yeşilce
Yiğitbaşı
March
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
April
May
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
*Outside proposed biosphere reserve
The villages were divided in 3 groups, each to be visited by one of the mixed faclitation teams to
engage with the village communities.
The first round of visits to villages involved kick-off events with a film show, providing examples of
communities and civil societies organising and empowering themselves, followed by discussions
about aspirations, issues and the relevance of the Project.
After the first round of visits to the villages, 2 feedback focus group meetings were held with the
provincial agencies: one on 30th of March in Kirklareli and one on 2nd of April; and 3 feedback
focus group meetings were held with muhtars (8th of April in Kirklareli; 10th of April in Demirköy;
13th of April in Vize). In the same meetings, the biosphere reserve concept was introduced to the
muhtars and their comments were received about the process to be carried out in the second
round of visits.
In large towns, namely Demirköy, İğneada, Kıyıköy, where the population is over 1,000 people,
‘drop-in’ events were organised during which participants had the chance to learn about the
Project and write on flip-charts their values, visions and threats concerning Yildiz Mountains.
The second round of visits to villages focused on the perception and assessment by the people
of the values of the Yildiz Mountains in the natural and cultural context in which they live
and work, the threats to such values (resources) and the ways in which such threats can be
alleviated, reduced or mitigated. This information, summarised in Annex 5, together with similar
outputs produced from the agencies’ workshop on 28th of May; and was later used to inform the
development of the preliminary management plan for Yildiz Mountains.
The 3rd round of dialogue focused on examining existing systems of managing natural resources,
such as cooperatives for timber extraction and muhtarships, in order to identify how they might
be strengthened and developed to provide for local natural resource management to generate
increased revenue for the local communities and to ensure their sustainable use. A series of
11
workshops were held separately with (i) muhtars and cooperative board members, (ii) women,
(iii) young people, and (iv) provincial agencies to identify the strengths, weaknesses and
opportunities inherent in existing systems. The schedule of these workshops is in Table 3.
Table 3: Schedule of commuity and agencies workshops
Place of
workshop
Workshop participants
Date of workshop
Number of participants
Muhtars and cooperative
board members
20.05.2009
İğneada
31 muhtars and cooperatives representatives from
16 different villages
Women
22.05.2009
Hamdibey
Village
29 women from 11 different villages
Young people
26.05.2009
Vize
31 youngsters from 7 different villages
Provincial agencies
28.05.2009
Demirköy
17 members from agencies
In short, the analysis showed that:

the only natural resource actually being sustainably managed is timber, which is
managed by the Forest District Directorates (FDDs);

most other natural resources (mushrooms, medicinal plants, herbs,…) are subject to an
open-access system, without any mechanism capable of ensuring that their harvesting is
sustainable;

FDD have limited resources and capacity to manage and control the non-timber forest
products harvesting;

the local communities are not entitled to and have no incentive to manage the resources.
Outputs from these workshops, as well as from the previous village dialogue, were then shared
at a common workshop with muhtars, cooperative board members, women, young people and
provincial agencies on 4th of June during which discussions focused on the improvement of the
the cooperatives so that they can be used for CBNRM model for Yildiz Mountains. A SWOT
analysis of the cooperatives is in Annex 6.
The development of these mechanisms was fast-tracked in 4 selected villages (Kızılağaç,
Hamdibey, Aksicim, Boztaş) in order to develop a model which can be brought back to the wider
group of stakeholders for their further inputs. The discussion was broadened to Çukurpinar,
Gökyaka, Karacadag and Yeşilce Villages on several occasions. The model was well taken by
the village and cooperative heads; however there were some concerns by those villages who do
not have a cooperative and by some cooperative members, who pointed to the existing
weaknesses of the cooperatives.
12
The development of this model for community based natural resources management (CBNRM)
was based upon a number of principles, namely:
 the costs and benefits of conservation management should be equitably shared;
the authority and responsibility for resource management must reflect the de facto
managers.
The main purpose of these principles is to ensure that either protection or utilisation is applied as
a management strategy and at all costs to avoid having to abandon a resource – either by choice
or as a result of neglect.

Implicit in this approach is that with limited material, human and financial resources the most
effective form of managing the natural values of the Yildiz Mountains will be through a
consensual process with sustainable use providing the primary incentive for wise management.
This will require management agreements to be negotiated between cooperatives or
representative village organisations and the agencies concerned (mainly the Forest District
Directorate (FDD) and the Provincial Directorate of Environment and Forestry).
3.4
SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY
In order to identify and review existing socio-economic data and information about villages within
and peripheral to the Project area that are readily available from government agencies, these
were visited by the facilitators. These data were complemented by informal data collection from
villagers and muhtars during the village visits. All the information served to establish a socioeconomic profiles for each village. An example is given in Annex 7, the full data set was reported
separately, and fed into the database.
3.5
OTHER EVENTS
To introduce the Project and promote the public envolvement in the process, as well as to
disseminate the information to a broader group of the communities, some events were
organized. These were:
(a) Participation in the Dupnisa Cave Nature Festival on 16th of May in Sarpdere Village: the
facilitation team delivered handouts and informed festival participants about the biosphere
reserve concept and the participatory planning process in the project. The cave research
team informed the people about the Dupnisa Cave and other caves in the project area.
Around 50 children and 150 adults visiting the project stand participated in the finger painting
activities to draw the values of Yildiz Mountains.
(b) Finger paintings of the values of Yildiz Mountains in the schools: 17 primary schools in the
Project area were supplied with the necessary materials and informed about the Project. The
children from 1st to 5th grade participated in class finger painting activities to represent the
values of the Yildiz Mountains.
(c) Project slogan school contest: the children were asked to propose a slogan for the Project
from their school, when they were visited for the painting activity.
13
(d) Participation in the Kakava Festival on 5th of June (World Environment Day): an exibition was
organized under the organization of the Kakava Festival in Kirklareli. 17 pictures and 18
slogans were exibited and made subject to public voting. Two slogans received the highest
number of votes: “Do not let our Star fall” (Demirköy Yenimahalle Primary School) and “Let
our Star shine; and let our mountain remain green and our streams blue” (Dereköy Primary
School). The painting of the Demirköy Fatih Primary School got the highest number of votes
from the people.
(e) Finger painting activity with the Provincial Directorate of Environment and Forestry
personnel: this activity was held on 5th of June (World Environment Day) with all the
personnel of the Directorate.
4.
PHASE 3
In June the participatory process led to the formal establishment of a Stakeholder Working Group
(SWG), representative of the main interest groups living and working in the Project area (village
communities) and local/provincial agencies and NGOs responsible for or with a vested interest in
Yildiz Mountains.
4.1
ESTABLISHING THE SWG
The representatives from the agencies and NGOs were appointed to the SWG. The community
representatives of the Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) were identified based on the following
selection/election criteria:
1. The women who volunteered for participation in the Regional Women’s Workshop
2. The youngsters who volunteered for participation in the Regional Youth’s Workshop
3. Muhtars and cooperative heads:
• Representation of all the settlements as much as possible
• Representation from all sub-provinces
• Cooperative heads if there is a cooperative in the village
• Otherwise muhtars
• Authorization to represent several villages
• Representation of water products cooperatives
• Ratio of young people in the population
• Interest in the Project and the process
• The village where the Environmental Training centre is located
4. Resource person(s).
The members of the SWG were endorsed by the Ministry of Environment. later on the
composition of the SWG changed due to some new comers during the course of the process.
The SWG members and their attendance as well as other participants are listed in Annex 8.
14
4.2
WORK OF SWG
This Group was tasked with reviewing draft inputs to the preliminary management plan and
providing feedback to the Management Planning Unit (MPU), thereby allowing representatives of
village, government agencies, NGOs and other interest groups to formally engage with the
management planning process. A series of workshops was held by the SWG between July and
November; one of them being devoted to the presentation of the outputs of the scientific surveys.
The schedule of workshops is in Table 4.
Table 4: Schedule of SWG workshops
Workshop no.
4.3
Date
1
22.7.2009
2
18.8.2009
3
15.9.2009
4
30.9.2009
5
8.10.2009
6
15.10.2009
7
22.10.2009
8
5.11.2009
9
12.11.2009
OUTPUTS OF THE SWG
The main outputs of the workshops were the common vision, threat analysis, objectives,
activities for the Yildiz Biosphere and recommendations regarding the Biosphere Management
Committee and Advisory Committee. The followings were the inputs of the SWG for the 20-year
common vision for Yildiz Mountains for the management planning:
The Yildiz Mountains with
 Undeteriorated natural resources handed over to next generations
 A preserved cultural structure and historical values
 An improved quality of life for local communities
 Where (authority for) natural resources management is transferred to local communities
in order to achieve the above objectives
 Where local communities benefit sustainably from natural resources
 A high social and economic welfare.
The SWG also collated the threats as they are presented in Annex 5.
The recommendations of the SWG for the Management plan were as follows:
 The boundaries of the Yildiz Mountains Biosphere should be reviewed and revised by
including Sergen in the Biosphere.
 The municipalities which are recognized in the Biosphere are the followings:
a) İğneada
b) Demirköy
c) Kıyıköy
Other related municipalities are the followings:
15


4.4
d) Yenice
e) Sergen
The Management Committee should be transformed into a more democratic structure by
increasing the number of civil members, particularly community representatives. It is
proposed that the Management Committee should consist of 20 members plus a
Chairperson, with no more than 10 being from the public agencies and the rest from the
village communities.
“The Management Committee can only take decisions, which are not only in line with the
policies and strategies of the FDDS but also all the national sectoral policies”.

While selecting/electing the Advisory Committee, the following criteria should be
considered:
o an ability to clearly express themselves;
o knowledge and familiarity with the problems of the Biosphere;
o those who have internalized the objectives of the Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project;
o those who participated in the Stakeholder Working Group regularly;
o those who are well recognized in their locality;
o at least 30% representation by women;
o any acceptable excuse should be replaced
o Cooperative heads where there are cooperatives; and
o Muhtars where there are not any cooperatives
o Advisory Committee members who do not attend three consecutive meetings without
any acceptable reason should be replaced.

Regarding zoning:
o The zoning should be consulted to the communities
o While verifying the sattellite images through ground-truthing the elder people in the
closest villages should be contacted to benefit from their long experiences and
observations.
OTHER EVENTS
During the third phase the following activies were carried out to enhance the dialogue among the
stakeholders and with the TAT:
a) Study tour to Bulgaria: SWG members participated in the study tour to Bulgaria on 29-31
July 2009. The study tour not only helped for capacity building but also for team building
among the SWG members.
b) Study tour to Izmir and Aydin: Some SWG members, cooperative board members and
muhtars participated in the study tour to Izmir and Aydin to see good working examples of
cooperatives and to inspire the coop/village representatives with examples of successful
income generating activities. This event paved the way to a network among the community
members and extended their vision regarding their cooperatives and eco-tourism.
c) Cultural Museum in Çukurpınar: The Cultural Museum was initiated by the villagers from
Beypinar and Çukurpinar Villages with some support of the facilitators and the Provincial
Agriculture Directorate staff. It was opened for visitors on 19 October 2009, when the
Steering Committee of the project was meeting in Kirklareli. This event demonstrated the
developed the solidarity between the villagers and collaboration of 2 villages.
16
5.
CONCLUSIONS
The active involvement of the Stakeholder Working Group in the Biosphere management
planning process shows that the participatory process applied by the project has overcome the
initial scepticism and mistrust of the local communities towards the biosphere, given their
previous experience with protected areas. The challenge is now for the agencies concerned to
maintain the momentum created.
Constraints that emerged during the participatory process include the following:

It is to be noted that previous experience of protected areas establishment in the region,
under the auspices of the GEF II Project which led to the creation of the İğneada Longoz
Forest National Park, had generated a lot of antagonism and scepticism. This obviously
made the task of the Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project substantially more difficult, and
required more efforts than anticipated to engage with the stakeholders.

Continuity of the process was sometimes hampered by changes of muhtars after the
local elections, requiring additional meetings with newly elected leaders to secure their
support.

Meetings often had to be held in the evenings because villagers needed to work in the
forest or fields during the day. This meant that people were often tired from their day’s
work, and that provincial agency staff rarely or never attended, as such times were
outside their normal hours of working. This reduced not only the opportunities for
capacity building of this staff, but also the likelihood of continuation of the process.

Some villages (e.g. Evciler, Sivriler) were initially not interested in the Project because it
does not have any funds to grant to village initiatives.

It was often necessary to hold additional meetings for women and young people, in order
to overcome the social exclusion inherent in many village communities. When given the
opportunity to participate however, women often proved to be more progressive and
active in their participation.
In line with the overall approach to Project implementation outlined in the Inception
Report, it was planned to use the process to build capacity within the MoEF in designing
and managing participatory processes by having national and provincial staff work with
the facilitation teams. This was moderately successful in so far as a large number of
MoEF staff from Ankara were exposed to the process, although none were able to
participate in all the stages of the process. Staff from the Provincial Directorate of
Environment and Forestry was not able to participate in any of the village meetings due
to their other work commitments. This is likely to jeopardise continuation of the dialogue
with village communities once the Project ends.

The main conclusions and lessons learnt from the process can be summarized as follows:

Establishment of dialogue and building mutual trust take a long time and demand patient
efforts. Although the Project period was too short to ensure the sustainability of this
dialogue, a network of facilitators from the local agencies and community members was
established for post-project activities.
17

The engagement of the people was ensured by exchanging inforlmation and views on the
natural values of Yildiz Mountains, in particular through the presentation of the outputs of
the scientic surveys; study tours and trainings.

Cooperatives should be explored in detail as the corporate body for managing the natural
resources; nevertheless, it is clear that they need considerable capacity building beside
financial support at the beginning.

A women’s cooperative can play a locomotive role for the region; to leave the businessas-usual and moving towards some best practices. Strong will is observed both from the
women and from the Provincial Directorate of Agriculture to this end.
REFERENCES
Beuret, J-E. 2006 a). Environnement et Développement mis en dialogue dans les réserves de
biosphère. Rapport technique et Recueil des fiches techniques. UNESCO-MAB in Dialogue in
biosphere Reserves-References, Practices and Experiences, technical Notes 2-2007, UNESCO,
February 2008, Paris.
Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Kothari, A., and Oviedo, G. 2004. Indigenous and Local Communities
and Protected Areas: Towards Equity and Enhanced Conservation. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland
and Cambridge, UK, xvii + 111 pp. http://app.iucn.org in in Dialogue in biosphere ReservesReferences, Practices and Experiences, technical Notes 2-2007, UNESCO, February 2008,
Paris.
18
ANNEXES
ANNEX 1: YILDIZ DAĞLARI SOSYO-EKONOMIK ANALIZ IÇIN SORU KAĞIDI
Çevre ve Orman Bakanlığı ve Agrer-Agri Consulting-Agrin konsorsiyumu tarafından Avrupa
Komisyonu desteğiyle, Yıldız Dağları köylerinde 2009 yılında yürütülmekte olan Yıldız Dağları
Biyolojik Çeşitlilik ve Doğal Kaynakları’nın Korunması ve Sürdürülebilir Kalkınması Projesi
kapsamında yöre için sosyo-ekonomik durum analizi yapılmaktadır. Sorulara vereceğiniz yanıtlar
Tarih:…………….
Yer:……………..……..…
bizim için yol gösterici ve aydınlatıcı olacaktır. İçtenlikle vereceğiniz yanıtlar için şimdiden
teşekkürler.
Formu Dolduran Kişi:…………….
Toplantıya katılan kişi sayısı:…..….
1. Köyün/Kasabanın adı :
En yakın merkeze uzaklığı:………………………
2. Köyün/kasabanın nüfus ve cinsiyet dağılımı
2.a. Köy kaç hane?
2.b.Toplam nüfus kaç kişi:
2.c. Kış nüfusu ve yaz nüfusu arasındaki fark ne kadar?
Aralarında mevsimsel işçi var mı?
2.d. Sizce 5-10 yıl sonra köyün nüfusu artar mı? Niye?
3. Köyde/Kasabada göç
3a. Köye hangi ülke/bölgeden göç edildi? Yugoslavya/Bulgaristan/Yunanistan/Selanik
3b.Köyden kaç hane göç etti?
3c. Köyden yurtdışına göç eden oldu mu? Olduysa, kaç hane?
3d. Köy göç alıyor mu?
3e. Niye göç ettiler?
3f.Göç edenler ne sıklıkta köye gelir?
3g. Göç edenlerin arazisi ne oldu?
3h. Köye geri dönen hane oldu mu?
4. Nüfusun yaş bileşimi
Çocuk
Genç
Orta yaşlı
19
Yaşlı
Hane büyüklüğü nedir köyde?
..
Toplam :.................................
5 Köyde/kasabada eğitim durumu:
(
(
(
(
(
(
) Okur-yazar değil Parantez içine sayı yazılacak.
) Okur yazar
) İlkokul mezunu
) Orta okul ve dengi mezunu
) Lise ve dengi okul mezunu
) Yüksekokul/Fakülte mezunu
6. Sosyal Altyapı
Yol durumu (asfalt /stabil /ham yol /patika):………………………..
Kanalizasyon şebekesi var mı? :……………………..
Açık çukur
Kapalı çukur
Dereye dökülüyor
İçme suyu durumu (evlere borularla geliyor / sadece köy çeşmesinde var) :……………….
Çöpler nereye dökülüyor?
7. Köye özgü yemek çeşidi var mı?
8. Köye/ yöreye özgü folklor, müzik var mı?
9. Köye/ yöreye özgü el işleri var mı?
10. El sanatlarından (halı, nakış, dikiş vs) gelir var mı?
10a. El sanatlarıyla ilgili bir kurs olsa katılmak ister misiniz?
a. Evet (Evetse, ne kursu?)
b. Hayır.
11. Köyde en sevdiğiniz gelenek hangisidir?
12. Yıldız Dağları denilince ne aklınıza geliyor? Flip chart
(Efsaneler, hatıralar, canlı varlığındaki değişmeler vd.)
(Festivaller, eğlenceler, kutsal-mitolojik mekanlar,)
13. Köyde en çok kimin sözü geçer? Köyde kim tuttuğunu koparır, köyde kim saygındır?
20
14. Bir sorunla karşılaştığınızda kime danışırsınız, kime gidersiniz ve güvenirsiniz?
15. Suni (Kimyasal) gübre kullanıyor musunuz?
a. Evet
b. Hayır
16. Kimyasal ilaçlama, hormon, antibiyotik var mı?
a. Evet
b. Hayır
17. Köyde başlıca geçim kaynakları (%) nelerdir?
Tarım (%)
:…..
Hayvancılık (%) :….
Orman işçiliği (%): ….
Orman ürünleri üretimi /işleme: .........
Tarım işçiliği (%):….
Ticaret
Turizm (%)
:….
Emekli(%)
:….
Esnaf(%)
:…
Devlet memuru :.......
18. Köyün/kasabanın toplam arazi varlığı ve kullanma biçimi :
Kuru tarım mı yapıyorsunuz, sulu mu?
a.
Tarım alanı (ha)
Ekilen tarla toprağı (ha)
Ekilen ürünler : Buğday
/ Arpa /
Yonca /
Korunga /
Mısır /
Ayçiçeği/ Nadasa
bırakılan/ Bağ-meyve bahçesi / Sebze bahçesi / Diğer ürünler nelerdir?
18b. Süt toplama merkezi var mı?
a. Evet
b. Hayır
c.
Bilmiyorum
18c.Seracılık var mı?
a. Evet
b. Hayır
18d. Çayır-otlak alanı
18e. Köyde/kasabada toprağı olmayan hane var mı?
Kaç hane?
21
18f. En büyük araziye sahip kaç hane var?
18g. 20-30 yıl geriye gidince neler üretiliyordu?
18h. Bugüne göre değişiklik var mı?
19. Köyde/kasabada alet-makine :
19a.Çoğunlukla makinalı tarım mı yapılıyor?
19b. Hangi makinalar? traktör/balya makinası/hasat
makinası/sulama motoru
20. Tarımsal Ürünlerin Pazarlanması
a. Tarımsal ürünlerin pazarlama biçimleri
Ürünler
Kime
Nerede
Nasıl Pazarlanıyor?
........................
..........................
....................
………..
b.Sulama
Sulu tarım yapıyor musunuz?
c.Tarım için su kaynağınız var mı?
d.Eskiden su kaynaklarınız nasıldı? Şimdi nasıl?
e.Tarımda kullandığınız suyu nerelerden sağlıyorsunuz?
a. Derelerden
b. Kuyu suyu
c. Sulama kanalı
d. Diğer
f. Ne tip sulama yapıyorsunuz?
g.Damla sulamadan haberiniz var mı?
h.Sebze meyve üretenlerde damla sulama var mı?
21.Hayvan Varlığı ve Hayvansal Üretim
a. Kasabada/köyde hayvan sayıları
Büyükbaş hayvan sayısı ne kadar?
Küçükbaş hayvan sayısı ne kadar?
Hayvancılık azaldı mı?
Son 15-20 yılda mera varlığında bir değişim oldu mu? Neler değişti? Buna etkili olan faktörler
nelerdir?
22
22. Arıcılık
a. Kaç hane arıcılıkla uğraşıyor?
23. Hayvansal Üretim
23a. Süt ürünlerinde ve fiatta azalma oldumu?
23 b. Canlı hayvan satışında ve fiyatta azalma oldu mu?
24. Hayvansal Ürünler Nasıl Satılıyor?
a. Ürünler
Kime
Nerede
Nasıl Satılıyor?
Süt
........................
.................................
...............................
Et
........................
.................................
...............................
Canlı hayvan
........................
.................................
...............................
Bal
.......................
.................................
...............................
b. Hayvanların veriminden memnun musunuz?
a. Evet
b. Hayır
c.
Bilmiyorum
c. Artırmak için ne yapmalı?
d. Köyün merası var mı?
e.Sizce köyün meraları yeterli mi?
a. Evet
b. Hayır
f.Yeterli değilse, ne yapılmalı?
g.Hayvanları nasıl besliyorsunuz? (saman mı, yem bitkisi mi, suni yem mi, çayıra mı çıkarıyorsunuz?)
Kışın
Yazın
h.Hayvanları nerede otlatıyorsunuz? ( Bu soru harita çizdirerek de sorulabilir.)
25. Orman köy ilişkileri?
a. Köyünüzde ne kadar orman alanı var? Hangi orman işletme sınırları içerisinde?
b. Orman köy ilişkilerini nasıl ve kimler karar veriyor?
c. Köyde ormandan mantar toplanıp satılıyor mu?
d.. Kime satıyorsunuz? Ne kadar kazanıyorsunuz?
23
e. Köyde ormandan başka toplanıp satılan ürün var mı?
a. Kekik
b. Böğürtlen
c.
Ihlamur
d. Çilek
e. Mantar
f.
Kızılcık
g. Yaban elması
h. Diğer
f. Doğadan toplayıp sattığınız ürün var mı?
26. Ormancılık
a. Köyde orman işçisi var mı?
a. Hayır (25. Soru’ya geçiniz.)
b. Evet
Toplam ...........; ......... erkek; ......... kadın
b. Orman işçilerinin bir kooperatifleri ya da başka bir örgütleri var mı? Varsa ismi nedir ve kaç üyesi
var? Bu kooperatif hangi tarihte kuruldu? OGM ile nasıl çalışılıyor?
c. Ormancılıktan geçen yıl ne kadar kazandınız? ........................ TL
d. Ormandan yakacak ihtiyacınızın ne kadarını karşılayabiliyorsunuz?
a. Tümünü
b. Yarıdan fazlasını
c. Üçte birinden azını
d. Hiç karşılamıyorum
e. Parayla odun alıyor musunuz?
27. Balıkçılık
a.Tatlı su balıkçılığı yapılıyor mu?
b.Balıkçılıkta verimin düşme nedenleri nelerdir?
c.Balıklar nereye pazarlanıyor?
d.Bu yöre avcılık açısından önemli mi? Eskiden geyik var mıydı? Vuruyor muydunuz?
e. Daha çok ne avcılığı var? Kaçak av var mı?
28. Turizm /Ekoturizim
28a. Köyün doğa turizmi açısından bir önemi var mı?
24
28b. Turistler gelince ne faaliyetlerde bulunuyor?
a. Yürüyüş
b. Kamp yapma
c. Balık tutma
d. Avlanma
e. Denize, göle girme
f. Çiçekleri, böcekleri inceleme
g. Kuş gözleme
h. Diğer (Açıklama yazınız)
28c. Turizme ilgi artıyor mu? İyi bir organizasyonla uzun dönemde turizm köye bir kaynak sağlayabilir
mi?
28d. Sizce bu yöreyi nasıl tanıtabiliriz? İnsanları buraya nasıl çekebiliriz?
28e.Turizm konusunda burada bir kapasite var mı? Varsa nasıl geliştirilebilir?
28f. Turizmle ilgili bir iş yapmayı düşünür müsünüz? Evetse, nasıl bir iş?
28g. Turizmin ne etkisi olur?
a. Gelir getirir.
b. Yöreyi tanıtır.
c. Ahlakı bozar.
d. Düzeni bozar.
e. Kültürümüze zarar verir.
f. Kültürümüzü değiştirir.
g. Bir zararı olmaz.
h. Bilmiyorum.
28h. Sizce köy için turizmin olumlu etkileri nelerdir?
28i. Sizce köy için turizmin olumsuz etkileri nelerdir?
28j. Turizmin ileride olumlu /olumsuz etkileri olabilir mi?
28k. Köyde kaç pansiyon var?
29. Köyde/kasabada kooperatif ve benzeri örgütlenme (sulama birliği, üretici birliği, tarımsal
kredi koop., tarımsal kalkınma koop, ziraat odası vs) var mı?
29a. Bu örgütlenmeler kendi içerinde nasıl bir karar alma mekanizması kullanıyorlar ve devletle nasıl
çalışıyorlar?
29b. Bu kooperatiflerin köyün yaşam kalitesine bir katkısı var mı?
29c. Köyde sivil toplum kuruluşu var mı? Dernek ? Avcılık Derneği?
30. Sizce kooperatif başarılı mı?
a. Evet
b. Hayır
25
31. Kooperatif başarısızsa niye başarısız olmuştur?
a. Bilgi eksikliği
b. Deneyim eksikliği
c. Hesap kitap bilmeme
d. Tüccar baskısı
e. Sermaye eksikliği
f. Kuruculara güvenmeme
g. Başkana güvenmeme
h. Bilmiyorum.
i. Hepsi
32. Köyde/kasabada kredi kullanımı
Köyde son yıllarda kredi kullanıldı mı?
Köyde krediye ilgi azalıyor mu?
Ne kredisi ? (Tarım, hayvancılık, ticaret)
Kredi kullanan hane sayısı nedir?
b. Köyde alınan hibe/ yardım/ desteklerin nitelikleri ve etkisi me oldu?
a. Or-Köy
b. GEF-II
c.
Özel İdare
d. Sosyal Yardımlaşma
e. Belediye
f.
Köye Hizmet Götürme Birliği
g. Çiftçi Birlikleri
33. Köyde bu kurumların desteklediği proje oldu mu?
33a. Destekler niye başarısız oldu?
34. Köyünüzdeki ekonomik faaliyetleriniz ve yaşam tarzınız doğrultusunda daha iyi bir yaşam
için nelerin düzelmesini bekliyorsunuz? Neler değişmeli?
35. Sizce köyün doğal varlıklar açısından en önemli 3 sorunu nedir?
36. Çözüm için öneriniz nedir?
37. Yıldız Dağlarında sizin için ne değerlidir?
38. Son 10 yılda yaşadığınız doğal çevrede bir değişim gözlemlediniz mi?
26
ANNEX 2: TRAINING MATERIALS
BİYOSFER REZERVLERİ
Biyosfer Rezervi Nedir?
Biyosfer, yaşamı destekleyen kara parçası, su ve atmosferin tümüne verilen isimdir. Biyosfer
rezervleri, uluslararası önem taşıyan ve Birleşmiş Milletler Eğitim, Bilim ve Kültür Kurumu’nun
(UNESCO) İnsan ve Biyosfer Programı (MAB) kapsamındaki karasal ve/ veya kıyı
ekosistemlerine sahip alanlardır. Biyosfer rezervleri biyolojik çeşitliliğin korunması ile, kalkınma
ve kültürel değerlerin devamlılığı arasındaki çatışmaların sürdürülebilir çözümü için geliştirilmiş
bir yaklaşımdır. Biyosfer rezervleri koruma ile birlikte alan kullanımlarını da dikkate alır; ikisi
arasında sürdürülebilirlik ilkelerine uyumlu bir ilişki kurarak bölgesel kalkınmayı gerçekleştirmeyi
amaçlar. İlk olarak 1974’te ortaya atılan biyosfer rezervi kavramı 1995’te gözden geçirilmiştir.
Biyosfer rezervlerinin işlevleri
Biyosfer rezervlerinin koruma, kalkınma ve bilim olarak üç temel işlevi vardır. Koruma, genetik
kaynakların, türlerin, ekosistemin ve peyzajın korunmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlar.
Kalkınma, alanda yaşayan halkın, ekonomik ve sosyal gelişimi, sosyo-kültürel ve ekolojik
bakımdan sürdürülebilir şekilde desteklenmesi biçiminde özetlenebilir. Bilim işlev ise, yerel,
ulusal ve küresel ölçekte doğa koruma ve kalkınma çabalarına dönük bilimsel araştırma, izleme,
eğitim ve bilgi değişimini desteklemek olarak tanımlanır.
Biyosfer rezervinin özellikleri
Biyosfer rezervleri mutlak koruma bölgesi, yani çekirdek bölge, tampon bölge ve geçiş bölgesi/
gelişme bölgesi olmak üzere üç bölgeden oluşmaktadır. Genellikle çekirdek ve tampon bölgelerin
yasal olarak koruma altına alınması gerekir. Dünyadaki birçok biyosfer rezervi milli park, dünya
miras alanları, Ramsar alanları gibi o ülkenin doğa koruma yasaları ile koruma altına alınmış
alanları da içine alır. Biyosfer rezervi İnsan ve Biyoküre Programı (MAB) ile, disiplinlerarası bir
araştırma ve kapasite geliştirmeyi sağlar. Örnek korunan ve kullanılan alanlar oluşturmayı
hedefler. BR’lerinin en önemli özelliği yerel halkın, alanın yönetimine ve alınan kararlara çeşitli
komiteler yoluyla katılımının sağlanması ve bunun pogramlı bir biçimde desteklenmmesi ve
özendirilmesidir.
Dünyada, 102 ülkede 507 biyosfer rezervi bulunmaktadır.
Biyosfer rezervinin yararları
Biyosfer rezervleri:
 Yurttaşlar ve kamu kurumları arasında çevre ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma konularında
bilinçlenmeyi artırır.
 Bir eğitim ve öğrenme örnek alan olarak koruma ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma
konularında, diğer korunan alanlarda da kullanılabilir yaklaşımları araştırır ve uygular.
27

Ülkelerin, Yerel Gündem 21, Biyolojik Çeşitlilik Sözleşmesi, Birleşmiş Milletler
Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Eğitimi On Yılı ve Bin Yıl Kalkınma Hedefleri amaçlarını
uygulama araçlarından biridir.

Ulusal sınırları aşan, büyük doğal alanlarda, sınıraşan biyosfer rezervleri
oluşturulmasına olanak verir. Bu, ilgili ülkelerin katılımıyla uzun dönem işbirliği
olanaklarını sağlar.
Dünya Biyosfer Rezervleri Ağı
İnsan ve Biyosfer Programı (MAB), 1970’lerin başında oluşturulmuştur. MAB, Dünya Biyosfer
Rezervleri Ağı’nı, bilgi paylaşımı, araştırma ve izleme, eğitim ve katılımcı karar alma aracı olarak
görmektedir. Dünya Biyosfer Rezervleri Ağı ise:
 Biyolojik çeşitlilik kaybını azaltmayı;
 Geçim kaynaklarını geliştirmeyi;
 Çevresel sürdürülebilirliği sağlamak için toplumsal, ekonomik ve kültürel koşulları
geliştirmeyi amaçlar.
Korunan Alanlar ve Biyosfer Rezervleri Arasındaki Farklar
Biyosfer rezervleri bir korunan alan kategorisi değildir. Biyosfer rezervleri biyolojik çeşitlilik ve
doğal kaynak yönetiminde uygulanan bir yaklaşımdır. Bu özelliği ile diğer korunan alanlardan
ayrılır. Bir anlamda korunan alan ile korunan alanla organik bağı bulunan taraflar arasındaki
ilişkiyi düzenleyici bir mekanizmadır. Genel hatları ile korunan alanlar ile biyosfer rezervleri
arasındaki farklar aşağıda belirtilmiştir.
Korunan Alanlar
Biyosfer Rezervleri
Çoğunlukla tek bir amaç için belirlenmiş
(Örneğin doğa koruma) nispeten küçük
alanlar
Tek bir amaç ya da işlev (koruma)
Farklı amaçlar için yönetilen alanların
oluşturduğu bir mozaik (koruma, kalkınma
amaçlı vb.)
Farklı
tipteki
amaç
ve
işlevlerin
uyumlulaştırılması
(koruma,
kalkınma,
bilimsel destek)
Çok taraflılık
(Tarım, ormancılık, balıkçılık, turizm, bilim,
yerel ve ulusal kurumlar)
Hedeflenen tek bir özellik
-Doğal
-Kültür
-Peyzaj
-Tarihi
Tek bir yönetici
(Yasal ve idari sorumlulukları açıkça
tanımlanmış bir alanın yönetimi)
Kesin bir bölgeleme
Yasal ve teknik düzenlemelerle alan koruma
Birden fazla yönetimin koordinasyonu
Daha çok amaçlı ve esnek bir bölgeleme
Farklı
düzenlemelerle
alan
koruma
(sözleşmeler, antlaşmalar, protokoller vb.)
28
Yönetim Planı (Uzun Devreli Gelişme Planı)
Sınırları kesin olarak tanımlanmış bir alana
tek
senaryolu
bir
planın
hazırlanıp,
uygulanması
Yalın ekosistem yaklaşımı
Biyosfer rezervi koordinasyon rehberi,
Sınırları esnek olarak tanımlanmış bir alana
seçenekleri de içeren planların hazırlanıp,
uygulanması (Esnek, değişen koşullara uyum
sağlayan bir yönetim anlayışı)
Peyzaj Ekolojisi yaklaşımı
Sorumlu yönetici
Koordinatör
UNESCO MAB Programının Tarihçesi
23 Ekim 1970’te de XVI. UNESCO Genel Konferansı’nda İnsan ve Biyoküre (MaB=Man and
Biosphere) Programı kabul edilmiş ve uygulanmaya başlanmıştır. Programın koordinasyonu için
bir “Uluslararası Koordinasyon Birimi” (ICC=International Coordination Council) kurulmuştur.
UNESCO İnsan ve Biyoküre (MAB=Man and the Biopshere) Programı doğal kaynakların etkin
yönetimi için bilimsel olarak irdelenmesi, bu kaynakların yönetiminde karşılaşılan sorunların
analizi ve çözüm yollarının araştırılması, doğal kaynak yönetim planlarının hazırlanması ve
uygulanması için temelinde insan olan uluslararası, disiplinlerarası ve devletlerarası bir
programdır. Programın ana yaklaşımını insan ve ekosistemler arasındaki ilişkilere bütüncül
olarak yaklaşması ve insan ile doğa arasındaki ilişkileri birbirinden ayrılmaz bir “ilişkiler yumağı”
olarak kabul etmesidir.
1974 yılında 14 temel çalışma alanı belirlenmiştir:
1. Tropikal ve Subtropikal ormanlarda artan insan etkisinin ekolojik sonuçları
2. Ilıman kuşak ve Akdeniz kuşağında orman peyzajından yararlanmanın ekolojik etkileri
3. Maki, Savan ve Çayır kuşaklarında insan aktivite ve yararlanmalarının etkisi (Ilıman
kuşak ile Kurak kuşak arasında kalan kesim)
4. Kurak ve Yarı-Kurak kuşakta akarsulardan yararlanmak başta olmak üzere insan
faaliyetlerinin ekosistem dinamikleri üzerine olan etkileri
5. Kıyı alanları, deltalar, akarsular, sazlık alanlar ve göllerde insan faaliyetlerinin kolojik
etkileri
6. İnsan faaliyetlerinin dağ ve tundra ekosistemlerine olan etkileri
7. Ada ekolojisi ve ada ekosistemlerinden yararlanma
8. Doğal alanlar ve doğal alanların biyolojik çeşitliliğinin korunması
9. Karasal ve sulak ekosistemlerde gübreleme ve zararlılarla mücadele çalışmalarının
ekolojik sonuçları
10. Büyük ölçekli yapı ve tesislerin insan ve çevresine olan etkileri
11. Endüstriyel bölgelerin enerji kullanımına ekolojik yaklaşım
12. Değişen çevresel koşullar ile insanın genetik ve demografik yapısı ve ortama uyum
özellikleri arasındaki ilişkiler
13. Çevre kalitesi bilinci
14. Çevre kirlenmesi ve biyoküreye etkileri
1993 yılında Rio Konferansının sonuçları da dikkate alınarak yukarıda sıralanan 14 proje konusu
içerisinden öncelikli 5 alt konu belirlenmiştir (Erdmann et.al. 1995) .
29
Bu konular;
1. Biyolojik çeşitliliğin korunması ve ekolojik süreçlerin devamlılığını sağlama,
2. Sürdürülebilir yararlanma stratejilerinin belirlenmesi ve uygulanması,
3. Bilgi aktarımı ve çevre eğitiminin desteklenmesi (özendirilmesi),
4. Sürdürülebilir bir kalkınma modelinin oluşturulması,
5. Bir Küresel Çevre Gözlem Sistemi’nin kurulmasıdır.
Seville Stratejisi ile UNESCO, biyosfer rezervlerine ilişkin hedeflerini şu başlıklar altında
toplamıştır;
1. Biyosfer rezervleri uygulamasından yararlanılarak doğal ve kültürel değerlerin korunması,
2. Bir alan kullanım modeli olarak biyosfer rezervleri uygulamasından sürdürülebilir
kalkınma çabalarında yararlanmak,
3. Biyosfer rezervlerinden araştırma, izleme ve eğitim amaçlı yararlanmak,
4. Biyosfer rezervi uygulamalarını yaygınlaştırmak.
EuroMAB 2007 Bölgesel toplantısının temel tartışma konuları

Biyosfer rezervlerinin sürdürülebilir kalkınma ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma için eğitim
çalışmalarına katkısı




Biyosfer rezervlerinden iklim değişikliğine uyum çabalarında yararlanma
Biyosfer rezervi bölgelerinin sürdürülebilir kalkınmaya katkısı
Biyosfer rezervlerinden sosyal ve ekonomik kalkınma çabalarında yararlanma
Biyosfer rezervlerinin kentleşme, göç gibi çevresel değişimlere etkisi/tepkisi
Madrid Eylem Planı’nda tanımlanan ve biyosfer rezervleriyle ilişkilendirilen temel sorun alanları:



İklim değişikliği
Ekosistem işlevlerini sağlama
Kentleşmenin ekosistem üzerine baskısı
Madrid Eylem Planında (2008-2013) tanımlanan öncelikli konular:




İşbirliği, yönetim ve iletişim
Biyosfer rezervi bölgelerinin (bölgelemenin) işlevleri
Bilim ve kapasite arttırılması
Yerel, bölgesel ve uluslararası düzeyde işbirliği / ortaklıklar kurulması olarak
belirlenmiştir.
Eylem Planı için: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0016/001633/163301e.pdf
•Sürdürülebilir kalkınma için bilimsel deneyim paylaşımı ve politika oluşturmaya katkıda
bulunmak.
•Doğal kaynak yönetimi ve çevrenin kullanımında bilime daha fazla ağırlık vermek•Temel bilimler
ve enerji alanları öncelikli olmak üzere bilim, teknoloji ve yeni buluşların gerçekleştirilmesi için
kapasite oluşturma çalışmalarını destekleme
•Afet öncesi hazırlıklar ve doğal afetlerin etkilerinin azaltılması için yürütülmesi gereken
çalışmalara katkı yapma
30
Ulusal MAB Komitelerinin Yapısı
Ulusal MAB Komitelerinin oluşturulurken temel yaklaşım bilim adamları ile karar vericileri bir
araya getirmek ve birlikte çalışmalarını sağlamaktır. Bu nedenle Ulusal MAB Komitelerinin
oluşturulmasında genel olarak kullanılan temel ölçütler şunlardır:
- MAB Ulusal Komiteleri oluşturulurken ulusal düzeyde çalışan araştırma merkezleri,
bilimsel araştırma kurumları, üniversitelerin temsilcileri bu komite içerisinde yer almalıdır.
- Doğa koruma ve doğa koruma alanları yönetiminden sorumlu ilgili bakanlık ve arazi
kullanım ve çevre düzeni planlarından sorumlu bakanlık ve kurum temsilcileri bu
komitede temsil edilmelidir.
- Komite yapısı çok disiplinli olmalı ve fen ve sosyal bilim dallarından bilim adamlarını
içermelidir.
- Ülkedeki biyosfer rezervlerinin yönetici ve/veya koordinatörleri bu komite içerisinde yer
almalıdır.
- Komitede kadınlara ve genç bilim insanlarına öncelik verilmelidir.
Ulusal MAB Komitelerinin Temel İşlevleri











Ülkede UNESCO MAB Programı ile ilgili politika ve planların oluşturulmasında ilgili kamu
kurumlarına danışmanlık yapmak.
UNESCO MAB Programı hakkında toplumun ilgili kesimlerini bilgilendirmek.
UNESCO MAB Programı kapsamında yürütülen uluslararası, bölgesel ve ulusal
çalışmaları izlemek, değerlendirmek, katkıda bulunmak ve biçimlendirmek.Ulusal
düzeyde MAB ile ilgili yapılan çalışmaların eşgüdümünü gerçekleştirmek.
Ülke adına MAB Uluslararası Koordinasyon Kurulu ile gerekli iletişimi sağlamak.
Web sayfası hazırlamak ve güncellemek.
Bakanlık tarafından önerilen aday biyosfer rezervleri arasından, ülkenin aday biyosfer
rezervlerini belirlemek.
UNESCO tarafından ilan edilmiş biyosfer rezervleri için ortak bir koruma, kullanma,
geliştirme ve yönetim stratejisi belirlemek.
Biyosfer rezervleriyle ilgili koruma ve kalkınma çalışmalarını destekleyen ve çıkabilecek
sorunların çözümüne yönelik ilke kararları almak.
Doğal kaynakların korunması ve doğal kaynaklardan sürdürülebilir yararlanma
konusunda ulusal bilincin oluşturulması, geliştirilmesi ve yaygınlaştırılması ile toplumun
bu alanlara olan ilgisinin ve desteğinin güçlendirilmesi için kamu kurum ve kuruluşları,
yerel yönetimler, yöre halkı, bilimsel kuruluşlar ve STK’larla işbirliği içerisinde eğitim ve
bilgilendirme çalışmaları gerçekleştirmek.
Biyosfer rezervi yönetim planlarının uygulanması ile ilgili kararlar almak.
Gerektiğinde, biyosfer rezervleri ağından çıkartılacak alanları belirlemek ve bu alanları
Milli Komisyon vasıtasıyla UNESCO MAB Sekreteryasına bildirmek.
31
Biyosfer Rezervi Belirleme Ölçütleri
1. Küresel biyocoğrafya bölgelerinden birini temsil etmelidir.
2.Korunması gerekli peyzaj tipleri, ekosistemler, flora ya da fauna türlerini içermelidir.
3.Bulunduğu bölgede sürdürülebilir alan kullanımları için örnek olmalıdır.
4.Biyosfer rezervlerinin üç temel işlevini – koruma, kalkınma ve bilimsel destek- yerine
getirebilecek ölçüde yeterli büyüklüğe sahip olmalıdır.
5.Üç temel bölge içermelidir: Yasal olarak koruma altına alınmış çekirdek bölge, sınırları açıkça
tanımlanmış tampon bölge ve bunları çevreleyen genişçe bir geçiş bölgesi.
Biyosfer Rezervi Başvuru Hazırlıkları
Biyosfer rezervi olabilme ölçütlerine uygun bir alanı ilgili Bakanlık danışma süreciyle seçebilir.
Başvuru dosyası hazırlama
o Gerekli flora, fauna, ekosistem ve sosyo-ekonomik durum hakkında araştırmalar
tamamlanmış olmalı.
Başvuru formu http://www.unesco.org/mab/BRs/offDoc.shtml adresinden temin edilebilir.






Başvuru formundaki bölümler yetmezse flora, fauna raporları, bölgeleme haritası
eklenebilir.
Yöntem
İlgi grupları ilgili Bakanlık tarafından önceden belirlenmeli.
İlgi gruplarının katılımıyla bölgeleme, alan kullanımı, biyosfer rezervinin ismi ve sınırları
belirlenmeli.
Açık, alanın özelliklerine uygun bir iletişim yöntemi benimsenmeli.
Başvuru formu üç bölümdür.
1. Bölüm Yasal Çerçevede belirtilen biyosfer rezervinin işlev ve ölçütlerine aday alanın, ne
kadar uygun olduğunu anlatan bir özetten oluşur. Ayrıca, ilgili kurumların adaylık
başvurusunun onayını belirten imzaları içerir.
2. Bölüm daha ayrıntılı ve alanı açıklayıcı bilgilerden oluşur. Alanın sosyal, fiziksel ve
biyolojik özelliklerinden ve kurumsal durumundan bahseder.
 Arazi kullanımının tarihçesi
 Önerilen biyosfer rezervinde insan nüfusu
 Biyosfer rezervinde yaşayan yerel halkla ilgili bilgiler
 Temel ekonomik faaliyetler
 Kültürel önemi (Tarihi, arkeolojik, sosyal ve mimari önemi)
 Fiziksel özellikler
 Biyolojik özellikler
 Birincil habitat/ arazi örtüsü tipi
 Karakteristik türler
 Önemli doğal süreçler
 Temel insan etkileri
 İlgili yönetim faaliyetleri
32
3. Bölüm Ekteki özet bilgilerden oluşur. Alan biyosfer rezervi olarak onaylandıktan sonra
buradaki bilgiler Biyosfer Rezervleri Rehberi web sitesinde (MABnet) kullanılacaktır.
Başvuru Formu
Başvuru formu İngilizce, Fransızca veya İspanyolca dillerinden birinde doldurulmalıdır. MAB
Sekreteryasına iki nüsha halinde gönderilmelidir.
1. İmzalar, bölgeleme haritası ve destekleyici belgeleri içeren orijinal yazılı nüsha UNESCO
Milli Komisyonu ve/veya UNESCO Daimi Delegasyonu gibi Resmi UNESCO kanalları
aracılığıyla UNESCO MAB Sekreteryasına sunulur.
2. Disket ya da CD’de başvuru formu ve mümkünse haritalar (özellikle bölgeleme haritası)
elektronik olarak sunulmalıdır. Bunlar doğrudan MAB Sekreteryasına gönderilebilir.
UNESCO
Division of Ecological and Earth Sciences
1, rue Miollis
F-75352 Paris Cedex 15, France
Tel: ++33 1 45 68 41 51
Fax: ++33 1 45 68 58 04
Email: [email protected]
Başvurunun İncelenmesi ve Kabulü
UNESCO MAB Sekreteryası başvuru formunu inceler. Eksiklik varsa tamamlanması için geri
gönderir. Başvuru formu eksiksizse, MAB Uluslararası Koordinasyon Konseyine gönderir.
MAB Uluslararası Koordinasyon Konseyi yılda bir defa toplanır ve Biyosfer Rezervi adaylık
dosyalarını değerlendirir. Adaylık kabul edildiğinde Biyosfer Rezervi diploması UNESCO Milli
Komisyonu’na gönderilir. Komisyon da diplomayı ilgili Bakanlığa iletir. İlgili Bakanlık da biyosfer
rezervine sunar.
Biyosfer Rezervlerinin İlanı
Biyosfer Rezervi ilanı UNESCO tarafından yapılmaktadır. MAB Uluslararası Koordinasyon
Konseyi toplantısı sonucu belirlenen yeni biyosfer rezervlerinin listesi bir basın bildirisiyle tüm
dünyaya duyurulmaktadır.
33
SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR KALKINMA
1. “Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma” kavramı içeriği
“Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma” kavramı, “gelecek kuşakların kendi ihtiyaçlarını karşılayabilme
olanağından ödün vermeksizin bugünün ihtiyaçlarını karşılayabilecek kalkınma” olarak
tanımlanmaktadır. Bir başka deyişle, insanla doğa arasında denge kurarak doğal kaynakları
sonuna kadar tüketmeden, gelecek nesillerin ihtiyaçlarının karşılanmasına imkan verecek şekilde
bugünün ve geleceğin yaşamını ve kalkınmasını programlama anlamını taşımaktadır. Sosyal
yapı, ekonomi ve çevre sürdürülebilir kalkınma yaklaşımının temel üç bileşenidir. Sürdürülebilir
kalkınma yaklaşımı, bir ülkenin bütün ekonomik ve sosyal politikalarının çevresel politika ve
stratejileriyle bütünleştirilmesi sayesinde ancak hayata geçebilecektir.
Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmanın Evrimi
Doğal kaynaklar, ekonomik büyüme için
bedelsiz bir mal...
Çevresel sorunlarıyla sosyal ve ekonomik
sorunların kökeni ayrıdır...
TANIM-1
“Sürdürülebilir kalkınma, günümüzün
ihtiyaçlarının gerektirdiği kalkınmanın,
gelecek kuşakların gereksinmelerini
karşılama kabiliyetlerini ortadan
kaldırmayacak şekilde
gerçekleşmesidir.”
Brundtland Raporu, II. Bölüm, sayfa 54
(Çevre ve Kalkınma üzerine Dünya
Komisyonu, 1987)
34
TANIM-2
“Sürdürülebilir kalkınma, yaşam
kalitesinin, çevredeki yaşamı
destekleyici doğal sistemlerin taşıma
kapasitesi içerisinde kalacak şekilde
iyileştirilmesidir.”
(World Conservation Union (IUCN), BM
Çevre Programı (UNEP) ve World Wide
Ekonomik
faaliyetler,
toplum
tarafından
Fund for Nature (WWF))
gerçekleştirilir.
Topluma
yaşama
mekânı
oluşturan da çevredir…
“Sürdürülebilir kalkınma” yaklaşımı sosyal, ekonomik ve çevresel kapsamda aşağıdaki hususları
öne çıkarmaktadır:







Yaşam kalitesinin artışı; sadece gelir artışını değil her kişinin yaşam koşullarının
iyileşmesini içerir,
Günümüzdeki insanların eşitliği; gelir düzeyi eşitliği, sağlık, bilgi vb. konularda erişim
eşitliğini de içerir,
Nesiller arası eşitlik; gelecek nesillerin en az şu andaki çevresel koşullar kadar iyi
koşullarda yaşamasını içerir,
İnsan refahının sosyal boyutları; hakkaniyet, fırsat eşitliği ve diğer sosyal boyutları içerir,
Kendi kendine yeterlilik; bir sistemin kendi kendini döndürmesini içerir,
Yaşamı destekleyici doğal sistemlerin korunması, iyileştirilmesi,
Taşıma kapasitesine uyulması; alınacak teknik önlemlerle doğal sistemlerin taşıma
kapasitelerine uyulmasını içerir.
Temel olarak sürdürülebilir kalkınma:



Ekonomik açıdan dünya piyasalarıyla rekabet edebilen, insanların temel ihtiyaçlarının
uygun şekilde karşılandığı, refah düzeyini yükseltici,
Toplumsal açıdan hakkaniyetçi, eşitlikçi; dezavantajlı grupları kapsayıcı ve yaşam
kalitesini yükseltici,
Çevre ve doğal sistemler açısından önleyici/koruyucu/iyileştirici/destekleyici
olacak şekilde birbirini destekleyici ve bütünleyici; nesiller içi ve nesiller arasında dengeli olarak
planlanması ve yönetilmesi süreci olarak görülmektedir.
Sürdürülebilir kalkınma yaklaşımının sosyal, ekonomik ve çevresel boyutları içeren politikalarla
hayata geçmesi için bu üç boyutun bir arada planlanması gerekmektedir. Günümüz dünyasında
planlama süreçlerine bakıldığında sektörel, coğrafi, sosyal ve zamansal boyutların göz önünde
bulundurulması gereklidir.
35
Sektörel boyutta sürdürülebilir kalkınmanın hedeflerine ulaşabilmek için sürdürülebilir ulaştırma,
sürdürülebilir arazi kullanımı, sürdürülebilir tarım, sürdürülebilir turizm vb. konularında
uygulamaya geçilmesi gerekmektedir.
Coğrafi boyutta küresel, bölgesel (uluslararası), ulusal, yerel ölçeklerde planlamalar yapılmasının
yanında su havzaları, kıyı alanları, dağlık alanlar gibi küçük ölçekli uygulamalarda da
sürdürülebilir kalkınma temellerinin göz önünde bulundurulması gerekmektedir.
Sosyal boyutta sürdürülebilir kalkınmaya ulaşabilmek için kent, topluluk, iş dünyası, aile, birey,
dezavantajlılar, kadınlar vb. toplum yapıları ve gruplar göz önünde bulundurularak yönetim
planları yapılmalıdır.
Zaman boyutu, uygulamaların izlenmesi, devamlılığı ve etkilerinin değerlendirilmesi süreçlerini
içermektedir. Uygulamalar, nesiller arası boyutu, sosyal çevresel değişimleri karşılayabilmek
amacıyla uzun vadeli planlamaları içermelidir.
2. Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma kavramının ortaya çıkışı
Bugün, insanlığın dünya üzerinde var olabilmesi için doğal kaynakların dengeli kullanılması
zorunlu hale gelmiştir. Eskiden doğal kaynaklar, insanlar tarafından sınırsız oldukları varsayılarak
kullanılmaktaydı. 1970’lerden sonra doğal kaynakların sınırsız olmadığı ve akılcı bir kullanım
yöntemi belirlenmezse hızla tükenecekleri gerçeği dünya çapında tartışılmaya başlandı.
Bu farkındalıkla birlikte “sürdürülebilir kalkınma” yaklaşımının temelleri, 1987 yılında Birleşmiş
Milletler Dünya Çevre ve Kalkınma Komisyonu’nun hazırladığı “Ortak Geleceğimiz” raporunda
atıldı. "Bruntland Raporu" olarak da bilinen bu rapor ekonomik etkinliklerin hali hazırdaki hız ve
nitelikte devamının, insanın dünya üzerindeki varlığı açısından "sürdürülemez" olduğunu tespit
etmektedir.
“sürdürülebilir kalkınma” kavramı, “gelecek kuşakların kendi ihtiyaçlarını karşılayabilme
olanağından ödün vermeksizin bugünün ihtiyaçlarını karşılayabilecek kalkınma” olarak
tanımlanıyor. Bir başka deyişle, insanla doğa arasında denge kurarak doğal kaynakları sonuna
kadar tüketmeden, gelecek nesillerin ihtiyaçlarının karşılanmasına imkan verecek şekilde
bugünün ve geleceğin yaşamını ve kalkınmasını programlama anlamını taşıyor. Sosyal yapı,
ekonomi ve çevre sürdürülebilir kalkınma yaklaşımının üç temel bileşeni. Sürdürülebilir kalkınma
yaklaşımı ancak, bir ülkenin bütün ekonomik ve sosyal politikalarının çevresel politika ve
stratejileriyle bütünleştirilmesi sonucunda hayata geçirilebilir.
“Bruntland Raporu”, kalkınmanın yeni bir döneme girmesinin gerekliliğine vurgu yapar. Bunun
içinse şu şekilde bir planlama önerir; gelecek nesillerin ihtiyaçlarının ve yeryüzündeki yaşam
alanlarının insan etkinliklerini "taşıma" kapasitesinin göz ardı edilmediği, doğal kaynaklar
üzerindeki baskının ve yoksulluğun azaltılması için yeni bir teknolojik ve toplumsal yapılanmanın
hayata geçirildiği bir dönem.
Rapor, tüm bu değişimlerin hayata geçirilmesi adına değişim için küresel gündemin
oluşturulması çağrısı yapmıştır.
36
1972'de Stockholm'de gerçekleştirilen "Birleşmiş Milletler İnsan Çevresi Konferansı"yla
başlayan çevre sorunlarına küresel yanıtlar geliştirme çabaları, Bruntland Raporu'nu izleyen
dönemlerde yeniden yapılanmaya başlamıştır.
Bu toplantılarla beraber dünyadaki sosyal, ekonomik ve çevresel yapıyı küresel ölçekte göz
önünde bulunduran politikaların oluşturulması konusundaki tüm çabalara rağmen gelişmenin
istenilen düzeyde olmadığı görülmüştür.
Gelinen noktada, bu eksikliği gidermek üzere, sürdürülebilirliğin fiilen hayata geçmesini
sağlayacak yeni uygulama araçlarının ortaya konması bir zorunluluk olarak gündemin merkezine
oturmuştur.
Kaynak: http://www.yesilkutu.net/?action=page&p
37
KOLAYLAŞTIRCILIK
Kolaylaştırıcılık nedir?
Kolaylaştırıcılık, grupların etkin ve ortaklaşa çalışmalarını sağlamaya yönelik bir süreçtir.
Kolaylaştırıcılık, bir araya gelen insanların birlikte çalışmak için farklı kapasitelere, ilgi alanlarına
ve geçmiş birikimlere sahip oldukları durumlarda daha da önemli bir hale gelmektedir. En basit
ifadeyle kolaylaştırıcılık katılımcılık süreçlerinde, katılımcıların kendilerini en rahat ifade
edebilecekleri ortamı oluşturur(Gerry, 2000).
Kolaylaştırıcı Kimdir?
Kolaylaştırıcı bir etkinliğin en kısa sürede ve en verimli şekilde hedefine ulaşmasını sağlayan
kişidir. Kendi fikri ya da başkalarının fikirlerini yargılama hakkı yoktur. Tarafsızdır. Hedefi
katılımcıları en etkili bir biçimde sonuca götürmek, sıkılmadan, yorulmadan etkinliği
tamamlamalarını sağlamaktır. Bu konuda eğitim almış deneyimli kişiler bulunmaktadır. Eğitim
alınarak ve bazı beceriler geliştirilerek kısa sürede kolaylaştırıcılık becerileri edinilebilir (KAD,
2007).
Kolaylaştırıcı Kim Değildir?
Sorumlu olan kişi değildir: Kolaylaştırıcı toplantı yöneticisi ya da başkanı değildir. Diğer
katılımcılar üzerinde bir üstünlüğü yoktur. Kolaylaştırıcı yalnızca toplantı sürecini daha kolay,
daha keyifli bir hale getirir.
Konuşmacı değildir: Kolaylaştırıcı diğer katılımcılar gibi etkinliğin konularını araştırarak ve
başkalarının bireysel deneyimlerini aktararak bu öğrenme sürecine katkı koyar.
Uzman değildir: Görüşmeleri ayarlayan, kurgulayan kişi olsa da her konuda bazı taraflar kadar
bilgisi olmayabilir.
İlginin odağı değildir: İyi bir kolaylaştırıcı genellikle diğer katılımcılardan daha az konuşarak
diğerlerinin tartışmalara katılımını sağlar.
Hakem değildir: Kolaylaştırıcı etkinlikte hakem rolü üstlenmez. Ortak öğrenme süreçlerinde
fikirleri “doğru” veya “daha doğru” olarak tanımlamaz (KAD,2007)
Kolaylaştırıcı Nelere Dikkat Eder?
Amaç ve gündem:
Bütün katılımcıların etkinliğinin amacını bilmeleri ve hem fikir olmaları önemlidir. Amaç açık ve
basit olmalıdır ve etkinlik boyunca katılımcıların ihtiyaç duyduklarında görebilecekleri bir yerde
bulunmalıdır. Gündemin açıkça belirlenmiş olması katılımcıların gündeme odaklanmasına ve
kolaylaştırıcının zamanı iyi yönetmesine yardım eder.
38
Tanıştırma:
Etkinliğin başında öncelikle kolaylaştırıcı kendini tanıtmalıdır ve bütün katılımcıların kendilerini
isimleriyle birlikte tanıttıklarından emin olmalıdır. Etkinlikte bütün katılımcıların birbirlerini ismiyle
tanımaları sağlanmalıdır. Bunun için isim kartları kullanılabilir.
Temel kurallar:
Katılımcılar tarafından kabul edilen “toplantının temel kuralları”, etkinlik sürecince herkesin
göreceği yere yazılmalıdır. Örneğin:
- Bütün fikirler bizim için önemlidir,
- Aynı anda konuşmamalıyız, konuşanı dinlemeliyiz,
- Bütün katılımcılar eşittir,
- Cep telefonları kullanılmamalıdır,
- vd
Açık bir ortam:
Bireylerin fikirlerini rahatlıkla ifade edebilmeleri sağlanırsa gruplar çok daha etkin çalışırlar.
Kolaylaştırıcı, tüm katılımcıları diğerlerinin söylediklerini dinlemeye teşvik etmelidir. Eğer
toplantıda gruplaşmalar ve farklı tartışmalar ortaya çıkıyorsa kibarca bunun önüne geçmeli ve
aynı anda sadece bir tartışmanın yürütülmesini sağlamalıdır.
Tüm katılımcıları sürece dahil etmek:
Etkinlikte bazı katılımcılar daha sessiz kalmayı tercih edebilirler, kolaylaştırıcı bu kişileri tespit
ederek sürece katılmaları için teşvik etmelidir. Bazı kişiler kısık sesle konuşabilir ve diğerlerinin
sözlerini kesmelerinden dolayı alınganlık gösterebilirler. Bu kişileri konuşmaya teşvik etmek için
görüş ve katkıları sorulmalıdır.
Dikkat:
Kolaylaştırıcı, etkinliğin her aşamasını dikkatle takip etmelidir. Bir kenara çekilerek bireylerle
uzun tartışmalara girmekten kaçınmalıdır.
Örnek olmak:
Kolaylaştırıcı ortak hareket etmeyi teşvik etmek için kendisi, davranışları ile gruba örnek
olmalıdır. Kolaylaştırıcı dürüst, açık, saygılı ve tarafsız olmalıdır. Anlaşmazlık durumlarında taraf
tutmamalı, grubun görüşünü sormalıdır.
Rahatlık:
Birçok insan kolaylaştırıcılık konusunda gergindir. Bu gerginlik kolaylaştırıcılık görevini yapan
insanların davranışlarına yansır. Unutulmamalıdır ki, kolaylaştırıcının görevi, sorumlu olduğu
grubun beklenen sonucu elde etmesini sağlamaktır – yani sorumluluğu, bu süreci desteklemektir.
Mümkünse, etkinlik sonrasında katılımcıların bazılarından daha sonrası için kolaylaştırıcılık
becerilerini geliştirmek üzere etkinliğin kolaylaştırılması konusunda eleştiriler ve öneriler
alınmalıdır. (GERRY, 2000)
39
Bir
Kolaylaştırıcıda
olması
beceriler:
- İyi Dinleyen
- Fikir Üreten
- Tarafsız
- Uyanık
- Gözlemci
- Sınırları tutabilen
- Geri bildirim veren
- Esnek
- Güven verici
- Lider
gereken
İyi Bir Kolaylaştırıcı Olmak İçin Neler Gerekir?
İyi kolaylaştırıcı olmak için aşağıdakiler gerekmez:
- Akademik dereceye sahip olmak veya her şeyi bilmek,
- Çok akıllı olmak,
- Çok iyi konuşmacı olmak ve
- Çok iyi lider olmak.
Ancak, iyi bir kolaylaştırıcı olmak için gerekenler şunlardır:
Tarafsızlık:
Etkinliğe katılan
koruyabilmektir.
tüm
katılımcılara
karşı
eşit
mesafede
durabilmek
ve
tarafsızlığını
Sıcak bir kişilik:
Herkesin kendisini çekinmeden rahat ve özgürce ifade edebilmesi için sıcak ve samimi bir
yaklaşım, güler yüzlü davranış, toplantının en başından itibaren sıcak bir atmosfer oluşmasına
yardım edecektir.
İyi dinleyici olmak:
Kolaylaştırıcı etkinliği baştan sona kadar dikkatle, aktif şekilde dinler ve takip eder.
Kolaylaştırıcılar gruptaki diğer kişilere göre daha az konuşurlar. Kolaylaştırıcılar genellikle tekrar
eder, özetler veya diğerlerinin söylediklerine doğrudan yanıt verirler. Konunun açıkça
anlaşılabilmesi için gereken kişilere, gereken zamanda ve gereken şekilde, gereken soruları
sorarlar.
Bireylerin hislerine ve ihtiyaçlarına duyarlılık:
Kolaylaştırıcının en önemli becerilerinden biri katılımcıların nasıl hissettiklerini anlamak ve farklı
durumlara nasıl karşılık verdiklerini çözmektir. Birçok kişi rahatsız oldukları veya kızdıkları
konuları paylaşmak yerine tartışmadan hatta çoğu zaman gruptan sessizce çekilirler. Ya da
kendilerini yeterince açık bir şekilde ifade etmekte zorlanabilirler. İyi bir kolaylaştırıcı bu kişileri
40
tespit edip sürece yeniden kazandırmalı; kişilerin diğerleri tarafından açıkça anlaşılabilmesini
kolaylaştırmak üzere, ifadesini daha açık hale getirerek diğerlerine tekrarlamalı ya da sorular
sorarak daha açık anlaşılabilmesini sağlamalıdır.
Grubun hislerine duyarlılık:
Kolaylaştırıcı grup dinamiklerini algılayabilmeli ve onlara cevap verebilmelidir. Kolaylaştırıcı
grupça paylaşılan öfke, sıkıntı, memnuniyet vb duyguları hemen algılayabilmelidir.
Nezaket:
Kolaylaştırıcı bazen grubun iyiliği için rahatsızlık verici eylemler yapmak veya tuhaf şeyler
söylemek zorunda kalır. Bunu dikkatlice ve nazikçe yapmak gerekir. Duygusal konularla
uğraşırken kolaylaştırıcının çok özenli olması gerekir.
İşbirliğine inanmak:
Ortak öğrenme, ortak karar alma süreci bazı durumlarda zaman kaybı, sinir bozucu ve etkin değil
gibi görünebilir ve böyle zamanlarda kolaylaştırıcılar kendi rollerini unutup öğretmen rolüne
bürünmeye ya da toplantı başkanı gibi davranmaya eğilimli olurlar. Ancak yine de ortak öğrenme
ve işbirliği hakkındaki değerlere inanmak, kolaylaştırıcının hâkimiyet kurma rolüne karşı
durabilmesine yardımcı olacaktır.
Zamanlama konusunda hassasiyet:
Kolaylaştırıcı verilen süreyi iyi kullanmalıdır. Toplantının akışına göre katılımcılara konuşmak
üzere vereceği süreyi adil bir şekilde ayarlayabilmeli; katılımcıların diğerlerine göre kendilerine az
süre verildiği hissinin önüne geçmelidir. Tartışmaların odaklandığı konuların, ana hedefle uyumlu
olmasını sağlamalı, ana temadan uzaklaşıldığını hissettiğinde tekrar katılımcıları asıl konuya
odaklamalıdır. Kolaylaştırıcı, zamanın izlenmesi hususunda birinden yardım isteyebilir.
Esneklik:
Kolaylaştırıcılar etkinlik öncesi plan yapmalı; ancak bu planlarını değişen durumlara göre
değiştirmeye de hazırlıklı ve istekli olmalıdırlar. Çoğu zaman katılımcılar, bir oturumu
beklenmedik bir tarafa yönlendirebilir veya belli bir konu üzerinde daha fazla zaman isteyebilir.
Kolaylaştırıcı grubun ihtiyaçlarını ve ortaya çıkan koşulları değerlendirip; buna nasıl yanıt vermesi
gerektiğini hızlıca tanımlayabilmelidir. Her tartışma önemlidir, bu yüzden bazen kolaylaştırıcının
konunun tam olarak ele alınması için bir konuyu kaldırma kararını da verebilmesi gerekir.
Mizah duygusu:
Kolaylaştırıcı etkinliği keyifli hale getirebilmek için grup içi espriler yapabilir veya yapılmasına
fırsat verebilir (KAD,2007). Ancak bu katılımcıların kültür ve değerleri ile uyumlu olmalı; herhangi
bir kişi veya grubu incitmemeli; fazla zaman almamalıdır.
Konuyu enteresan hale getirebilme kapasitesi:
Yukarıda bahsedilen espri yapma da dahil olmak üzere, bir tartışmayı sıkıcı halden çıkarmak
üzere farklı teknikler uygulayabilir. Örneğin, uzun tartışmaların, eğitimlerin olduğu toplantılarda,
ara sıra kalkıp vücut esnetme hareketleri yaptırmak, küçük oyunlar oynatmak gibi eylemlerle
katılımcıların tekrar konuya odaklanabilecek dikkate kavuşmalarını sağlayabilir. Bu yöntem daha
çok yetişkin eğitimi toplantılarının kolaylaştırıcılığında kullanılır.
41
Sabırlı olmak:
Kolaylaştırıcı etkinlik esnasında tartışmaların uzasa ve çatışmalar olsa bile sabırlı olmalı; olanlara
karşı tolerans göstermelidir; sakin kalmayı bilmelidir.
Organizasyon yeteneği:
Bir kolaylaştırıcı, toplantıyı en verimli hale getirecek teknikleri ve süreci belirleyebilmeli
çalıştaylarda kullanılacak malzemeleri, makina ve ekipmanı, kişilerin bu çalıştaylardaki rollerini,
oturma düzenini, kolaylaştıcı teknikleri, programın akışını, organize edebilmelidir.
Çatışmaları çözebilme becerisi:
Katılımcılar arasında tartışmalar sırasında herhangi bir çatışma çıktığında, soğukkanlılığını
koruyarak, tarafsız bir biçimde çatışmanın çözümlenmesine ve tarafların uzlaşmasına yardımcı
olabilmelidir. Gerginliğin arttığı durumlarda toplantıya ara vermek, çatışmanın taraflarıyla başka
bir ortamda görüşerek gerekirse önce ayrı ayrı, sonra bir arada görüşmek ve çözüm üretmek
gerekebilir. Bazı durumlarda çatışma sadece yeterli bilgi olmamasından, tarafların birbirlerinin
gerçek çıkarlarının nerede olduğunu tam olarak anlayamamasından çıkabilmektedir. Bu nedenle
kolaylaştırıcı tarafsız bir kişi olarak bu bilgileri sağlayıp, tarafları bilgilendirerek, çatışmayı
çözmeye çalışmalıdır.
Konuşulan konuya ilişkin bilgi:
Kolaylaştırıcının, konunun uzmanı olması gerekmez; ancak tartışılan konuya ilişkin arkaplan
bilgisinin olması; kullanılan terminolojiye aşina olması; konuya ilişkin kavramları bilmesi gerekir.
Kolaylaştırıcılar İçin Kişisel İpuçları
- Yargılamayın
- Kendi görüşlerinizi başkalarına kabul ettirmeye çalışmayın
- İnsanların sizin yardımınıza ihtiyaçları olduğunu düşünmeyin
- Samimi olun
- Birlikte çalıştığınız insanlara saygı gösterin
- Birlikte çalıştığınız insanlara güvenin
- İnsanların kendi değerleri, davranışları ve dünya görüşleri olduğunu kabul edin
- Geri adım atın ve dinleyin
- Size davranılmasını istediğiniz şekilde sizde diğerlerine davranın
- Diğerlerinden daha iyi bildiğinizi düşünmeyin
- Öğüt vermeyin (RECOFTC, 2002)
Kaynaklar
KAD, 2007, Sulakalan Yönetim Planlaması Rehberi
RECOFTC, 2002, The Art of Building Facilitaion Capacities, A Training Manual Lydia Braakman
and Karen Edwards
Gaffney Gerry, 2000, Facilitation
Rowena Harris, 2002, Consensus Building and Stakeholder Dialogue, Essential Course Notes,
RJH Associates.
42
ANNEX 3: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE NGO WORKSHOP (17 MARCH 2009)
Name
Erhan BAYCAN
Vicdan ALADAĞ
Özgün TİRAN
Hasan ÇALIKUŞU
Yalçın YILDIRIM
Zafer KAMAY
Osman KINAY
Andaç ATAÇ
Sırrı TAYAN
Vatan AVCI
Erkan TABAK
İbrahim METİN
Nevzat ENGİN
Coşkun DİREK
Ayça ENGİN
Sermin
DEMİRGÜLLE
Ör. Gör. Münür
SAYGIN
Fahrettin
YAVUZDOĞAN
Erdoğan DALLI
Ahmet GÜL
Metin YILMAZ
Ahmet MENCÜŞ
Hamdi VALANDOVA
Coşkun TOPAÇ
Fatih TATAR
Türker ALTAN
Sema ALPAN
Sevgi GÜL
Selim CESUR
Okan CAN
Volkan GÖÇ
Institution
Önadım Gazatesi
OMO Kırklareli Temsilciliği
Anadolu Ajansı
Kırklareli Belediyesi AB Proje
Ofisi
Yeşilyurt Gazetesi
e-mail
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Tel
0543 318 64 72
0535 561 31 68
0544 464 51 21
0 532 333 81 77
0 543 330 74 38
Çevre Orman Müd.
Demirköy Avcılar Derneği
DEKAT
DEKAT
Kışlacık Tarım Kooperatifi
Kışlacık Tarım Kooperatifi
Limanköy Su Ürünleri Koop.
Limanköy
yalcin_yildirim39@hotmai
l.com
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
-
Anadolu Üni.-TEMA
[email protected]
0 532 622 93 41
Kurudere Tarım Kalkınma Koop.
-
655 41 36
Beypınar Kalkınma Koop.
Çukurpınar Koop.
S.S. Kızılağaç Tarımsal
Kalkınma Koop.
S.S. Kızılağaç Tarımsal
Kalkınma Koop.
Kırklareli Avcılar Klübü
Yenice Tarımsal Kalkınma Koop.
Yenice Tarımsal Kalkınma Koop.
Ekip Lideri Yardımcısı
Kolaylaştırıcı
Kolaylaştırıcı
Proje Ofis Yöneticisi
Kolaylaştırıcı
Proje Asistanı
-
0 545 659 94 97
0 539 559 83 83
0 535 832 14 25
-
0 542 406 84 60
-
0 542 527 96 56
0 535 464 26 00
0 541 695 51 90
212 53 34
0 535 893 03 91
0 544 656 05 57
0 533 221 13 38
0 537 885 24 39
0 542 466 87 70
0 533 747 09 48
694 40 49
0 544 819 40 39
0 544 651 46 18
0 544 722 40 04
43
ANNEX 4: AGENCIES’ STAFF WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE FIRST ROUND OF VILLAGE MEETINGS
AD SOYADI
Zeynep Büker
Fehmi Arıkan
Serpil Özkan
Aysun Özkan
Gencay Serter
Burak Tatar
Mahmut Akan
Davut Polat
Özgür KELEŞ
Serkan Koyun
Burcu Bursalı
Hülya Özbek
Sibel Ertaş
Nalan Güven
Rıdvan Ulus
Zahit Yılmaz
Adil Akyol
Ahmet Erkmen
Bilge Güven
Hüseyin Cevahiroğlu
Feridun Tandoğan Güven
Mustafa Kızıloğlu
Bahadır Balaban
Aytaç Yılmaz
Ulviye Çebi
Mehmet Ali Gürbüz
Hakan Kılınç
Edip Yağan
Ibrahim Altan
KURUMU
Ministry of Environment and Forestry
Kırklareli Museum
Prov. Agric. dir
Kırklareli Orman İşletme Müdürlüğü
Demirköy DKMP Mühendisliği
Demirköy FDD
Demirköy FDD
Demirköy FDD
Demirköy FDD
Demirköy FDD
Demirköy FDD
Demirköy FDD
Atatürk Soil and Water resources Research Inst.
Atatürk Soil and Water resources Research Inst.
Pınarhisar Agri. Dir
Demirköy Agri. Dir
Vize Agri. Dir.
44
ANNEX 5: OUTPUTS OF THE VILLAGE VISITS AND ‘DROP-IN EVENTS’
Issues
Needs
Milk prices are very low. The price of a kilogram of milk is TL 0.50, whereas the price of a There should be a higher body than the Union of Milk Producers.
kilogram of fodder is TL 0.60. In addition we cannot market the milk products (such as butter
made using churns). There is no buyer. We can make butter either manually or using
machinery. If we use machinery, we cannot even cover the cost of it since the electricity costs
are high. We have some additional income thanks to animal husbandry. However, the milk is
very cheap. We do not have a cooperative. Even if we have one, it does not make any
difference in terms of prices. We have to apply the price that the Union of Milk Producers sets.
We cannot sell the milk products directly. We sell it to a wholesaler (Alkan Dairy). We keep
some of the milk for ourselves, and sell the rest of it. We make buttermilk, yoghurt or ekşimik
(T.N. a kind of cheese made of skim milk or yoghurt curds). We used to make cheese as well,
but it was contaminated with brucella, so we do not make it anymore.
Water resources are scarce in Avcılar village. Water is brought from Demirköy; however, we New young trees need to be planted in thinning forests. We can
cannot water our gardens due to the limitation set by the mukhtar. Villagers make complaints produce saplings in empty fields of the Forestry. If there was a
about each other if one waters his garden for more than 15 minutes. To irrigate our gardens, we nursery garden in Balaban area, women can work there.
have to carry the irrigation water on our back from a place at half-an-hour distance on foot.
Ones who have facilities carry their water by car or tractors. We cannot practice collective work.
We cannot practice farming because there is no water.
Young men leave the village because they cannot find women to get married or there are no
job opportunities in the village, whereas girls leave because they do not want to live in a village.
Population of the village is decreasing due to migration to towns and cities. Young people do
not want to involve in rural works, and they move to cities where they are encountered with the
most important and common problem of unemployment. The young people are mainly going to
Kırklareli to find a job. The young people are going to other places for education. All these
leavings decrease the workforce. If those young people do not come back to the village, the
village will gradually be dead. They study at universities, and pay visits to the village from time
to time. They will not come back to the village for good. There is migration to other towns and
cities from our village because of unemployment. People are leaving the village to work in the
factories, and they do not come back.
There should be commercial investments and business
opportunities. There should be an enterprise where we can work.
The only solution here is opening of new enterprises and factories
where the young people of the village will be employed.
Majority of the population is retired people. The young people dismissed from their jobs are also The village road from Igneada to Avcılar is very bad.
coming back to the village.
Transportation facilities are not good.
45
Issues
Needs
There is no solidarity or brotherhood in some villages. There are many villagers who do not get Roads within village should be coated with paving stone blocks.
on well with each other.
There are no advertisement or promotion opportunities. For instance, we do practice organic
farming here, but nobody knows about it. We have to invest approximately USD 2,000 – 2,500
to a private company to receive organic farming certificate or patent for our products. We
cannot give that much money.
Organic farming certificates / patents should be taken for the
products. Organic farming should be encouraged and improved.
There should be a mechanism to authorise the experts of the
Provincial Directorate of Agriculture for certification.
Boars make great damage to our lands. The only crop they do not eat is the beans. We have to If they will find a market for boars, we can hunt and sell boars.
go every night to our lands for guard duty. The pinewood planted by the Forestry Department There are 20 hunters in the village of Avcilar. Hunting is the main
serves as a shelter for boars.
source of income for us. However, we cannot take game meat out
of the forest since it is banned to carry game meat out of forest
borders. We know that pork is sold in the hotels in Antalya. There
should be a system that allows us to keep the animals we hunt in
cold rooms and then to sell the game meat based on the
permission we will receive.
We are all forestry workers, but we do not have an insurance scheme. The contracted We need social security.
cooperatives do not provide us with an insurance scheme. The forestry workers work without
insurance, they do not have social security and they have health problems. If they get these
services, they can survive. In the last four years, we experienced five to six accidents one of
which was deadly. We do not have enough money. The state only cares about the nature. We
work for the state, but the state does not provide our social security.
Thirty years ago, the Avcılar village used to have approximately 20,000 acres of treasury land.
Now it is military zone, and we cannot plant anything due to the prohibition. The Forestry
Enterprise has started to plant poplar trees, and this land is gradually being transformed into a
forestland. These are our most productive lands.
We are experiencing problems as to the roads in Balaban. The
short road, which is a forest road, is not coated with asphalt. The
other road of 4.5 kilometres from the Velika bridge to our village is
in a very bad condition. The road to Dupnisa cave is also in this
area. Tourists are coming here continuously, and this bad road
does not befit our dignity.
The power lines are on the surface of the ground, so they are damaged very often and very There is no road to Sislioba castle.
easily.
Lorry driving is practiced in Balaban village. These trucks can carry containers if a harbour is The border gate should be opened (İğneada harbour and
built in İğneada. There are a total of 10 trucks, which mainly carry wood.
Beğendik)
46
Issues
Needs
There used to be some plans for building a harbour in İğneada. What is the result of this A commercial harbour should be built in İğneada.
initiative? They want to build a harbour for loading purposes, but no one asks anything to the
fishermen.
We do not have a health clinic. Accidents happening in the forest constitute a great threat. We We need a health clinic to serve the village and other people who
need emergency care for wounds. There are even deadly accidents.
come and stay here.
We used to process and knit rye stems, and sell them. We used to make hats, bags, etc. using There is a health clinic in Çukurpınar village, but no one is working
rye stems. The price was TL 1 for 40 metres of it. Since they started to import it from China two there. When there is a health problem, we experience problems.
years ago, no one buys it from us anymore.
We work hard, but works do not generate adequate income.
We request that the school building that is currently not in use be
allocated for Beypınar village’s use through a transfer process by
the Provincial National Education Directorate to the village’s legal
entity or to the cooperative to be used for exhibiting and selling the
products of the cooperative. This building is currently not in use,
and it is left to decay.
Our potatoes, tomatoes and pepper crops suffer from crop pests immediately after we sow We request that built-up borders of the village be determined.
them. Experts of the Provincial Directorate of Agriculture had come and examined, but the
pesticides we used did not solve the problem.
The road from Beypınar village to the Dupnisa cave has been built by the Kırklareli Forest Dupnisa road is important for us. It is crucial in terms of tourism.
Enterprise. However, the remaining 1.5 km part of the road needs to be built by the Demirköy With the completion of this road, the road will be shorter, and
Forest Enterprise.
tourists will be able to come easily. We are planning to open a
restaurant in the surroundings of the Dupnisa cave.
Only three people have animals in the village. We need support and incentives in terms of
animal husbandry. However; membership to the cooperative is prerequisite for receiving
incentives, and it is necessary to have a minimum of 30 members who do not have a social
security. There is no incentive given to the retired people for animal husbandry. The women are
not members of the cooperative. The women are not retired, but they are not counted.
It is very difficult to meet this requirement here in these villages.
We request you to decrease this number of minimum members.
We need barns to be used by three to five farmers collectively. The
animals should be bred using the semi-open system.
The Provincial Department of Agriculture provides incentives for animal husbandry, but they Provision of grants and loans.
want artificial insemination as a prerequisite. Yet, it is very difficult to separate the heifers from
the bullocks to prevent natural insemination when the animals are out at idle grazing in the
forest.
47
Issues
Needs
Animal husbandry is very costly. The expenses are more than the revenues.
We pick sloe, apple, blackthorn, linden, medlar, beans, cornelian cherry and thyme from the
forest but just for ourselves. The remaining just rots under the trees.
We planted pear, apple, cherry and walnut trees; but they are all dead.
We want soil analysis.
There are people coming here from Çorlu or Kırklareli to pick mushrooms. These people pick
the mushrooms before the local people do. Mushroom production is not done effectively.
Mushrooms are not considered as an alternative income generating material, because it is
something done only during two months in a year. It is not a long-term business. In addition,
hauling charges to be paid to Forest Enterprise for anything you take out of the forest. Forest
products are not profitable any more; one needs to learn about the mushroom varieties and
how to pick mushrooms. No one picks mushrooms since they are concerned about not
marketing it. People from the neighbouring villages come and pick tonnes of mushrooms in our
forests. One kilogram of mushroom is sold for TL 1.-; so everyone does the mushroom picking.
However, it is done not in an aware manner. These mushrooms are very expensive in İstanbul.
We can benefit from these mushroom resources. We need to pick
our own mushrooms. If there is a cooperative for mushrooms to
buy the picked mushrooms, this business can be run in an easy
and organised manner. Picking mushrooms is not easy. The
surface is not smooth and straight. Picking is also done in a rough
way, not an organised method at all. One should be trained to
single out the poisonous mushrooms. It is also necessary to find
marketing opportunities for these mushrooms, as well as sales
mechanisms to sell the natural mushrooms picked from the forests
to the EU countries.
Mushrooms are picked during two months a year. The harvest varies depending on the rainfall.
In some years, it is possible to pick 400 to 500 kilograms. Nonetheless, since the main activity
is to cut trees in the forest, there is no time to pick mushrooms. Unfortunately, we do not know
how to pick mushrooms without damaging mushrooms as well as the nature. We cover gas,
fertiliser and fodder costs with what we earn from the forest.
The 2b practice based on the Forestry Law has taken our lands that we have cultivated for 100
– 150 years. We are experiencing problems with the General Directorate of National Estate in
this regard. We cannot do anything without our fields and pastures. There are villages whose
40 to 500 acres are taken away with this practice. In our village, there used to be 36,000 acres;
now, it is 20,000 acres after the 2b practice.
The price of a kilogram of certified seeds is TL 1.10; when you want to sell, it is TL 0.40 to 0.50
per kilogram.
48
Issues
Needs
Before 1980, the wood belonged to the villagers whereas the forest assets were of the Forestry Regulations for “planted sales” should prioritise the forest villagers.
Department. Now they have taken it away from us, and started to contract it to the traders.
They call it “planted sales” where the trees are sold on site. What the villagers have lost here is
that they do not take money for ground skidding and carrying the timbers. The trader pays to
the villagers only for cutting. “Planted sales” contracts are against the Forestry Law, because
they do not protect the rights of the villagers. Village cooperatives cannot compete with the
other companies.
We are also experiencing problems for finding wood to burn in winter due to the same reason. Clear cutting/felling (coppicing) should be revisited.
Currently, even the rotten woods in the forests are not given to the villagers because of the new
regulation.
There are some problems in the relations with the Forestry Department. The Department sees
the events from a trader’s point of view. We can make more money if we are given the
opportunity of market sales. Annual profit of the Forestry Department is TL 5 million; but the
villagers do not benefit from this money, nor are they invested on. The trader makes money
from the cutting business. Besides, the Forestry Department brought workers from outside of
the region and decreased the amount paid to the workers.
The majority of our income is from the forest; however, recently our income is less than before.
We cannot earn enough from the forest as we used to do; because the price of wood is always
the same while the expenses have gone up. The annual average is 2 to 3 billion TL per
household.
Forestry work can only be done during a few months in a year.
We received training and certificates on organic farming. Fourteen or 15 people have The region should be supported in terms of tourism. Opportunities
certificates. But we have to give USD 2,000 – 2,500 to a private company in order to receive should be provided for practicing touristic activities (e.g. camping,
patent for our products. We cannot give away such an amount.
motels, pensions, etc.) without damaging the ecological system
should be supported and encouraged. The village may be
appropriate for upland tourism. Surroundings of the village may be
used for natural tourism. Public places can be created as daily
picnicking areas.
Open air sports facilities can be created (e.g. mountaineering,
trekking). Village tourism should be improved through motel and
pension management and service sector. The village should be
introduced and promoted.
49
Issues
Needs
A model hunting area (managed by a private company) may be considered here. There is We can breed animals for this hunting area; but we will need
already a model hunting area starting from the borders of our village, including Armağan and financial support and know-how.
Çukurpınar, and ending at the borders of Armutveren.
The local population is poor, not rich enough to create a model hunting area. Illegal hunting is
very common. There are many hunters coming from İstanbul, Edirne, Çorlu and Lüleburgaz.
We should either prevent them coming here or make it compulsory to purchase services from
guides. They even hinder the rights of local hunters here; but nothing can be done if they have
permission. There are a lot of complaints regarding the hunters coming from outside of this
area. There needs to be a solution for this problem of strangers coming here for hunting
purposes. The forests have become model hunting areas starting from the borders of our
village, in which we cannot enter.
Deer and partridges should be released in forests. This may be
considered as an income generation opportunity for the villagers.
Game tourism should be supported. Motel or pension management
can be encouraged for the accommodation of those hunters
coming from other cities, but it depends on the demand.
In the past, the villagers used to be preferred for employment as forest officers or fire fighters to The forestry organisation should employ local people.
work in the forests. Now, one has to take the KPSS (Examination for Selection of Civil
Servants) examination for such employment. This has two shortcomings: firstly, the forest
villagers cannot be employed; and secondly those who are not familiar with forestry at all are
employed to work in the forests.
We are experiencing water problems in our Çukurpınar village. The water resources in the
hunting area was allocated to the Kırklareli Municipality 50 – 60 years ago by the Special
Provincial Administration in order to supply drinking water to the Kırklareli center. The previous
mukhtar applied for allocation of some part of this water to the village for irrigation purposes
during the summer; but this was a not a written/formal application.
It is also said that in Çukurpınar the storage tank for irrigation water was closed to the utilisation
by village.
We were to receive irrigation water from the Armağan Dam for 10 %, but there is no We want to have trout farming facilities in fresh waters. Angling
improvement on this issue either.
should be supported.
Some of the plants we pick are used in the pharmaceutical industry. We cannot market these Plants picked by the women can be sold through a cooperative.
plants. There are other wild plants, but we do not know what they are.
The women in Poyralı sell their handicrafts; we can do the same.
50
Issues
Needs
We make çetik (T.N. knitted slippers), oya (T.N. a type of embroidery called needlework) and The funds allocated to the coastal towns from the Bank of
çember (T.N. large printed kerchiefs with embroidery on skirts), but we cannot market them.
Provinces should be calculated based on the population in summer
season.
The Forestry Enterprise planted pine trees in our pastures, and put a fence around them. We Establishment of a waste water treatment facility in Iğneada is
cannot turn out and feed our animals.
needed.
The fodder prices are going up, while the milk prices are going down.
Cold storage house should be established for the fisherman.
The forestry cadastral survey took the Dupnisa Cave from Çukurpınar and put it within the
borders of Sarpdere.
In Çukurpınar, there is a transportation problem on Saturdays and Sundays because there is
no shuttle service.
Of the road connecting Çukurpınar village to Üsküp, some part of 1.5 kilometres are iced in This part of the road should be repaired and renewed by the
winter and creates problems.
Department of Highways.
Pine trees are planted in our pastures without even informing the public. We prefer income We request Akören and Yenice roads done properly.
generating types of trees.
We have the unemployment problem.
Such tasks as stamping should be done in a timely manner to
improve the forestry production.
It is difficult to produce fruit due to white frost.
There should be project supports for fishery, royal jelly and meat
production.
There are land losses in Dereköy due to the 2b practice and construction of the new road. We There is a need for constructing a road around the Evciler Pond.
do not have enough lands for agriculture.
The road is very bad.
Shopping malls can be moved to Dereköy. The Bulgarians have a large demand for cleaning
materials. They can come and shop here.
In the past, trucks and trailer trucks used to be loaded in Dereköy. For instance, potatoes There is a need to open the village for border trade.
coming from Nevşehir used to be loaded to trucks here. At least 50 families used to make their
living through this trade.
51
Issues
Needs
We cannot use the water of the Evciler Pond for irrigation. When we use the fresh drinking
water from the mountains to irrigate our gardens / orchards, especially in upstream settlements,
we do not have enough water in summer season. Only ¼ of the irrigation water is used
effectively; the remaining water is wasted away.
It needs to bring closed-system water from the pond in order to
meet the irrigation needs of orchards and fields through drip
irrigation system. The closed system for distribution of water will
enable us to use our water more efficiently. So, we will not have
water shortage. Or, the mukhtar should ban using drinking water to
irrigate gardens or orchards.
The garbage is thrown to the riverbeds or to Akören road. Even, sometimes, dead bodies of We want garbage dumpsters and an established waste collection
animals are not buried, but thrown away in the forest.
system.
The Forestry Department does not allow beehives within the forestry.
A few people possess beehives. If opportunity given, we would like
to practice beekeeping. Technical knowledge should be improved
on beekeeping.
There is no understanding of getting organised or cooperation yet. A milk business was started Other villages have training courses on sewing, embroidery and
previously, but failed. The collected milk was given to Mahya Dağı Cheese Production and handicrafts. We also want to attend these courses. In our village,
we only knit çetik (T.N. knitted slippers) or oya (T.N. a type of
Alkan Dairy, instead of the cooperative.
embroidery called needlework) for cotton coloured kerchiefs, which
is not for trading purposes.
Animal husbandry is not practised in an aware and effective manner. Therefore, it does not Many guests visit the dam. If there is a daily accommodation and
improve yet goes back. Only five or six flocks have remained out of 50 to 60 flocks. The food facility next to the pond, our village can benefit from it and
following problems should be solved:
make money.
-Pastures should be expanded. The Forestry Enterprise transforms the pastures into We can do fresh water fishery and fish farming in the pond
nursery areas. Our land is not a pasture area, but a non-forested forestry asset.
(through the cooperative). However, the State should provide loan
facilities for this.
-The prices should be increased.
The ramparts of the fortress are still there; restoration of these
walls for tourism will provide us very good opportunities.
Our land is not fertile. We can only get 300 kilograms of wheat. It is possible to do fruit We request training on walnut production.
production, but it has marketing problems.
52
Issues
Needs
There are Air Radar Site Command, Turkish Radio & Television Directorate’s transmitter, and In Evciler village, the emigrant (muhacır) neighborhood does not
base stations of the GSM operator on top of the Mahya Hill. We think that the radiation emitted have a road.
from these facilities has a negative impact on our products. We will be glad if you kindly
investigate this issue and inform us accordingly.
As a result of the forestry cadastral survey, we have lost most of our fields. Following the We do not have a market in our village.
cadastral survey, all of us have ended up in court. The forest is also being taken from us
gradually. The forestry cadastral survey has resulted in confiscation of our fields. In the İncesırt
village, only 130 decares have remained out of a total of 930 decares. We cannot cultivate our
lands because the status of the lands is unknown. Forest is gradually encroaching into the
uncultivated lands. Registered (title deed based) cutting may be considered again as a
resolution.
Trees produce a lot of fruit without using any agricultural chemicals. There are loads of fruit. There may be a fruit juice plant where we can sell our fruits.
However, the products that are remained after our own consumption are either become rotten
or eaten by the animals since we cannot market them.
In the neighbourhood of Demirköy, everybody produces his own fruit and vegetables. We request that the hospital in Demirköy (with 30 bed capacity) put
Therefore, there is no chance that we will market our fruits in Demirköy’s open market.
into operation now.
We either eat as fruits or make marmalade from damson plum, plum and strawberries. Each A cesspool should be built for every house.
woman can produce up to 50 kilograms of plum marmalade every year.
There is no cooperative for the women. The female population is less in the villages. Therefore, Barns should be taken outside the villages.
a few villages should come together.
Some people in the villages make mushroom preserves. They make preserves from hedgehog We need to learn about herbs and plants, as well as know-how on
mushrooms.
picking and marketing. We also need support for marketing.
In Demirköy, a contract was signed with DANONE, but it failed. The contract was terminated We want an irrigation canal to irrigate our poplar trees.
after six months. We do not know the reason for it.
53
Issues
Needs
The villagers are not strong enough for the cooperative unions. Lowland villagers are stronger Lakes around İğneada should be kept clean.
than the forest villagers in this regard.
The agricultural productivity is low, since the forest smothers our fields.
A customs point should be opened in İğneada.
Agricultural products do not bring any income when one calculates the gas and fertiliser costs Support and incentives are needed to cover these expenses. A
as well.
serious structuring is necessary on the issues of incentive and
pricing.
There is no tree-cutting to open lands for cultivating. In this region, forests are encroaching to Farmers need small tractors.
cultivable lands gradually. People are migrating to towns and cities. When lands are not
cultivated, the forests encroach.
There is a transportation problem since the İğneada road is quite narrow.
İğneada - Poyralı road should be widened.
There is drinking water supply problem in İğneada.
Gravity water supply from fresh water resources to İğneada town.
The municipal services are limited in İğneada.
Number of employees should be increased in the municipality.
There is a lack of equipment in the municipality.
We need tourism investments.
We earn most of our income from the forest. Our income level was good until 1980. There was Regarding the forestry products, the timbers should be given to the
open market sales, and earnings from carrying the timbers... The amendments to the law took Forestry Enterprise whereas the twigs should be given to the
these opportunities from us and decreased our income. Last year, TL 10 was paid for one ster villagers.
of fuelwood. Production per person is around 30 to 50 sters per year. Our profit is around TL
400 per person per year.
We do not have social security.
Two guards should be placed to the Rezve River to prevent from
illegal hunting.
54
Issues
Needs
In İncesırt village, our other alternative income generating activities are animal husbandry and
agriculture. The number of animals is gradually decreasing since there are no young people to
look after them. Only six (6) households have animals. Milk production is 7-8 litres per animal
per day. There is no cooperative. Alkan Dairy purchases the milk. The animals are local breeds.
The price of one sack of fodder is TL 30. It is not possible to breed sheep since the young
people have left the village.
The climate is suitable for kiwi or hazelnut (çakıldak or gök fındık)
production. Similarly, pepino fruit can also be grown in wetlands
along the riverside. It is a fruit with high vitamin C values. Pepino
can be bought as a sapling, and planted. Every family with a
greenhouse can do this business. It can be done in a land of 10-20
acres.
There is no fruit production although the climate and soil is suitable. Frost sometimes We want an irrigation canal to irrigate our poplar trees.
decreases the amount of fruit produced.
Our chickens are taken by foxes.
No incentives are provided even if we want to practice green housing. İncesırt village has never Green housing should be supported.
benefitted from the supports and incentives.
Five people in the village practice beekeeping, but cannot do it efficiently. Bees fly away, and Beekeeping should be supported, and training should be provided
do not come back. There used to be beekeepers in Karacadağ village as well, but their bees on beekeeping.
were stolen by the Bulgarian beekeepers as a result of a trap. So, they could not dare to start
beekeeping again. We participated in the beekeeping training course provided by the Marmara
Group Foundation. There was no queen bee in the beehives delivered at the end of the
training, and we suffered from it. We tried to interfere with sugar, but it was not cost effective.
The Provincial Directorate of Agriculture sold the boxes (hives) in return for TL 100.-; however it
did not give any productive result because they divided the swarm into two.
Animal husbandry is the best alternative for the forest villagers. Milk production by the animals Establishment of a company should be considered to process the
in the village is 500 to 600 kilograms per day. The produced milk is sold to Alkan Dairy through honey product.
the cooperative. Boztaş Cooperative signed an agreement with Alkan Dairy for TL 0.50 per
kilogram, although DANONE proposed TL 0.63 per kilogram. The villagers are complaining
about it; however they cannot resign from the cooperative since the membership conditions set
by the Provincial Directorate of Agriculture do not allow them to do so.
They grow green beans, but they cannot sell it. They think if they sow green beans or red The road (15 kilometres between Karacadağ – Yiğitbaşı - Boztaş)
beans, it is possible to can them.
should be coated with asphalt.
There is sufficient amount of land; however the villagers cannot use their lands after cultivation A pipeline of 5 kilometres should be laid from the existing water
efficiently due to several threats such as wild boars and rabbits.
tank in Karacadağ to provide water.
55
Issues
Needs
Some lands that had been cultivated by the villagers remained under the newly constructed
dam. The State paid for the registered lands with title deeds. Nonetheless, since most of the
lands are treasury lands, no payment was made for those lands having no title deed.
Problems are being experienced for marketing the agricultural products.
There needs to be market surveys.
In Karadere village, our only option is animal husbandry; but it is a very costly activity. We want We need support for animal husbandry. We need 20-25 animals
to find small, collective solutions. There should be actively working, unretired, 50 members for a per household. There are 20-25 households in our village.
cooperative to benefit from the incentives of the Provincial Directorate of Agriculture. Only 25 of
the 48 members of our cooperative are not retired. Therefore, it is very difficult to benefit from
these supports and incentives. ORKÖY provides supports for animal husbandry as well, but the
supports are limited to a few households for each village.
The pastures are intensive. Animal husbandry is not profitable because the inputs are We need integrated solutions that consider agriculture, animal
expensive.
husbandry and forestry together.
The population of our village is decreasing due to migration to towns and cities. People leave
the village, go and settle in towns and cities. If there was a bus service from our village to the
town three years ago, the youngsters would not leave the village.
The Forestry Enterprise provides every village with some felling from the forest. Some years, it The logs are sent to İstanbul for processing. However,
is not provided at all. The felling starts in January – February and continues until December.
establishment of a processing facility here will create job
opportunities for the young people.
Although alternative income generating activities are created, we are used to work in the forest. We do not have Internet access in our village.
We cannot adopt ourselves easily to other jobs.
The fellings provided from the forestry is not sufficient to make a living.
Side roads in the neighborhoods facing Sivriler village are not
coated with asphalt.
There is water shortage in Sivriler village.
Drip irrigation system needs to be embraced.
Drinking water in Sivriler village is contaminated.
Sivriler village needs clean drinking water.
56
Issues
Needs
The nursery between Bulanıkdere and Sivriler belongs to Sivriler. The signboard should be We would like to have the guidance of an agriculture expert for our
changed accordingly.
fruit trees.
We, the women working in the nursery, do not have social security. Since 2003, the Forestry We can establish a cooperative for women to package and sell
Enterprise outsources the planting job, and the contracted company do not provide social honey, mushroom, handicrafts, animal products and herbs. We can
security to its workers. They make the workers sign a contract at the recruitment stage, and also sell our products using the Internet.
leave them short of their rights.
The number of our animals has decreased. The dairy enterprises do not come to our village to
buy milk.
We do not make cheese and butter in the village. Those products are purchased ready made We need guidance to market organic products.
from other resources. But we can make if we can market them. There was a dairy in Demirköy,
but it was closed.
Apples are rotten since the establishment of the base station.
The road connecting İğneada to Sivriler is not asphalt, and there is no bridge on the
Bulanıkdere river. If the road is improved, the distance will be shortened by 10 minutes;
however, there are rumours that the GEF project hinders the road construction and the
Demirköy district has an objection to the construction of this road.
There are rumours about the establishment of a nuclear plant; is it true?
Excavations of the coast and the riprap works have both been expensive for the State
economically and also they have harmed the nature.
Holstein breed cows that we bought with ORKÖY support cannot adapt themselves to the Land race cattles should be supported.
circumstances of Yıldız Mountains. Animals die due to the lack of a veterinary.
Veterinary services should visit the village more often.
Dairies contaminate the river, as the wastes of the village do. There is no sewerage system. There should be sewerage system.
Waste water from the houses is collected in the septic tanks, vacuumed by a sewage truck, and
discharged to the rivers.
Promises are made, but not realised. Projects never yield to outcomes.
A shelter should be built for the dogs of İğneada town.
57
Issues
Needs
The quality of the forest has decreased within the last decade.
Whenever there is a problem in the power distribution unit, our
water is cut. The villagers cannot pay the cost of repair of the
power distribution unit.
We suffer from being settled close to the country border. No tourists visit here.
Waiting should be minimised and stopped eventually in the
restricted zone.
Fishing young turbots should be banned.
Civil servants trained to be protectors of the area should not have an itching palm.
The governorship and other public institutions should lead the way.
The state is not sensitive enough to our problems. The State support for the villagers is not Trees in the forests should not be cut. This area should be
sufficient. There is no continuity for the supports.
designated as a National Park. The young people should be
involved in preservation of the wildlife and forests. We cannot
achieve anything by cutting trees.
The villages are rich in terms of water. Combined with the forest nearby, this is our biggest
advantage and potential; however, we cannot make use of it.
We are not organised. There is no one to lead us, for which we are responsible.
The project of the Demirköy Governor (collecting fruits, apple, pear
and healing herbs from 17 villages and marketing them from a
single source) should be supported.
The State’s support for our village is not sufficient. We cannot express our problems to higher The awareness of the local public should be raised.
authorities.
There is female unemployment problem.
There is no one to inform the young people, to raise their awareness or to create new job Training activities should be organised on the creation of income
opportunities.
generating activities towards the young people. Joint studies
should be made on educational issues through communication and
interaction among the countries. Student exchange programmes
should be started to widen the students’ perspective.
The people cannot dream for their future.
People should be taught to fish, not to be given fish all the time.
58
Issues
Needs
Agricultural lands in Hamidiye and Aksicim villages are limited due to expropriation of the
agricultural areas by İstanbul Water Supply and Sewerage Administration (İSKİ) for Papuçdere
and Kazandere Fresh Water Dams.
There is no irrigation pond in Kurudere village for animal husbandry purposes.
The irrigation pond, which was planned to be built by the State
Water Works (DSİ), should be completed in order to increase the
income being generated through animal husbandry. The project is
in the feasibility study process now. This pond will enable us to
practice animal husbandry efficiently. A villager having 200 acres
of land can look after 20 animals. If we can plant our own fodder
crops or silage, we will not pay for the fodder.
59
VALUES OF THE YILDIZ MOUNTAINS ACCORDING TO THE LOCAL COMMUNITIES





















Forest: Natural beech forest (the source of the famous Turkish folk song named “snowy
beech forest”)
Uncorrupted nature
Natural beauties
Green landscape
Scenery
Rich natural characteristics with 80% of all species around the world living here
Endemic flora and rich variety of crops
Trees: linden tree, oak, poplar tree, beech (natural beech forest), hornbeam, pine,
Turkish oak, willow, alder
Tree roots (in various forms)
Natural mushrooms: Suillus luteus, dedeman, dil mantarı (used in food industry),
Lactarius delicious (grows in spring and autumn), Craterellus cornucopioides (used in
paint industry), Amanita caesarea, Amanita muscaria, Lapista nuda, kiraz mantarı, kayısı
mantarı, Pleurotus Cornucopia, kara mantarı, Cantharellus sp., sarı mantar, horoz
mantarı, yumurta mantarı, dana dili, Agaricus campestris, cultivated mushroom, beyaz
mantar, Russula delica, karnabahar, Chroogomphus Rutilus, Hydnum repandum,
Lactarius volemus, Morchella esculanta, duvaklı, sütleğen, sarı mantar, kirmit, yeryaran
Herbs: Patience dock, purslane, common dandelion, stinging nettle, mallow, thyme, mint,
Cayenne pepper and other local herbs called ispit, kaldırak, mancan, ıştır
Healing herbs: Linden tea, sage tea, St. John’s wort (hypericum perforatum), thyme,
yarrow, Tetra otu, stinging nettle, kantarya, sarı çiçek, camomile.
Natural fruits: Wild plum, common medlar, cornelian cherry, sorbus, wild apple, wild pear,
rosa canina, blackberry, strawberry, elderberry (used in pharmaceutical industry), hazel,
forest strawberry, cherry, white mulberry, walnut, alder buckthorn, sour cherry, peach,
black grape
Flowers: tulip, gazania, snowdrop, hyacinth, wild pansy, Chenille plant, buzuva,
anemone, poppy, tobacco plant, rhododendron, zalimkade, Dupnisa tulip, neoragelia,
daisy, wild rose, common primrose, yellow crocus, yonus topu
Wild Life – Hunting: Rabbits and hares, roe deer, gazelles, deer, wild boars, fox, wolves,
martens, fitches, turtles, snakes (viperines), mallards, European hedgehogs, bats, wild
ducks, wild goose, squirrels, lizards, wild chicken, wild goats, mountain rabbits, badger,
hyenas, beavers, wild cats, sea otters
Breeding beds for wild animals
Insects: Fireflies, dragonflies
Birds: Swallows, starlings, sparrows, curlews, quails, chukars, eagles, Eurasian
sparrohawk, buzzards, peregrine falcons, Eurasian black vultures, storks, Eurasian jays,
carrion crows, meşe tavuğu, woodpeckers (Syrian woodpecker, black woodpecker),
pigeons and collared doves, kestrels, ravens, wood pigeons (mostly seen in beech
forests), magpies
Rivers
Lakes
Fish:
60
Natural trout fish in the rivers (used as medicine): trout fish, barbells.
Fish in the dams: carps, mirror carps, leather carps, catfishes
Fish in Rezve River: trout fishes, common rudd, silversides, ganoid fish, barbells,
grey mullet, common carp
Wild ducks along the Rezve River
Spring water: clean, fresh, cold spring water
Drinking fountains
Fresh air, oxygen
Beekeeping: Natural bees and honey
Bee baskets made of old vine shoots and coated with animal dug, which builds
honeycombs themselves.
Cattle and sheep
Good quality and taste of meat, milk and cheese of local curly-fleeced sheep and land
race cattles as well as village style goat cheese
Natural pasturing and feeding of cows and goats, which leads to natural products
Good quality meat and milk from the animals pasturing in nature
Buttermilk, butter, ekşimik (T.N. a kind of cheese made of skim milk or yoghurt curds),
cheese (used to be made when there were plenty of animals)
Chicken
Crops: potatoes (well known), corn, barley, rye, wheat, beans, broad beans, beetroots,
lentils, corn
Organic farming free of pesticides
Potential for production of organic products since no hormones or fertilisers are used
Organic products: tomatoes, peppers, green beans, aubergines, fresh onions, lettuces,
okra, corn, courgettes
Peanut, hazelnut and walnut trees
Taste of white kidney beans
Meadows and pastures
Devşeli Baba tomb
Villages, village houses, old Greek houses
Historical buildings (7 to 8 fortresses, iron foundries, moulds)
Caves: Dupnisa cave, Kocadere cave (direkli cave), Tripez cave, wet cave, girl’s cave,
snowy cave, cult cave, Şükrüpaşa cave, bats
Volcan bridge (a bridge built by Sinan on the Bulgaria – Turkey border, partially
destroyed during the war)
Mahya Hill
Sightseeing
Waterfalls
Long winters with heavy snow, available sites for winter tourism
Cool shadows in summer season
Beautiful stars at night time
Freedom in nature
Ability to live four seasons at a time
Tourism potential
Bormer Quarry (marble)
o
o
o


































61






































Sheep flocks
Poplar and cottonwood (in fields)
Nursery
Rip saws (8 to 10 rip saws in Balaban village)
Wood to burn
Forest workmanship
Sources of income
Animal husbandry
Fishery
Spring water / rivers: where Beypınar took its name from
Mutual respect among the people
Social solidarity
Hospitality of the people
Traditional culinary culture, Bosniak pastries and desserts
Being a safe place
Famous walnut trees of Gökyaka village
Being located on the border (cooperation with Bulgaria, being on the road of other
regions)
Natural and archaeological sites in Kıyıköy and Longoz forests, Longoz Forest National
Park
Available conditions for growing hydrangea
Fertile soil
Underground treasures
Natural resources for rural tourism and mountain tourism (sightseeing paths, angling in
rivers, horse riding tours, mountain roads, car tours, bicycle riding tours, motel and
pension management)
Having sufficient values to be a National Park
A beautiful combination of green and blue
History, nature, fresh air
Availability of transportation and short distance to İstanbul
Festivals
Fresh spring waters from the forests in the village flowing through the caves.
High altitude in some villages, mountain weather
Kışlacık village being the hometown of Karagöz (T.N. one of the two lead characters of
the traditional Turkish shadow play)
The famous Ottoman traveller Evliya Çelebi’s visit to Kışlacık village
Sultan Selim I’s winter residence in Kışlacık village (that is where the village took its
name from)
House of the famous Greek author, Georgios Vizyenos
Panayır jetty in Kışlacık village
Potential for camping tourism (sea, beach, harbour, forest)
Drinking water dams built by İSKİ (Kazandere and Papuçdere)
Variety of the ecological system and one of the rare place on the earth that one can find
a number of natural varieties
The only oxygen resource in the Thrace that we can hand down to our children
62

Pozlak meadow above the Dupnisa Cave
THE VALUES OF YILDIZ MOUNTAINS ACCORDING TO AGENCIES REPRESENTATIVES:



































The natural resources and the ecological balance are still preserved
They are virgin
Diversity of natural resources
Richness in flora: 544 species registered
An important place for fauna: 26 mammal species, 194 bird species, 7 reptile species, 30
fish species some of which are on the red list.
Has wetlands that are on the migration road of birds
Important for its oxygen content (2nd after Kaz mountains)
Longos forests
One of the rare forests that accomodates 24 broad leave tree species with a dominants
of Quercus and Fagus
Acorn source
The only place in Thrace to hold Fagus trees
The only place in Thrace to hold natural Pinus nigra.
Rarity of the similar climax
Strategic water resources
Has a shore to Black Sea
Richness in flowered plant species and its importance for beekeeping and honey
production
High potential in sea and nature tourism
Dupnisa Cave and other caves for tourism and for the bat species they shelter (16 bat
species out of 987 species)
Historical and cultural values
Potential in organic agriculture, fisheries, and forestry
Potential in hunting tourism
Potential in health tourism
The highest potential area for ecological tourism in the region
Proximity to Istanbul and to the EU
Holds the highest peak (Mahya peak 1031 m alt.) of the Strandja Mountain chain
The only place to hold rhododendrons in Europe
The forest villages have very limited pesticide and fertilizer use, the products are close to
organic
Potential for tourist and commercial port construction
Richness in minerals and granite (iron, gold, coal)
Richness in strawberry and sour cherry
Potential in renewable energy
Paragliding potential
High level of education of people in Thrace
Accomodates many cultures
Handicrafts, Bosnian and Pomak culture, kitchen culture
63
SUMMARY OF THREATS TO THE VALUES OF THE YILDIZ MOUNTAINS IDENTIFIED BY THE
VILLAGE COMMUNITIES AND AGENCIES REPRESENTATIVES:


Illegal and unsustainable mushroom collection
Lack of rubbish collection and illegal tipping of rubbish in the forest
Domestic sewage is discharged into the river system and industrial sewage pollutes
the river system
Illegal and inappropriate (unsustainable) fishing methods (rivers)
Illegal fishing and inappropriate fishing methods (marine)



Mining
Cattle grazing in the forests
Illegal hunting

Conversion of pastures to scrub and forest due to a reduction in livestock at some
locations
Overgrazing of treasury pastures at some locations





Inadequate extent and occurrence of old growth forest for certain biodiversity (e.g.
woodpeckers)
Illegal commercial fishing in rivers


Incomers settling in villages and unplanned development
Damage caused by treasure hunters




Forest fire
Unplanned and unregulated tourism
Proposed nuclear power station at Igneada
Proposed thermal power plant at Kiyikoy


Construction of wind turbines
Road construction



Crop damage by wild boars
Falling prices of timber
Changes in forest operations have reduced incomes of village communities (coppice
ban)



Lack of new income generating opportunities
Lack of security of income generation (logging and livestock)
Development expectations can be damaging to the natural resource base and values
(e.g unrestricted tourism development)
Deterioration in ecosystem due to water supply to Istanbul
Climate change
Forest clearance
Construction of iron and steel factory near Kasatura Nature Conservation Area





64
MITIGATION / ALLEVIATION MEASURES
















Protection and administration of trout should be encouraged. Hunting trout may bring
revenues to the village’s cooperative; however since the trout population is quite low
currently, the revenues will be low and we cannot cover this administration cost. If trout
hunting is prohibited in this area for the next two years, it is possible for the trout
population to increase again. Thus, we can earn enough to cover the administrative
costs.
Garbage dumpsters should be put on the roadsides. There is a lot of people visiting the
dam in summer season. We can make this place a touristic area, and charge the visitors
with entrance fee. We can then use the profit to buy garbage dumpsters and chairs to
use in weddings and other social gatherings.
Wastes should be separated for collection. Those plastic bags harming the environment
should not be used. We should use net-bags and paper bags as we used to do in the
past.
Threats will be removed if the Caucasian oil is not sold to Kıyıköy.
Establishment of wind power plants should be stopped.
The project for building a nuclear plant in İğneada should be stopped.
Villagers should be given 25 % premium from the forest revenues as it used to be in the
past.
Measures against fires should not be disregarded since there has not been any fires for a
long time. Continuity should be ensured.
Illegal and unauthorised wood cutting should be stopped. The Forestry Enterprise should
take necessary measures and apply penalties for those practicing illegal cutting.
The Yıldız Mountains can be opened for touristic activities but in a proper and an
acceptable manner. The forest, the flora and the fauna should definitely be conserved.
The local population should be trained on income generating activities.
The local population should be trained on protection of nature. This training should be
expanded to every segment of the society, and become sustainable.
If there was a chipboard factory, the forestry waste could be used and fewer trees would
be cut.
The local population should be informed about the Longoz and coastline.
Angling should be supported.
Trawling period, which has been extended until 1st of May, should be shorter.
65
ANNEX 6: SWOT ANALYSIS FOR THE EXISTING COOPERATIVES IN YILDIZ MOUNTAINS
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
Offers job opportunities to
villagers
Trustable
Internal operation and
management
The cooperative
managers have little
knowledge on
legislation concerning
their field of activity
Cooperatives have a
single service. That’s
the reason why
everybody cannot profit
from it.
Careless expenditure
costs are paid by the
members
The board takes
decisions without
considering the priorities
and needs of people.
Feudal relations still
dominant during
elections and
management
The lack of full time
working personnel
Entrepreneurship in
cooperatives is low
It’s a tool to organise the
people for common work
Is a structure that
represents the majority of
the community
The strongest NGO of the
villagers
Can easily and quickly
access to inhabitants
Eliminates the dealers and
traders
Has the priority for getting
forestry works from the
FDD
Dominates in its field of
competence such as
Good management of
accounting
Brings villagers together
Our voices can be heard
by means of the
cooperatives
Cannot develop new job
opportunities (no
experience, no
willingness, not capable,
not courageous, weak in
management)
Board of internal
auditors have a weak
capacity and isn’t
working well
Capacity
Managed by
uneducated people
Can help financially
villagers who needs it
Low awareness in the
management of
resources other than
wood (e.g. hunting)
Cooperatives are
democratically managed
Cooperatives are
unaware on
where/which institution
to get support
OPPORTUNITIES/MEASURES
To inform members about the
legislation on cooperatives, the rights
and responsibilities of members in the
cooperatives
The areas that have been excluded
from by the Article 2b of the forestry
legislation, should be granted to the
cooperatives or to the legal entity
muhtarship
The members could put pressure
democratically on unsuccessful
managers to demission
Youngsters must be unified
The cooperatives should be
empowered
Project conditions should be made
easier for forest villages
Training sessions should be
organised by the relevant agencies in
order to meet the training needs
The Provincial Directorate of
Agriculture could inform the villagers
on the legislation concerning
cooperatives
The cooperatives and the
muhtarships should inform the
relevant provincial/sub-provincial
agencies (Provincial Directorate of
Agriculture, Public Training Centre,
etc.) for their training needs.
The cooperatives should inform
themselves on the financial resources
from the institutions
66
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
Equal to all its members
Has knowledge on
forestry, honeybee
keeping, livestock farming,
milking
Has internal inspection
Economic and financial
Financially weak
Is legally suitable for a
multipurpose development
Protects the rights and
interests of the members
People are able to
cooperate
As an intermediate offers
marketing opportunities to
villagers
Is a tool to meet the needs
of the people at a lower
price (e.g. by supply of
fuel, fodder, fertilizer etc.)
Provides an improved
quality in the work done
It supports solidarity
Can support its members
in case of difficulty
(compensation of hospital
cost or damages in case
of fire in a house, accident
in the forest during
logging, etc.)
Allows fair share of
benefits by its members
Allows to have the priority
to benefit from the state’s
financial supports
Makes credit loans more
easily accessible
Has priority in benefiting
from state projects
Has a negotiation power
Supplying information can
empower villagers
Can invest with its own
A lot of cooperatives
and muhtarship do not
have the capacity to
sustain a budget
Low level capital limit
their activity to one field
Lack of wood
processing facility in
villages that have a
cooperative
Financially difficult to
change the president or
the executive board
when they are failing
The executive and
auditing board are
working as volunteer
Marketing
Weak in
competitiveness
State should financially support
cooperatives (25% would be helping)
The number of members could be
increased but it won’t be sufficient.
State should support the cooperatives
at a certain level
channelling the EU funds
to create mechanisms to compete
with the private sector
Weak at marketing
Social and Cultural
The managers and
society do not know
how to seek and fight
for their rights
The cooperatives do
not have youngsters as
members
The members are
usually old and they
are not open for new
projects
The women cannot
express themselves
No communication with
state institutions
The ownership is not
strong among
members of the
cooperatives
Not innovative
67
STRENGTHS
budget
The members are part of
the management (a
member who doesn’t
participate in 3 general
meetings consecutively
can be excluded from the
cooperative)
Less affected by the
market risks compared to
individual entrepreneurs
WEAKNESSES
Open to discrimination
between members
Relations with the FDD
Absence of
cooperatives (in some
villages)
Sales on allocated
standing timber are not
in favour of
cooperatives
The forestry enterprise
does not consult
cooperatives or muhtars
when taking decisions
The legislation on
forestry have little
benefit for forest
villagers
The forestry enterprise
make profit but not the
villagers (but it employs
villagers without social
security)
Lack of information on
cooperatives
There isn’t union of
forestry cooperatives
FDD employs villagers
without social security
Legislation
Sanctions are not clear
if the management or
the members doesn’t
respect the rules
Grant supports cannot
be used because
eligibility criteria are
hard to fulfil
The state support for
forestry and for
agriculture are different,
there isn’t any support
for forestry
The capital of
cooperatives remain
weak because the
forestry enterprise
doesn’t return the 25%
In case of clear felling: forest must be
managed based on scientific
information
The villages who do not have a
cooperative should be demanding it.
FDD must allow some grace period
for allocated sales for cooperatives in
forest villages
The dialogue between FDD and forest
villagers must be enhanced
The legislation must be drafted by
taking the demands of the community
into account
The forest villagers must get greater
share from the profits generated from
forest products
FDD and cooperatives must be in
cooperation for the implementation of
legislation
Establishing the union of forstery
cooperatives
Taxes must be lowered for village
market sales (KPS)
The legislation must be complied, but
at the same time it mustn’t be
forgotten that there must be an
organized struggle to change
legislation in our favour
The legislation should be amended so
that the evaluation of the profit of the
Forest Enterprise should be changed
from the existing “regional level pool
system” to the “Directorate level
68
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
share they should get
Other
Some of these
cooperatives have been
established because of
obligations and not of
needs
There is no attack to
any field other than
forestry work
evaluation system”
The working field of cooperatives
should be enlarged;
Technical support to the cooperatives
in the form of machinary-equipment,
information and financial aid to help
them to be multifunctional
69
ANNEX 7: EXAMPLE OF VILLAGE PROFILE
General
Kaynak/
Source
Genel
Name of the settlement
Name of the muhtar/mayor
- tel no.
Distance to the nearest
town center
Yerleşim yerinin adı
Muhtar/Belediye Bşk. Telefon no
En yakın merkeze uzaklığı
Age of the village and
origin
Population
Köyün yaşı ve halkın
kökeni
Nüfus
Total (Summer)
Total (Winter)
Toplam (Yaz)
Toplam (Kış)
Male
Female
Children (0-16)
Young (17-25)
Middle (26-40)
Elder (41-...)
Number of households
Level of education
Illeterate
Litterate
Gratuated from primary
school
Gratuated from secondary
school
Gratuated from high school
Gratuated from university
Cooperatives and other
NGOs
Name of the cooperative
Chairman and tel no.
Erkek
Kadın
Çocuk (0-16)
Genç (16-25)
Orta yaş (26-40)
Yaşlı (40-...)
Hane sayısı
Eğitim durumu
Okuma-yazma bilmeyenler
Sadece okur-yazar
İlkokul mezunu
Number of members
Other NGOs and contact
details
Number of members
Economy (% of livelihood)
Üye sayısı
Diğer STK ların adı ve
iletişim bilgisi
Üye sayısı
Ekonomi (geçim kaynağı
%'si)
HAMDİBEY
Turan
ÜSTÜNDAĞ
DEMİRKÖY
0 545 8040155
1
1
4
1
1922
Boşnak
1
Muhtardan
alınan/From
muhtar
Resmi/Official
371
371
188
183
50
100
150
71
90
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
15
240
1
1
1
Ortaokul mezunu
60
1
Lise mezunu
Yüksek öğrenim mezunu
Kooperatif ve diğer
STKlar
Kooperatifin adı
Başkan ve Telefon No.
54
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
Kadın/Women
0
0
0
0
1
Erkek/Men
Forestry
Tourism
Agriculture
Livestock
Beekeeping
Ormancılık
Turizm
Tarım
Hayvancılık
Arıcılık
Orman
işçiliği/forest
worker
60
0
5
15
0
1
1
kereste/odun
satışı/timberNTFP
1
1
1
1
1
70
General
Other
Retired people
Income level of households
(%)
0-1.000,- TL/y
1.000,-TL/y-2.500,-TL/y
2.500,-TL/y-5.000,-TL/y
5.000,-TL/y-7.500,-TL/y
7.500,-TL/y-10.000,-TL/y
10.000,- TL üzeri
Land Use
Diğer
Emekli
Hanehalkı gelir düzeyi (%)
Total land size of the
settlement (da)
Total agricultural land (da)
cultivated (da)
poplar plantation (da)
crops (da)
fodder (da)
nursery (da)
other (da)
irrigated (da)
Forest land (da)
Meadows (da)
state land (da)
private land (da)
Yerleşim yerinin toplam
yüzölçümü (da)
Tarım alanı (da)
ekilen (da)
Kavak yetiştiriciliği (da)
Tahıl ve baklagiller üretimi
(da)
Meyve ve sebze üretimi
(da)
Yem bitkileri (da)
Fidancılık (da)
Diğer (da)
sulanan (da)
Ormanlık alan (da)
Mera (da)
hazineye ait arazi (da)
özel arazi (da)
Sources
Kaynaklar
1. Muhtar
2. Village meeting notes
3. Demirköy County
Directorate of Agriculture
(2008 data)
3. Vize County Directorate
of Agriculture (2008 and
2009 data)
5. Orman Köylerinin
Demografik Bilgileri,
İstanbul Orman Bölge
Müdürlüğü, İstanbul, 2005.
6. Provincial Directorateof
Culture and Tourism
7. Estimations of Demirköy
Sub-governorship
1. Muhtar
2. Köy toplantı notları
3. Demirköy İlçe Tarım
Müdürlüğü (2008 verileri)
8. TÜİK, 2008
8. TÜİK, 2008
fruits and vegetables (da)
Kaynak/
Source
Genel
0-1.000,- TL/yıl
1.000,-TL/yıl-2.500,-TL/yıl
2.500,-TL/yıl-5.000,-TL/yıl
5.000,-TL/yıl-7.500,-TL/yıl
7.500,-TL/yıl-10.000,-TL/yıl
above 10.000,- TL
Arazi Kullanımı
0
20
1
1
2%
50%
43%
5%
0
0
Muhtardan
alınan/From
muhtar
1
1
1
1
1
1
Resmi/Official
45519
3
5328
556
150
50
3
3
1
1
0
1
150
0
0
150
35840
1
1
1
1
5
406
227
3
3
* 3 yıllık
temel eğitim
dahil
4. Vize İlçe Tarım
Müdürlüğü (2008 ve 2009
verileri)
5. Orman Köylerinin
Demografik Bilgileri,
İstanbul Orman Bölge
Müdürlüğü, İstanbul, 2005.
6. İl Kültür ve Turizm
Müdürlüğü verileri
7. Demirköy Kaymakamlığı
tahminleri
71
General
9. Kırklareli Provincial
Directorate of Agriculture
Kaynak/
Source
Genel
9. Kırklareli Tarım il
müdürlüğü
Agriculture and Forestry
Forestry
Ormancılık
Related Forest Enterprise
unit
Forest land per person (da)
Köyün bağlı olduğu Orman
İşletme Şefliği
Ormandan kişi başına
düşen alan (da)
Ormandan kişi başına
servet olarak düşen m3
miktarı
Hayvancılık
küçük baş (koyun/keçi)
sayısı
Büyükbaş
Assets per capita from
forest (m3)
Livestock
# of ovines (sheep and
goats)
# of bovines
# of cows
# of water buffaloes
Beekeeping
# of hives
honey production (kg/year)
Agriculture
Products
Kaynak/
Source
Demirköy İşletme Müdürlüğü
Sığır sayısı
Manda sayısı
holstein
ırkı
8
0
kovan sayısı
bal üretimi kg/yıl
10
900
yerli ırk
(yoz)
216
0
90
5
3125
5
3200
1
melez
ırk
100
0
3
3
Arıcılık
1
1
Tarım
Yetiştirilen ürünler
Non-timber forest
products
Ormandan alınan odun
dışı tali ürünler
Firewood
Mushroom
Yakacak odun
Mantar
Game
Av hayvanları
Medicinal plants
Tıbbi bitkiler
Fish from rivers
Wild fruits
Derelerden balık
Yabani meyveler
Herbs
Otlar
Others
Diğer
Kaynak/
Source
1350 Ster
Bolet , kuzugöbeği, çayır
mantarı, geyik mantarı,
kuzugöbeği, cincila, kaz
ayağı, borazan, sığır dili, sütlü
mantar, karnabahar, kanlıca,
dedeman, civciv bacağı,
duvaklı mantar
Domuz, karaca, geyik
1
1
papatya, kantaron otu, ada
çayı
1
1
0
1
1
Ahlat, yabani erik,kuşburnu,
kızılçık, ıhlamur, yabani
çilek,böğürtlen
kuzukulağı, ısırgan otu,
kantoron otu, nane, kekik,
cıvan perçemi, tavşan dikeni,
çivan perçemi, labada
1
0
1
72
Services
Education
Eğitim
Pre-school
Primary school (1-5)
Primary school (6-8)
High school
Communication
Post office
Telephone
Internet
Infrastructure
Water supply
Sewerage
Waste collection
Facilities
Health service
hospital
clinic
ambulance
Veterinary service
Fire-fighter
Library
Guest house
Hotel
Pension
Bank
Market
Weekly market
Grocery store
Community hall
Tea-house
Transportation
# of days when road
unaccessible
Bus service
Minibus service
Taxi
Anasınıfı
İlköğretim (1-5)
İlköğretim (6-8)
Lise
İletişim
Postane
Telefon
İnternet
Altyapı
Su şebekesi
Kanalizasyon şebekesi
Katı atık
Hizmetler
Sağlık
hastane
sağlık ocağı
ambulans
Veterinerlik hizmeti
İtfaiye
Kütüphane
Konukevi
Otel
Pansiyon
Banka
Market
Pazar
Bakkal
Toplantı salonu
Kahvehane
Ulaşım
Yolların kapandığı gün
sayısı
Otobüs seferi
Dolmuş
Taksi
Sayı/Number
0=yok,
1=var
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
3
0
0
1
0
1
0
* Sometimes private cars provide taxi service
73
Issues and Needs
Sorunlar/Issues
Köyde orman üretim miktarı az
olması
Çiftçilik imkansızlıktan yapılamıyor,
yem çok pahalı süt çok ucuz .
Tarım aletleri yok, dışarıdan
kiralanıyor.
Gençlere iş yok.
Orman köylüsü devlet için üvey
evlat olması
İhtiyaçlar/Needs
Kadınlara eğitim verilirse dokumacılık
yapabiliriz
Yıldız dağlarının öncelikli bir alan
olması
Bir takım projelerin bu alana
önceliklendirilmesi
Alanın reklamının yapılması
Maddi ve manevi açıdan zengin bölge
olması için bölgenin desteklenmesi
Doğal güzelliği ile anılan bir alan
olması
Or-köy kredilerinin artırılması, daha
fazla bireye ulaşması
Organik tarım için gerekli alt yapının
oluşturulup tabana (halka)
yaygınlaştırılması
Gelirlerin il bazında değil de, ilçe ilçe
hatta köylere göre saptanması
Organik arıcılık, meyvecilik v.s
konularda yörenin desteklenmesi
Orman köylüsünün en azından üretim
süresince SSK’lı yapılması
Köyümüzdeki tarihi binaların
restarasyonu için gerekli desteğin
sağlanması
Üretilen ürünlerin markalanması için
gerekli desteğin sağlanması
Cultural and Historical
İlkbaharda kuzuların sürüye salınması tam bir şenlik havasında gerçekleşirdi(silahlar atılır, şarkılar
söylenir, dualar okunurdu)
Köyde imece usulüardımlaşma yapılırdı. Tarlada ekilen mısır toplandıktan sonra bütün komşular
toplanır mısır soyarlarken taze mısır pişirilip çalışanlara ikram edilirdi. Kış mevsimine girerken herkes
gücüne göre kışlık yiyecek: turşu, kuru meyva, kavurma, konserve hazırlar, et kurutulurdu.
Diğer bilgiler ve notlar/Other info and notes
Köyde yapılan toplantılarda kadınlar ve erkekler ile bir arada toplantı yapılmıştır. Kadınlar kendilerini
erkeklerin yanında çekinmeden ifade etmişlerdir.Köyde hayvancılık yapıldığı, köyün hayvancılık için
uygun olduğu belirtilmiştir. Toplantılarda projenin somut olarak ne sağlayacağı üzerinde sorular
sorulmuş, proje ile ilgili açıklamaların net ve anlaşılır olması istenmiştir. Özellikle alanda bugüne
kadar yapılan çalışmalarda birtakım sözler verildiği ve verilen bu sözlerin yerine getirilmediği
vurgulanmıştır. Alanın gelecekte nasıl görülmek istendiği, alanın değerleri, engeller ve çözümler
konusunda grup çalışması yapılmış, her grup yaptığı çalışmayı grup sözcüsü seçerek sunmuştur.
74
Plan Information
Köy halkına göre alanın gelecekte olması istenen durumu/Vision of the community
Vizyon: 1 grup
Doğal değerleri bozmadan ileriye dönük projelerle gelişmiş bir turizm bölgesi olarak görmeyi
istiyoruz. Köyümüzde gelen misafirleri ağarlamak için köyümüzde bulunan tarihi evlerin
restore edilip burada misafir edilmeleri ve kendi kültürel değerlerimizin tanıtılması
Vizyon: 2 grup
Buraya gelen kişilerin köyümüze zarar vermeden doğal güzelliklerinin bulunması
Yaptığımız işlerin pazarının bulunması
Maddi açıdan kalkınmak
Konaklama için yeni yerlerin açılmış olması
Vizyon: 3 grup
Üretilen ürünlere Pazar bulunması ile bölgenin ekonomik olarak kalkınması
Bölgenin kültürel özelliklerinin tanıtımı, bir çok alanın olması, turist çekmesi
Her türlü çalışmada bölgenin doğal güzelliğinin aynı olması
Alanın ilgi ve odak noktasında olması
Köy halkına göre Yıldız Dağlarının değerleri/ Values of the Yildiz Mountains
Görsel turizm değeri
Kış turizm değerleri
Hayvan ve bitki çeşitliliği
Rumlardan kalan evler
Doğal kaynak suları
Boşnak börek ve tatlıları
Toprağın çeşitli bitkilerin üretimine olanak tanıması
Belli dönemlerde çıkan çeşitli mantarlar
Daha önceki dönemlerde çeşitli kültürlerin yaşamış olması
Yöredeki değerler ve vizyonun gerçekleşmesinin önündeki engeller/tehditler /Threats
Devletin desteklerinin yetersizliği ve sürekli olmaması
Projelerde yöre halkını ikna etmede yetersizlik
Engellerin ve tehditlerin kaldırılması/azaltılması için yapılması gerekenler/ Removal
and or mitigation/reduction measures
Devlet ve yöre insanı işbirliği içerisinde çalışmaya yönelik güven ve inançın oluşması
75
ANNEX 8: SWG MEMBERS AND THEIR ATTENDANCE IN THE MEETINGS
Name
Kenan Şanlı
Osman
Karaelmas
Filiz İhtiyar
Zafer Kamay
Ruhi Eray
Müberra
Akkaya
Ahmet Güzel
Sencer
Yaylacı
Representation
Ministry of Environment and
Forestry
Ministry of Environment and
Forestry
Environment and Forestry.
Governor
Zahit Yılmaz
General Secretary of Special
Provincial Administration
Kırklareli University
Subgovernorship of Demirköy
(public training centre)
Subgovernorship of
Pınarhisar (Agriculture
Directorate)
Subgovernorship of Vize
Agriculture
Agriculture
Agriculture
Culture and Tourism
(Museum)
District Directorate of
Agriculture in Demirköy
Directorate of Kırklareli Forest
Enterprise
Feridun Tolga
Güven
Directorate of Forest
Enterprise in Demirköy
Hakan Kılınç
Selim Kuzu
Ayhan Çelik
Ayfer Kayhan
Şaziye Taş
Emir Tuzkaya
Mücahit Erel
22.7.2009
18.8.2009
15.9.2009
30.9.2009
8.10.2009
15.10.2009
+
+
+
22.10.2009
5.11.2009
12.11.2009
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
76
Name
Ufuk Özen
Nihan
Şahinbaş
Emre Sır
Sırrı Tayan
Hasan Temel
Hüsnü
Gültekin
Rıdvan Ulus
Vatan Avcu
Coşkun Uluk
Mahmut
Zipak
Mustafa
Çınar
Mustafa
Abakos
Osman Kınay
Faruk Akan
Suat Aydın
Kenan
Ceylan
Gürkan
Varolan
Zeki Ercan
Turan
Üstündağ
Ahmet Ege
Representation
Kırklareli Municipality
22.7.2009
+
Demirköy Municipality
İğneada Municipality (Tahir
Işık)
Kıyıköy Municipality
DEKAT (NGO)
TEMA (NGO)
Representatives of Hunting
Association
Beekeeping Association
Representatives of coop
Kiyikoy Water Product
Cooperative
Representatives of
Representatives of
Representatives of
Representatives of
Muhtars
Representatives of
Muhtars
Representatives of
Muhtars
Representatives of
Muhtars
Representatives of
Muhtars
Representatives of
Muhtars
18.8.2009
15.9.2009
30.9.2009
8.10.2009
15.10.2009
+
+
+
22.10.2009
5.11.2009
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
coop
coop
coop
Villages -
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Villages +
+
Villages +
+
+
+
+
Villages Villages +
+
+
+
+
+
+
Villages -
12.11.2009
+
+
77
Name
Sabahattin
Obuz
Burhan Göre
Remzi Kasap
Nazire Yıldız
Tülay Özkan
Dilek Öztürk
Derya Ercan
Fatma
Köybaşı
Nejat Dallı
Namık Ovalı
Metin Yılmaz
Salim
Dağdelen
Representation
Representatives of
Muhtars
Representatives of
Muhtars
Representatives of
Muhtars
Representatives of
women
Representatives of
women
Representatives of
women
Representatives of
women
Representatives of
women
Representatives of
young people
Representatives of
young people
Resource person
22.7.2009
18.8.2009
15.9.2009
30.9.2009
8.10.2009
15.10.2009
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
22.10.2009
5.11.2009
12.11.2009
Villages Villages +
Villages +
Villages +
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Villages Villages +
Villages Villages +
+
+
+
Villages +
Villages -
Resource person
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
78
Other participants to the SWG meetings
Name
Representation
Sema Göre
Tülay
Candan
Yeşilce Village
Fikri Erbaş
Büşra Sevim
Önder
Pakdemir
Aygül Çıngar
Münür
Saygın
Dursun
Saykın
Korcan
Karakoç
Tahsin
Doğan
Şerif Akgül
Eşber Oğuz
Adil Akyol
Hayrullah
Yalçınsoy
Hüseyin
Aydın
Bilge GÜVEN
Kadriye
Ceyhan
Ayfer Okan
22.7.2009
Sivriler Village
Kırklareli FDD
TEMA (NGO)
Sivriler Muhtar
Sivriler Village Board
18.8.2009
15.9.2009
30.9.2009
8.10.2009
15.10.2009
22.10.2009
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
AK Party Demirkoy Board
+
+
+
+
+
Demirköy
+
+
+
+
+
+
Demirköy FDD
+
+
İğneada Municipality
İğneada National Park Adm.
Kışlacık coop. member
Demirköy FDD
12.11.2009
+
+
+
5.11.2009
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
79
Name
Representation
22.7.2009
Mediha
Altınel
Demirköy
Gani Okan
Demirköy
Orhan Uyanık İDE (NGO)
Halil Tufan
Çukurpinar Village Muhtar
Ahmet Gül
Çukurpinar coop.
Halil Ülgün
Çukurpinar Village
Necati Tufan
Çukurpinar Village
Cumhur
Nişancı
Çukurpinar Village
Erdinç Çakar Karadere Village
Recep Şahin
Beypinar Village
Ahmet Çelik
Beypinar Coop.
Şerafettin
Aba
Armutveren Village
Zeliha İngeç
Gökyaka Village
Birol Coşkun
Yiğitbaşı Village
Bülent
Özkaya
Armağan Irrigation Coop.
Nazlı Kasap
Dereköy Village
Emin Ateş
Kışlacik Village
Şenay
Küçükuysal
Hamdibey Village
Betül
Üstündağ
Hamdibey Village
Mehmet
Aksoy
Aksicim Village Board
+: indicates attendance
18.8.2009
15.9.2009
30.9.2009
8.10.2009
15.10.2009
+
+
+
+
+
22.10.2009
5.11.2009
12.11.2009
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
80
ANNEX 9: CONTACT DETAILS OF SWG AND MPU MEMBERS
STAKEHOLDER WORKING GROUP
name
Provincial Directorate of Environment and Forestry
Kenan Şanlı
Osman Karaelmas
Filiz İhtiyar
Zafer Kamay
Governor
Ruhi Eray
Special Directorate of Kirklareli
Kırklareli University
Demirköy District Governorate (community training centre)
Pınarhisar District Governorate (District Agriculture Directorate)
Vize District Governorate
Provincial Directorate of Agriculture
Provincial Directorate of Culture and Tourism (museum)
Demirköy Directorate of Agriculture
Müberra Akkaya
Ahmet Güzel
Sencer Yaylaci
Hakan Kılınç
Selim Kuzu
Ayhan Çelik
Hasan Taylan
Emir Tuzkaya
Mücahit Erel
Kırklareli Forestry Management Directorate
Zahit Yılmaz
Demirköy Forestry Management Directorate
Kırklareli Municipality
Kıyıköy Municipality
DEKAD
TEMA
Hunters Association representative - Demirköy
Bee-keeping Union representative
Agricultural Development and Fisheries Cooperatives representative - Kışlacık
Agricultural Development and Fisheries Cooperatives representative - Boztaş
Agricultural Development and Fisheries Cooperatives representative - İğneada
Agricultural Development and Fisheries Cooperatives representative - Kıyıköy
Agricultural Development and Fisheries Cooperatives representative - Sislioba
Agricultural Development and Fisheries Cooperatives representative Yildiz Mountains Biosphere Project Report Series No. 7
Feridun Tandoğan
Güven
Ufuk Özen
Nihan Şahinbaş
insufficient no. of staff
after 15/08/09
Emre Sır
Sırrı Tayan
Hasan Temel
Hüsnü Gültekin
Rıdvan Ulus
Vatan Avcu
Coşkun Uluk
Mahmut Zipak
Mustafa Çınar
Mustafa Abakos
Osman Kınay
phone
5069468865
5442465098
2882125334
5333221123
2882144831
5367436399
5055433321
5322307450
5327955922
5423913429
5372016396
5438011084
2882142139
5369282059
2141020
5367009553
e-mail
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
5057830449
[email protected]
5327439623
5352736151
[email protected]
5456403480
5332211338
5436363902
5554964104
5553753560
5378852439
5358718628
5396003759
5373247229
5443049398
5358930391
[email protected]
[email protected]
5373247229
[email protected]
81
STAKEHOLDER WORKING GROUP
name
Demirköy
Agricultural Development and Fisheries Cooperatives representative - Balaban
Head of village - village representative - Aksicim
Head of village - village representative - Evciler
Head of village - village representative - Avcılar
Head of village - village representative - Beğendik
Head of village - village representative - Hamdibey
Head of village - village representative - İncesırt
Head of village - village representative - Sarpdere
Head of village - village representative - Yeşilce
Head of village - village representative - Dereköy
Women - village representative - Beypınar
Women - village representative - Çukurpınar
Women - village representative - Çukurpınar
Women - village representative - Beğendik
Women - village representative - Sivriler
Faruk Akan
Suat Aydın
Kenan Ceylan
Gürkan Varolan
Zeki Ercan
Turan Üstündağ
Ahmet Ege
Sabahattin Obuz
Burhan Göre
Remzi Kasap
Nazire Yıldız
Tülay Özkan
Dilek Öztürk
Derya Ercan
Fatma Köybaşı
Youth - village representative - Beypınar
Nejat Dallı
Youth - village representative - Çukurpınar
Resource person - Kızılağaç
Resource person - Beypınar
Namık Ovalı
Metin Yılmaz
Salim Dağdelen
phone
5357999209
5387649087
5353126594
5405956249
5398246773
5458040155
5458017471
5375817459
5362205404
5543782201
2882344134
2882344025
5442408555
2886954030
2886844064
2882344012
5447954270
5373645074
5358321425
5435369452
e-mail
[email protected]
82
MANAGEMENT PLANNING UNIT
no. of
participants
name
phone
e-mail
Ministry of Environment and Forestry – Ankara
General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks
1
Gencay Serter
5054084389
[email protected]
General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks
General Directorate of Forestry (Forest Managment Planning
Department and Photogrometry)
General Directorate of Forestry (Forest Managment Planning
Department and Photogrometry)
Regional Directorate of Forestry İstanbul
1
Cihad Öztürk
[email protected]
1
Vuslat Tilkici
3122075998
3122964000 /
5218
1
Mehmet Demir
5054281934
[email protected]
1
Hilmi Özdemir
5057711582
Representative of Special Provincial Administration
1
Erol Akyüz
1
[email protected]
Kırklareli
Fikri Erbaş
2882141214
5435370486
5068938303
[email protected]
m
[email protected]
1
Büşra Sevim
5323878263
[email protected]
Atatürk Soil and Water Resources Research Institution
1
Erol Özkan
[email protected]
Kırklareli - Forestry Administration Directorate
1
Şahin Aybal
Vize - Forestry Administration Directorate
1
Hüseyin Doğan
Demirköy - Forestry Administration Directorate
1
Enver Kara
5388569476
2882143068
5053185475
2883181084
5056898354
5052744866
Representative of Cooperatives
1
Mustafa Çınar
5373247229
Project Technical Assistance Team
1
Mesut Yaşar Kamiloğlu
5057711029
[email protected]
[email protected]
om
[email protected]
[email protected]
83
YILDIZ MOUNTAINS BIOSPHERE PROJECT
REPORT SERIES
N°.7: A participatory approach to planning the
management of the proposed Yildiz Mountains
Biosphere

No 7. A participatory approach to planning the management of

Transcription

Similar documents

7~lfc-r<S - Property File

The Climate Challenge

This was the 25th annual Tupper Lake Tinman Triathlon, in Tupper

THE BIOSPHERE PROJECT

VM - Village Market

Belstone - Dartmoor National Park

Dalmatisch stenen huis | U823 (6+2)

Bluffton-Low Country Village Flyer.indd

village ii - Henry S. Miller

Impressions flier.p65