the most prominent management problems in the national park

THE MOST PROMINENT MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS IN
THE NATIONAL PARK KOPAONIK
Šumarac Predrag and Saković Biljana
Abstract: Protected areas present “islands of wilderness” that are in theory protected
from all type of negative impact originate from human activity. This tool for nature
protection and biodiversity conservation is facing with constantly growing threats
which jeopardize its very existence. Variety of issues that are threatening the nature of
protected areas influence that management in them more or less effectively conduct
different measures with mitigating consequence towards these negative impacts.
This paper deals with problems of financing aspect of management, waste disposal and
illegal construction in the National park Kopaonik. Over the years these unsolved
problems (especially in the field of financing) culminated and seriously undermine
management efforts in relation to nature protection and biodiversity conservation.
Total budget amount and related financing structure are not optimally correlated with
prescribed role of national park and necessary management activities. Illegal and to
landscape inadaptable construction followed by undeveloped infrastructure lead
together to more negative impact towards national parks nature.
Key words: financing, nature protection, management, national park, illegal
construction
634
1. Introduction
Industrials revolution in 19 century provided precondition for rapid change of nature
and environment bringing adverse impact towards it. Since that period human kind
strive to find best possible solution for nature protection and preservation of
biodiversity. At this time protected areas present the best possible tools for nature and
biodiversity protection that human civilization have on its disposal.
National Park Kopaonik is among five national parks in Serbia and encompasses
territory of around 12 000 ha. Territory of mountain Kopaonik rich in unique natural
features and beauties was key factor in the process of proclamation this territory1 in
1981 as national park.
Since foundation National park in couple occasions change its organizational structure.
At the moment NP Kopaonik, like all national parks in Serbia, is organized as Public
enterprises under direct state authority.
Like most protected areas in the world National park Kopaonik or its management are
facing problems which seriously undermine non only its functioning but at the end and
its very existence as protected area. This paper will provide information about most
important problems in the National park Kopaonik.
2. Materials and methods
Nature protection and biodiversity conservation are activities from global importance
which should provide basic precondition for sustainable development not only for the
present generation but also and generation to come. This research is oriented towards
the most prominent problems in the National park Kopaonik. First problem elaborated
in this paper will be related with financing issues in the national park. Steady and
reliable financing of protected areas is one of the basic preconditions for fulfillment of
goals related to biodiversity protection. Fact that tourism development took place on
the mountain before foundation of National park Kopaonik contributed in great deal
that tourism related activities haven't been conducted in the manner that should support
nature conservation and biodiversity protection. Tourism related problems in National
park Kopaonik can be divided in two group: bad or poor waste disposal management
and illegal construction. Aim of this research is to provide thorough description of
management problems followed by reasons that caused present situation and their
consequence to proper functioning of national park. Purpose of this research is to point
out to possible solution and activities whit mitigation effects.
1
Only 4.3 %of mountain Kopaonik territory is designated as national park. This part of
mountain is known as Flat Kopaonik
635
This research fits into the applied research group because the audience and consumers
of the inquiry are going to be practitioners of different kinds and all interested
stakeholders.
Descriptive research should paint the picture of current situation in the national park
related to management and most prominent management problems, legislative and
institutional framework.
The research will be conducted as a case study because it offers possibilities to
scrutinize one or few cases for one period or across multiple periods of time2. The logic
of the case study is to demonstrate a causal argument how general social forces shape
and produce results in particular settings (Walton, 1992:122).The case in this research
is national park Kopaonik.
Qualitative inquiry processes or methodology with both primary and secondary data
will be used in this research. Non probability criteria or non random sampling with
judgmental attribute will be used for interviews. Interviews will be semi structured
with a set of predefined open ended questions which will follow the line of
investigation and provide an opportunity for additional clarifications.
3. Results
3.1. Institutional and legal framework
One of the primary goals of Serbian foreign policy is process of obtaining the full
membership in European Union. In line whit that orientation and based whit all
precondition stated in “acquis communautairi” Serbian parliament adopted in 2009 set
of "green" laws which incorporated critical substance of the EU Nature directives.
All activities that management, as well as other users of national park, conducts on
national park territory are regulated with the following set of laws3:
-
Constitution of Republic of Serbia(“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 83/06 )
Law on environmental protection (“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 135/04,
39/09)
Law on nature protection(“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 36/09)
Law on National Parks (“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 39/93, 44/93, 53/93,
67/93, 48/94)
Law on Public enterprise and fulfillment of function of public interest
(“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 25/00, 25/02, 107/05, 108/05)
Law on forestry(“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 30/10)
Law on tourism (“Official Gazette of RS”, No.36/09)
2
Handouts from Social research course-Karl Hogl, Michael Pregering and Peter Glück Sarajevo, 2007
3
Legal framework presented in this paper comprise only from the most important ones
636
For National park Kopaonik beside this legal framework the foundation for proper
management practice in the field of their responsibilities are based on the following
strategic planning documents:
-
Program for protection and development of National park Kopaonik
Forest management plan for state forest for 2004-2013 period
Forest management plan for private forest
Annual program for protection and development
Annual business program and following financial plan
When institutional framework is in question directly responsible ministry for the all
national park in Serbia is Ministry for nature protection and spatial planning. Other
responsible ministries for National Park Kopaonik and its activities are presented
below:
Figure 1 - Institutional framework for National Park Kopaonik
Source: Authors
3.2. Natural features and management responsibilities
Total protection area of national park Kopaonik is divided in tree zones:
-
4
First zone of protection include most valuable natural features (13 natural
reserves) and individual natural and stationary cultural welfare in total
amount of 1459.05 ha. This zone has highest level of protection and it is
divided in two sub zones: Ia4 (only scientific activity and strictly controlled
First zone is strictly conservation zone
637
-
-
education) and IIb (all like Ia and whit activities directed towards
maintenance and improvement of present ecosystem condition5
Second zone of protection include surface of 3941.46 ha whit active
protection status. In this zone certain management activities are allowed but
only if these activities have no consequences on primary natural values
(habitats, population and ecosystems)
A third zone of protection is the larges one whit 6691.2 ha. In this zone is
possible to use natural values but in accordance whit principles of
sustainable usage and sustainable development.
Around national park borders "Spatial plan of area whit specific purpose National Park
Kopaonik6" predict buffer or general protection zone whit area of 20000 ha whit preprotection purpose.
At the moment National park Kopaonik is organized as Public enterprise7 and
management have following responsibilities:
-
prevention of activities which might deteriorate basic features and other
properties of the national park
- protection, preservation and improvement of specific natural, cultural and
historical features that can be found within the national park territory
- development of activities such as scientific research activities, culture and
education activities, activities in presentation and popularization of the
natural and cultural values, development of tourism, recreational and other
activities with utilization functions of the natural and cultural values of the
national park........
PE ‘National park Kopaonik’ is also authorized for conducting others activities:
-
forest management (planning, silvicultural work ,protection and utilization)
protection, improvement and usage of game and fishing
organization of research activity in the field of protection and development
of National park
3.3. Financing situation
In order to meet foreseeable needs and challenges in forthcoming period management
of each company should develop a financial plan in which costs and revenues of
different activities (prescribed by a business plan or other strategic planning
documents) will be matched.
5
Law on nature protection (“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 36/09)
(“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 95/2009
7 Law on Public enterprise and fulfilment of function of public interest (“Official Gazette of
RS”, No. 25/00, 25/02, 107/05, 108/05)
6
638
Working in accordance with strict law regulation in regards to financial discipline of
company and having in mind difficulties in business performance of long term partners
caused by world economic crisis as well as transition process in a country and changes
in the company the following financial plan has been made and it is presented along
with achieved financial results in 2009:
Table 1-Revenus and cost in 2009(in thousands RSD)
Planed
Achieved
Total revenues
105 061,6
91 748
Total cost
103 261,3
90 822,3
Income8
1 800,3
925,7
Source: Izveštaj o radu JP" Nacionalni park Kopaonik" za 2009.godinu (Report about
National park Kopaonik business performance and activities for 2009)
All planned values from table 1 are realized in lower amount. Total amount of
revenues (achieved) for 2009 is, comparing to planned figure, lower for almost 13 % or
14 million RSD. Costs are also notably lower - 12% or 13 million RSD less comparing
to planned amount. Total income followed the downward trend of revenues and cost.
National park Kopaonik by the Law on nature protections9 has on it disposal following
sources of financing:
- State budget allocation
- Nature protection fund
- Revenue from own activities
- Project funding
- Donation, gift and aid
- Other sources
8
9
Total income-before tax deduction
Law on nature protection (“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 36/09)
639
Total amount of revenue for 2009 presented above is consisted from subsequent
revenue sources:
Table number 2- Structure of revenues for 2009(in thousand of RSD)
Revenue from forest wood product
Planed
Achieved
62 831.6
57 225.1
Revenues from charges for commercial 24 056
activities in NP
Cash inflow from state budget
8 500
13 940.4
Transferred revenues
5 500
7 292.5
Forest value adjustment
3 700
4 311.3
Other revenues
480
2 085.9
6 892.9
Source: Izveštaj o radu JP" Nacionalni park Kopaonik" za 2009.godinu (Report about
National park Kopaonik business performance and activities for 2009)
Protection, maintenance and sustainable management of forest within national park
present, among others, the most important goal of management. Due to this fact wood
based product from National park forests have a major share and provided from wood
sales present 62% of the total annual budget. This revenue is achieved in 91%.Main
reason for this level performance of main revenue source lies in the fact that plan for
trees marking and cutting wasn't completely fulfilled.
Revenues from charges for commercial usage of national park (tourist based
commercial activity prevailing in this item10) present a source of revenue with high
potential for future development which is as such recognized from NP management.
This revenue consists of charges from tourist based activities such as from restaurants
and hotels, and charges from renting land which is under the authority of the national
park. In 2009 this item presented 15% of total available budget. Like in previous years
the base for these charges is adopted from the Administrative board meeting decision
held in January 2002.
Budget allocation from Serbian Government as the revenue source has reached the
figure of 6.9 million RSD11 or 7.5% of total revenue. This modest state contribution to
overall financing of National Park Kopaonik, note decrease from 19% in comparing to
planned amount.
Transferred cash in flow from 2009 beside money for forest regeneration consists from
blocked and unused money which was out of financial flow of national park for several
years and which is now at the management disposal thanks to a court process that had a
positive outcome for National Park Kopaonik.
Forest increment for 2009 is presented in monetary values (forest value adjustment)
and because of this fact (it is presented as revenue) this item is taxable.
10
11
Indirect tourist charges
National currency
640
Other revenues are made by selling old equipment, fines collecting, and interest from
internal credit lines then throughout traditional manifestation of national park annual
assembly etc. Also in this item certain amount of money is earned from non-timber
forest product (mushrooms, blueberries) and guided tourist tours.
Graph 1-Revenue from wood products
Graph 2 -Revenue from charges for
charges commercial activities in NP
Percentages per years
Source: Master thesis- Improvement of Financing Aspects of Management in the
National Park Kopaonik (modified by authors)
Based on the financial results(revenue section) it is obvious that National Park
Kopaonik has two dominant sources of revenue which are forest wood products (whit
share in total revenue structure from 62%) and charges for commercial activities in
national park (whit 15% of share in total revenue structure).
If we take in consideration financial situation from 2006, 2007, 2008 years (graph 1
and 2) we can notice that these two dominant revenue sources from 2009 observed of
course in relative shares follow the general trend or revenue sources for 2006-2008
period. Based on observed years at least 85% of total annual revenue comes from this
these two sources. This percentage will be even higher if all the receivables from
previous year or years have been collected in accordance with signed agreements. A
financing situation like this implies that forestry is the main management activity in
National Park Kopaonik although the main purpose of the national park is nature
protection and biodiversity conservation.
For the period 2006-2009 (graph 3) state budget allocation notes slight increase.
641
Graph 3 -State budget allocation (in percentages of total revenue)
Source: Master thesis- Improvement of Financing Aspects of Management in the
National Park Kopaonik (modified by authors)
Different management activities related to nature protection and biodiversity
conservation, negative effect mitigation from diverse activities within the national park
borders, research and education activities followed by managing of state and private
forest stipulated the following costs:
Table number 3-Structure of cost for 2009
Cost of materials
Salaries, related taxes and personal
cost
Depreciation and reserve cost
Other business cost
Planned
5 850
41 306.3
Achieved
5 356.6
37 403.3
9 175
7 135.7
46 930
40 926.7
Source: Izveštaj o radu JP" Nacionalni park Kopaonik" za 2009.godinu (Report about
National park Kopaonik business performance and activities for 2009)
Item cost of material include office materials, outdoors uniforms, electric power and
cost of fuels, gear and car parts. Salaries and related taxes item include above all
compensation for members of the administrative and regulatory board with an amount
of almost 2 million RSD per year.. National Park Kopaonik have 39 employees with
average salary of 39000 RSD.
Third item in the cost table is consisted from depreciation cost and from reserve costs.
Reserve costs present an amount of money spent for regeneration of forest12, seed
12
Forest regeneration can be simple or extended. In the case of National park Kopaonik forest
regeneration is classified as simple
642
stands and other related activity. In respectable year 5.7 million RSD have been spent
for this purpose.
3.4. Problems derived from tourism activity
Mountain Kopaonik is site with extraordinary natural beauties, various ecosystems rich
in biodiversity, important historical and national cultural legacy. These prerequisites
influenced that mountain Kopaonik, especially part of the mountain which is
proclaimed as national park, become site whit numerous tourist visits. This one of the
biggest center of tourism activity in Serbia especially for winter tourism have about
250 000 visits per year.
Tourism in the national park has distinctively seasonal characteristic. During the winter
almost all capacities in the hotels are full in contrast to the rest of the year. Due to
seasonality attribute, annual accommodation usage of tourist facilities is very modest
25-30%13.
Most important center of tourism in the National park Kopaonik is without any doubt
complex of hotels followed by tourist supra - and infrastructure called Suvo Rudiste.
Several environmental and nature related problems are directly or indirectly connected
whit intensive tourism activities:
1. Problems of solid waste management
-
inadequate disposal, collection and removal of solid waste
(garbage)
-
inadequate disposal of construction waste (concrete, packages,
metals and other construction materials)
2. Lack of sewage infrastructure
3. Illegal construction
Waste collection and waste removal from tourist centre Suvo Rudiste is responsibility
of Raska municipality or more precisely PE Raska. In the winter, during the most
frequent tourist activity collection and removal of waste from predetermined places is
on very unsatisfactory level. Discharge cycles of garbage cans are irregular causing
garbage deposition. Waste problem is additionally supported by irresponsible visitors
which dispose different kind of garbage on and beside ski tracts. When tourist season is
over and snow finally gone unpleasant picture of tourist activity and bad waste
management is revealed. Different sized dunghills can be noticed close to ski tracks,
bellow line of ski lifts, close to tourist facilities usually on the side oriented towards
forest, close to place where garbage can are located.
13
Spatial plan of area whit specific purpose National Park Kopaonik(“Official Gazette of RS”,
No. 95/2009)
643
Every year after winter, personal from national park collects between 2000-3000 black
bags for garbage which presents additional financial burden for national park
management. 14
In 2008 following the general process of transition in the country all the biggest hotels
in the mountain have been privatized. Private capital introduced new business behavior
in order to attract new visitors and to remain leading regional position as winter
destination.
Reconstruction of interior and exterior of hotels produced huge amount of construction
waste. Reconstruction contractors have been obliged to properly dispose waste
produced in the process. Instead of waste removal to the local landfill, huge amount of
different construction materials have been disposed just bellow the mountain highest
peak, near to entrance of former mine on the altitude of 1600 m.
Beside this evidently huge violation of Np Kopaonik internal order regulation
whenever reconstruction of cottages or lodges takes place all construction waste is
disposed close to the regional roads usually beside the roads, in the forest. It is
important to mention that the same pattern of behavior present wide spread manners of
owners close to the borders of national park in the buffer zone (ex. cottage and lodge
settlement Lisina-Cajetina with 10000 beds).
Another problem related with tourist development and tourist activities in the national
park Kopaonik is sewage infrastructure. The most representative hotels are placed in
center Suvo Rudiste which is constructed in accordance with constriction planes.
Among others this included constriction of all needed infrastructure (roads,
telecommunication, electric lines, water and sewage system...). This work has been
done properly, at least properly in relations with general constriction rules. All sewage
from hotels, restaurants and shops are collected and transported whit pipes in sewage
treatment facility placed about 2 km below hotel complex, within the national park
borders. Sewage treatment process in this facility has been based on technology that
incorporates physical treatment and microorganisms' activity for purification process.
Thanks to high altitude and cold winters this sewage treatment facility haven't fulfilled
its function and very soon was abandon. Today all sewage from Suvo Rudiste tourist
center goes without any treatment directly in stream and forest below the sewage
treatment facility. Environmental impact and related consequence on the nature,
especially on the national park river system is enormous.
The construction and maintenance of sewage system before privatization of hotels in
2008 was responsibility of state company Genex who was at the same time and owner
of hotels in Suvo Rudiste. Now after privatization sewage infrastructure is
responsibility of Raska municipality.
Illegal construction, the third big problem in the NP Kopaonik, can be divided in two
subcategories:
14
-
exceeding of planned and prescribed caring capacities
-
construction of the cottages and lodges
Volume of this bags is 50 liters
644
Spatial plan of area with specific purpose National Park Kopaonik from 1989
prescribed limited number of beds for each tourist site within the boarders of NPK.
Actual situation, in regards to number of beds in tourist facilities, which are placed on
the territory of NPK revealed huge discrepancies. Suvo Rudiste exceeded planned
amount of beds for almost 2000 (prescribed number was 8000 and actual figure is
10000). Other site15 notes opposite situations in comparing to limited number of beds.
So far on these sites only 4% beds from prescribed 7000 have been built. New spatial
plan for area whit specific purpose National Park Kopaonik from 2009 retain limited
numbers of beds for each tourist site in previous rate.
In the period from 1976 to 2009 responsible authorities within the present boarders of
NPK and out of prescribed construction land press 82 charges for illegal construction.
4. Discussion
In most developed countries state funding for biodiversity protection is in line with the
level of protection of particular protected areas. This means that if the level of
protection is higher and the list of restricted activities longer then state funding is a
dominant source of revenue for financing management activities. With fewer
restrictions additional sources of revenues prevail in financing plans and results. In
Serbia funding of biodiversity protection and in this particular sense funding of
national parks is not among top government priorities. With 4.3 % average of state
funding in overall revenues it is clear that NP Kopaonik does not have the importance
that it deserves when state budget allocation are considered.
The main revenue generating activity in the national park is wood harvesting. This is
the most accessible, reliable and sustainable source of revenue at the moment. Several
reasons make wood extraction the most developed and most profitable management
activity at this point of time:
-
coniferous species as the most inherent ones in national park are a deficit
commodity in Serbian wood markets
-
a huge wood processing capacity in nearby area
-
good cooperation with the forestry sector
-
human resource capacity with trained and educated staff for this activity.
The average relative share of 62% indicates that other sources of revenue, more
precisely national park services like visitor information, recreational services, and
guided tours are seriously underestimated as revenue sources. Indirect tourist charges
levied on restaurants, hotels and sport facilities prevail in comparing to direct ones.
This fact supports the reality that National Park Kopaonik is lacking in services
provided to visitors and that extractive activities draw all management attention.
Information about existing guided tours organized by management is poorly
15
Srebrnac, Jaram, Rendara ,Gvozdac and Ciganska reka
645
disseminated among visitors resulting in a low financial contribution to the general
financing strategy.
The current combination of revenue sources is not optimal particularly in relation to
investing activity and core conservation goals and further diversification is a necessity.
But this cannot be accomplished without state support, good cooperation with tourist
companies and without external money inflow. Recurrent costs prevail in the general
cost structure of the national park. In a situation of short financial resources the
prevailing recurrent cost structure leaves little or no space at all for capital new
investment projects.
Organized construction and development of tourist supra- and infrastructure is
associated with state company General export16 and the year 1980. Large hotels and
following infrastructure have been constructed just bellow the mountain highest pick
(Pancicev peak) on the territory of future National park Kopaonik17.Thanks to
inefficient organization model of national park in that time, tourism prevail to impose
condition for future development to the national park (Nikolic et al.,1990). This fact
influenced that tourism and tourist activities have been developed and performed on
the way which is mostly uncorrelated with nature protection and biodiversity
conservation principle. The legacy of tourist activities which are not correlated with
nature protection have been continued to the present time.
Problems related with tourism activities in the national park cannot be solved only by
the park management and several reasons support this fact:
−
national park have no authority over waste management (except in the field of
situation monitoring and reporting18)
−
low awareness among visitors about importance of national park
−
sewage infrastructure is responsibility of Raska municipality
−
illegal construction is also out of national park authority(except in the field of
situation monitoring and reporting)
−
national park have no additional financial sources to deal with these problems
Nearest landfill which is in use for waste disposal from National park Kopaonik and
Raska municipality is 40 km away from national park Kopaonik. When waste
management (solid and sewage waste) problems are particularly in subject, European
Unions countries practice different models of public-private partnerships. Leaving
municipal authority or municipal company responsibility for deleing with waste
management issues showed low effectiveness and low efficiency performance. For past
30 years in the National Park Kopaonik this argument for waste management showed
its full validity.
16
General-export as company in that moment was engaged in international trade and tourism
National park is founded in 1981
18
Ranger service in the National Park Kopaonik has responsibility to monitor activities on the
filed and then in depends from situation to press charges against physical or juridical person
which committed violation.
17
646
Strategic documentation in the filed of spatial planning so far haven't accomplished it
role in preventing illegal construction. Prescribed capacities of hotel, cottages and
lodges for individual tourist site as compulsory guidelines haven't been followed.
Situating like this is leading to further concentration of tourist capacity and orientation
to solely winter tourism. New spatial plan for this area from 200919 whit orientations
and solution for future 20 years period will try to compensate mistakes from past
period.
5. Conclusion
Financing situation in national park Kopaonik has following characteristic:
−
Extractive resource activities as revenue source dominate
−
Only indirect tourist related charges are presently applicable
−
The national park services is undeveloped and not in a position to increase the
rate of self-financing activities
−
A financial gap exists between biodiversity related requirements and
investment activities
Two main revenue sources are wood harvesting and charges for commercial activities
in the NPK. Relative share of these two sources is 85%. Dominant role of these two
sources indicates that financing strategy of National Park Kopaonik is not adaptable.
Depending from small number of revenue source influence that management of
national park Kopaonik have huge problem in fulfillment of its major role and
responsibility which is nature protection and biodiversity conservation.
Possible solution for financing problems and problems related whit financing can be
found in future diversification of revenue structure and formulation of financing
strategy that will recognize new source of revenue (Figure 2):
19
Spatial plan of area whit specific purpose National Park Kopaonik(“Official Gazette of RS”,
No. 95/2009)
647
Figure 2 - New sources of revenue whit their relevance in time
Source: Master thesis- Improvement of Financing Aspects of Management in the
National Park Kopaonik
Tourist activity within boarders of national park is not correlated with nature protection
principle. In situation like this tourism cannot be considered as nature friendly activity.
Bad waste management is threaten to heavily damaged the natural balance in the
mountain especially in the filed of water ecosystems. Organization system of waste
management must be changed and organized in manner which will assure high
performance of conducted measures and activities. Company dealing with these
problems regardless to the owner structure must be bounded with related legislative
framework and clear contractual obligation.
648
References:
Bruner, A.G., Gullison, R.E. and Balmford, A. (2004). Financial Costs and Shortfalls
of Managing and Expanding Protected-Area Systems in Developing Countries,
BioScience 54(12):1119-1126
Emerton, L., Bishop, J. and Thomas, L. (2006). Sustainable Financing of Protected
Areas: A global review of challenges and options. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge: 97
(http://conservationfinance.net/Documents/CF_related_papers/sustainable-financing23feb.pdf)
Gutman P., Davidson S. (2007). A Review of Innovative International Financial
Mechanism for Biodiversity Conservation: With a Special Focus on the International
Financing of Developing Countries’ Protected Areas. WWF-MPO: 68
(http://www.conservation.org/sites/gcf/Documents/rev_int_financial_mechanisms.pdf)
JP Nacionalni park Kopaonik (2010). Izveštaj o radu JP" Nacionalni park Kopaonik"
za 2009.godinu
JP Nacionalni park Kopaonik (2009).Finansijsko poslovanje JP "Nacionalni park
Kopaonik"u 2008.godini
JP Nacionalni park Kopaonik (2008). Izveštaj o radu JP" Nacionalni park Kopaonik"
za 2007.godinu
JP Nacionalni park Kopaonik (2007). Izveštaj o radu JP" Nacionalni park Kopaonik"
za 2006. godinu
Neuman, Lawrence W. (2006). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative
approaches. Pearson education, Boston: 592
Schmithüsen F., Kaiser, B., Schmidhauser, A., Mellinghoff, St., Kammerhofer, A. W.
(2006). Preduzetništvo u šumarstu i drvnoj industriji-osnove menadžmeta i poslovanja.
Centar za izdavačku delatnost Ekonomskog fakulteta u Beogradu
Šumarac P., (2009). Improvement of Financing Aspects of Management in the
National Park Kopaonik-Master thesis report
Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and Methods. Sage publications,
London: 166
649