Projects / Programmes
Common lands in Slovenia: cultural landscape between past and future
| Code |
Science |
Field |
Subfield |
| 6.12.00 |
Humanities |
Geography |
|
| Code |
Science |
Field |
| P510 |
Natural sciences and mathematics |
Physical geography, geomorphology, pedology, cartography, climatology |
| S230 |
Social sciences |
Social geography |
common lands, land use, cultural landscape, environment, society, rural areas, geography, Slovenia
Researchers (2)
| no. |
Code |
Name and surname |
Research area |
Role |
Period |
No. of publicationsNo. of publications |
| 1. |
08294 |
PhD Drago Perko |
Humanities |
Head |
2005 - 2007 |
1,034 |
| 2. |
19134 |
PhD Franci Petek |
Humanities |
Researcher |
2005 - 2007 |
132 |
Organisations (1)
Abstract
In Slovenia, common land has not yet been comprehensively studied, even though it represents an important cultural heritage of the Slovene nation and with its economic role contributes to the preservation of Slovenia’s countryside. It is a special type of cultural landscape that developed through the interaction of relatively constant natural conditions and changing social conditions, and therefore the linking of natural and social laws is essential for its research.Using the Geographical Information System, we will geocode the database of common land in Slovenia and establish how much common land there is, where it is located, and what its natural characteristics are. On this foundation, we will form a typology of the common land using the Ward method of cluster analysis that will help us define characteristic areas to study in detail. Within individual cadastral municipalities where a specific type of common land is located, we will determine the time and spatial changes to its extent, type of land use, and ownership and look for potential laws of its distribution relative to natural conditions.Using the Delphi method, we will determine the future of the common land relative to environmental limitations, current economic, social, and political conditions, and its place in the value scale of people – mostly owners, users, and residents living in the vicinity – in accordance with their conceptions of its economic significance and the protection of cultural heritage.
