Aesop 2015 Book of Proceedings

BOOK OF PROCEEDINGS

13 – 16 JULY 2015, PRAGUE, CZECH REPUBLIC CZECH TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

D E F I N I T E S P A C E – F U Z Z Y R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y

ORGANISERS

PARTNERS

BOOK OF PROCEEDINGS

29th Annual AESOP 2015 Congress Definite Space – Fuzzy Responsibility July 13–16, 2015 | Prague, Czech Republic

ISBN 978-80-01-05782-7

Book of Proceedings AESOP Prague Annual Congress 2015 Definite Space – Fuzzy Responsibility

Autor (editor): Milan Macoun, Karel Maier (Ed.)

Edited by: České vysoké učení technické v Praze

Prepared by: Fakulta architektury

Address: Ústav prostorového plánování, Thákurova 9, 166 34 Praha 6

Tel.: +420 224 356 322

Published: only electronic version

Number of pages: 3495

ISBN 978-80-01-05782-7

The scientific content and standard of the papers is the sole responsibility of the authors.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD OF THE AESOP PRESIDENT …………………………………………………………………. 7

CONGRESS THEME …………………………………..……………………..………………………………..... 8

LOC MEMBERS …………………………………………………………………………....…………………..... 8

TRACKS AND TRACK CO-CHAIRS ………………………………………………………………………..... 9

ROUNDTABLES ……………………………………………………………..………………………………..... 10

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS …………………………………………………..…………………………………..... 11

FULL PAPERS (Oral presentations) .................................................................................................... 18

TRACK 01: Planning Theory and Methodologies: Towards an 'ethics of responsibility’? ……………..... 19

TRACK 02: Territorial Cohesion in the Multi-Actor Arena ……………………………………….………… 185

TRACK 03: Responsibilities in Planning Education and Practice ………………………...…….………... 231

TRACK 04: Participation and New Governance: Ethics, Responsibilities and Commitments ........ …………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………….397

TRACK 05: Legal Environment for Effective (Good) Governance and Efficient (Sustainable) Use of Land …………………………………………………………………………………………….……………..……….. 592

TRACK 06: Urban Design Quality and its Social Dimension ……………….....……...……...…………… 761

TRACK 07: Dealing with Urban and Rural Decline: Interplay of Actors and Responsibilities ……. ………………………………...…………………………………………………………..……………………. 1072

TRACK 08: Planning ‘in’ or ‘for’ Multicultural Societies. Diversity, Social Justice and Democracy ……. ……………………………………….………………………………………………………………….………. 1269

TRACK 09: Energy and Space as Resources / Limits for Planning Decisions ………....…..…………. 1376

TRACK 10: Planning in Weak Institutional Environment ……...…...…………................……………… 1473

TRACK 11: Planning across Borders: Transnational, International and Intergovernmental Planning and Spatial Management …………………………………….…...……………………………….….….…. 1620

TRACK 12: Responsibility for Social Cohesion in Housing, Cohousing and Neighbourhood Planning ….….….….….….….……..….….….….….….….….….….….………………..……….……………………. 1728

TRACK 13: Transport Planning and Mobility Policies: Available and Affordable Transportation ………………………………………………………………………………..………................………..….... 1810

TRACK 14: Responsible Economics, Economic Policies and Public Finance of Urban and Regional Interest ……………….....………………………………………………….…….….….….….………..……. 1959

TRACK 15: Culture, Entertainment, Tourism and Planning: Panacea or Threat? ……………...…….. 2037

TRACK 16: Planning Responsibilities in the Face of Information Technology ………………..………. 2215

TRACK 17: Ethics and Justice in Planning ……………………………………………………..…………. 2421

TRACK 18: Complexity, Planning and Fuzzy Responsibilities …………………………………….……. 2600

TRACK 19: Smart Approaches to Responsible-minded Planning Practice ……..……....…….…..….. 2994

FULL PAPERS (Poster presentations) ............................................................................................ 3271

TRACK 02: Territorial Cohesion in the Multi-Actor Arena …………………..….…………..…………… 3272

TRACK 05: Legal Environment for Effective (Good) Governance and Efficient (Sustainable) Use of Land …………………………………………………………………………..….……….…………...….. 3284

TRACK 06: Urban Design Quality and its Social Dimension ………………...………..…....……..…… 3299

TRACK 07: Dealing with Urban and Rural Decline: Interplay of Actors and Responsibilities …..…… 3341

TRACK 09: Energy and Space as Resources / Limits for Planning Decisions …….…….………...…. 3361

TRACK 10: Planning in Weak Institutional Environment ……...…...……….…...………….……...…… 3371

TRACK 11: Planning across Borders: Transnational, International and Intergovernmental Planning and Spatial Management …………………………………….…...…………………………….….…… …. 3381

TRACK 12: Responsibility for Social Cohesion in Housing, Cohousing and Neighbourhood Planning ….….……..….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….….…......…..……. 3394

TRACK 13: Transport Planning and Mobility Policies: Available and Affordable Transportation ………………………………………………………………………………..……………..…...………..….... 3408

TRACK 15: Culture, Entertainment, Tourism and Planning: Panacea or Threat? …………..….....….. 3417

TRACK 18: Complexity, Planning and Fuzzy Responsibilities …………………..…………….…..……. 3430

TRACK 19: Smart Approaches to Responsible-minded Planning Practice …………………..…....….. 3441

AUTHOR INDEX (authors included in the Book of Proceedings) ………….…..........….………..... 3485

AUTHOR INDEX (authors NOT included in the Book of Proceedings) …………..….…...….…..... 3492

.

FOREWORD OF THE AESOP PRESIDENT

Dear members and friends of the AESOP community,

Welcome in Prague for the 2015 annual AESOP Congress!

In these challenging and troubled times, the unpredictable and contested nature of our shared spaces forces us to develop innovative planning research, in the light of intellectual freedom, democratic enhancement of differences, cooperation, ethics and justice. This requires a deep sense of responsibility, individually as well as collectively, considering our ethical sensitivity, civic engagement and research commitment as parts of a wider social practice.

This issue – and the consequential dialectical tension – is at the core of the AESOP Prague Congress; in fact, the gap between sprawled powers and blurred sense of responsibility is the focus of the 2015 Congress debates. According to its intriguing title “Definite space – fuzzy re-sponsibility”, the Prague Congress asks us: who should take responsibility for how cities and regions are being changed? Our community will face this difficult question, with hundreds of papers and presences in Prague. This is a great occasion in order to consider whether anything systematic can be said about how such ethical and political issues arise, hence how they might be understood, and addressed today.

The AESOP Prague Congress also provides an opportunity for researchers in planning to think about the implications for their work of the changes in governance and planning which have been both a spur for, and object of, their academic work. In large measure, these derive from a perennial set of ethical issues surrounding research which seeks to inform public policy. There are ethical challenges which are distinctive of the kind of research which at least some planning researchers undertake, in contexts of social tension and/or conflict, sometimes associated with clear oppression and injustice. These circumstances are only more extreme versions of the challenge to any planning scholar, because the definition and use of space is bound up with social justice in the broadest sense, and the way power – and governmental responsibility – is exercised in society.

Consequently, one of the purposes of the Congress is to explore ways of thinking about plan-ning which considers the social context of ethical perception and public political behaviour. By doing this, we hope to shift the emphasis of discussion from individual and/or occasional probity to those circumstances that help planners and public officials develop and use sound ethical judgement: in public life, in society, in our cities as well as in our schools. Although the moral landscape within which planning is undertaken is not an easy one to read or traverse, the Con-ference debate and contributions will certainly identify significant planning issues which can constitute part of an agenda for discussion among researchers and policy-makers.

Due to the excellent and terrific work of the Prague Local Organizing Committee, the AESOP Congress 2015 is providing the best environment for all this, and I wish a fruitful and intellectu-ally attractive experience to all the participants!

Francesco Lo Piccolo

CONGRESS THEME

Definite space – blurred / fuzzy responsibility While many of the initiatives and powers moved outside public control, the sense of re-sponsibility for spatial change and sustainable development of cities and regions hardly overstepped the domain of city halls and ministries, and planners as their experts. The gap between sprawled powers / potency and blurred sense of responsibility should be the focus of the Congress debates.

Our cities are spreading, the distances that most of us have to travel for jobs, shopping, enter-tainment, etc. are steadily increasing, and money available for maintenance and improvement of roads, utilities and public services is shrinking. Rich people are retiring to gated communities while some others may remain trapped in social and ethnic ghettoes.

All these problems are expected to be tackled by planning as an instrument for urban and re-gional management. But planning itself was affected by drift from hierarchic control by state and local governments, through public-private partnership projects, to governance where the actual field of municipalities´ and states´ action is dissolved and shared with business. Also many ser-vices formerly provided by public domain have been outsourced. Who should take responsibility for how the cities and regions are being changed?

LOC MEMBERS

Chair Professor Zdeněk Zavřel, Vice-Dean, Faculty of Architecture, Czech Technical University in Prague

Executive Chair Professor Karel Maier, Czech Technical University in Prague Arch. Petr Durdík, President of the Association of Urbanism and Planning Prof. Maroš Finka, Slovak Technology University in Bratislava – PhD workshop Arch. Jan Kasl, planning practitioner, Ex-Mayor of Prague Prof. Ladislav Lábus, the Dean of the Faculty of Architecture, Czech Technical University in Prague Prof. Vojtěch Petráček, Vice-Rector of the Czech Technical University in Prague Arch. Ivan Plicka, Chair of the Czech Chamber of Architects Tomáš Sklenář, Ministry of Regional Development of the Czech Republic Dr. Matěj Stropnický, Vice-Mayor of the Capital City of Prague Dr. Jakub Vorel, Vice-Dean, Faculty of Architecture, Czech Technical University in Prague

Contact person Vít Řezáč

Executive part Irena Benešová, Veronika Brejchová (GUARANT – congress organiser), Zuzana Krmelová, Mi-lan Macoun, Kateřina Rottová, Martin Šilha, Jana Tóthová, Daniel Zahrádka, Petra Zhřívalová

TRACKS AND TRACK CO-CHAIRS 1. Planning Theory and Methods. Towards Ethics of Responsibility Willem Salet Enrico Gualini

2. Territorial Cohesion in the Multi-Actor Arena Dominic Stead Juho Luukkonen

3. Responsibilities in Planning Education and Prac-tice Andrea Frank Anna Geppert

4. Participation and New Governance: Ethics, Re-sponsibilities and Commitments Louis Albrechts Doris Gstach

5. Legal Environment for effective Governance and efficient Use of Land Rachelle Alterman Leonie Janssen (TBA)

6. Urban Design Quality and its Social Dimension Ali Madanipour Marion Roberts

7. Dealing with Urban and Rural Decline: Interplay of Actors and Responsibilities Martina Schretzenmayr Wim Van Der Knaap

8. Planning “in” and “for” Multicultural Societies. Diversity, Social Justice and Democracy Lia Vasconcelos Angelique Chetti-

paramb

9. Energy and Space as Resources / Limits for Planning Decisions Thomas Fischer Giancarlo Cotella

10. Planning in Weak Institutional Environment Jose-Miguel Fernandez Guell Pantelis Skayanis

11. Planning across Borders: Transnational, Inter-national and Intergovernmental Planning and Spa-tial Management

Stefanie Dühr Jochem De Vries

12. Responsibility for Social Cohesion in Housing, Cohousing and Neighbourhood Planning Nikos Karadimitriou Roelof Verhage

13. Transport Planning and Mobility Policies: Available and Affordable Transportation Angela Hull Morten Skou Nico-

laisen (TBA)

14. Responsible Economics and Public Finance of Urban and Regional Interest Michael Getzner Francesco Musco

15. Culture, Entertainment, Tourism and Planning: Panacea or Threat? Jan Schreurs Piotr Lorens

16. Planning Responsibilities in the Face of Infor-mation Technology Paolo Nunes Silva Michele Campagna

17. Ethics and Justice in Planning Simin Davoudi Willem Buunk

18. Complexity, Planning and Fuzzy Responsibili-ties Peter Ache Maroš Finka

19. Smart Approaches to Responsible-minded Planning Practice Petra Hirschler Roberto Rocco

ROUNDTABLES M1 Housing between identity and memory: on the go Giulia Maci, IFHP

Viviana Rubbo

M2 Territoriality and its role in contemporary European integration

Tobias Chilla Jonathan Metzger

M3 The Political Meaning

Of Informal Urbanisation

Roberto Rocco Jan van Ballegooijen

M4 Situated practices of strategic planning Louis Albrechts Alessandro Balducci

M5 Climate Change, environmental risks, resilience and their implications for planning education

Richard Sliuzas Cassidy Johnson

M6 Planning Perspectives on Civic Initiatives Adriaan Slob Beitske Boonstra

M7 What, actually, is neo-liberalization? Exploring a highly contentious concept

Stefano Moroni Barbara Pizzo

M8 Conversations in Planning’: An YA-AESOP collabora-tion

Mona Abdelwahab Verena Peer

M9 Spatial and Transport Development on a Macro-Regional and European Scale: The case of the EU TEN_T Orient/East-Mediterranean Corridor (Former Cor-ridor 22)

Prof. Bernd Scholl Prof. Andreas Voigt

M10 Planning History - Are there Lessons from the Past for the Future

Dirk Schubert, IPHS Prof. Dr. Carola Hein

T1 Being and becoming a planner: Exploring, engaging and learning from young planners' journeys

Tuna Tasan-Kok Mark Oranje

T2 The EU Urban Agenda in Cohesion Policy 2014-2020: why, how and for whom?

Anna Geppert Laura Colini

T3 Creating policy spaces for innovation Robin Hambleton Sandro Balducci EURA

T4 Multi-disciplinary critical perspectives on urban secu-rity/safety

Simone Tulumello Feras Hammami

T5 The planning research agenda Michael Harris Janet Askew RTPI

T6 What Actor-Network-Theory offers to Planning Laura Lieto Robert Beauregard

T7 Connecting Sustainability Knowledge and Action in Urban Planning

Meg Holden Majken Toftager Larsen

T9 EU-HORIZ0N 2020 - INSPIRATION: INtegrated Spatial PlannIng, land use and soil management Research ActTION

Uwe Feber Maroš Finka

TRACK 18

Complexity, Planning and Fuzzy Responsibilities

Track description Co-chairs: Peter Ache, Maroš Finka

Cities and regions are facing increased complexity and fuzziness of their spatial and functional structures. Their institutional and managerial systems, including planning, are expected to man-age it, but their capacities are limited. Moreover, additional new structures have appeared, which may rather contribute to the complexity on the management side, many of them making responsibilities becoming even fuzzier than before. Perhaps, we perceive such a situation more intensive with the recent economic and political disturbances being confronted with the ques-tion: “Can planning respond to both, the challenges of complex issues and of fuzzy responsibili-ties?“

The track invites academic and practice referring papers reflecting current concepts and prac-tices in urban regions, like metropolitan or city regions, both inside and outside Europe. Spe-cifically, the papers are expected to address the following questions:

Which new forms of governance are evolving in functionally closely related urban re-gions? How can they be described and understood in their operation? What are our theo-retical or conceptual tools to support our understanding – and maybe also our attempts to improve their management capacities?

The attempts to manage complex urban regions on the basis of distributed responsibili-ties and resources are mostly understood as expert realm. How can a citizen’s perspec-tive or the proto-professional world help create the necessary innovations in our man-agement approaches?

Planning and its organisational structures are just one player in the management of com-plex urban regions. How can we understand the interconnected system of policy making and implementation that shapes the framework conditions for the operation and the plan-ning challenge of complex urban regions?

While focusing on above topics, the papers should also make sure that the audience/readers have a good understanding of the region under consideration, relevant historical and actual de-velopment trends, and relevant politico-administrative aspects of national and urban planning systems.

29th Annual AESOP 2015 Congress | July 13–16, 2015 | Prague, Czech Republic

2600

EXPLORING ALTERNATIVE METHODOLOGIES OF SPATIAL PLANING IN WESTERN BALKANS The case of “Albania 2030 National Strategic Visioning” By: Prof.Dr. Besnik Aliaj1, Doc. Sotir Dhamo2, MSc. Eranda Janku3

1 POLIS University, [email protected] 2 POLIS University, [email protected] 3 POLIS University, [email protected] ABSTRACT One of the biggest challenges of our country still remains the consideration of urban planning as a management tool for controlling the development, in order to achieve territorial, social and economic cohesions. The transition from a centrally planned economy, where everything was controlled by the government, towards decentralization and market economy caused many consequences, among which uncontrolled and fragmented urban development, loss of agricultural land due to urbanization, concentration of population and dense urbanization in the major cities, abandonment of western lowland and eastern parts of the country etc. This research work tries to build against the vacuum that is created in Albania by the lack of tradition of national spatial development policies and plans, on the conditions of market economy and freedom. Previous elements of national visioning have not been sustainable in the long run, due to the fact that they have been imposed by authoritarian means and not understood as a real need of the country and society, facing growing competition among nations at global scale, and the need for creative solution, facing economic recession and waste of national resources. Therefore this work is a modest practical and theoretical contribution for Albania with a hope that could be useful also for the Albanian authorities, while undertaking action at such level. In return the Albanian case of national spatial visioning might serve as an interesting learning laboratory for the new science of spatial planning in Europe and beyond. INTRODUCTION: Albania: Urban Development Models 1945-1990: From the beginning of the ‘90s Albania was one of the most centralized planned economies, where government practically owned everything and controlled all forms of territorial developments. Two main criteria characterized the urban development and the whole process and structure of urbanization in the country: the combination of concentration and centrality (Aliaj, 2003, “Making Cities Work”). The main planning instrument during this period was the so-called “Regulatory Plan” for living urban areas, which was very rigid and did nothing more than showing where and what was the use of each building, with very poor appliance of architectural standards. Even though an official national spatial plan was still not to be mentioned, the interventions and policies taken by the authorities of the time were somehow the first steps toward a national spatial planning conception. Although, this was done on the basis of top-down principles and centralizing objectives. This was represented by the government’s aims on the economy of the country, which were directly related with territorial impact and development. The government’s top aims were to set-up and prioritize the development of new


2613

mailto:[email protected]



industries. Based on this economic policy, the main principle for taking the decisions in relation with the industrial allocation, were by setting up these industries nearby raw-material and thermo-energy sources, as well as near the consumption centers, which in most of the cases was followed with the foundation of new industrial cities. On this context the main priorities of the government of the time were to ensure the harmonious development of industry and agriculture, in favor of the general progress of the countryside, and the support of the intensification of agricultural production. Related to this last intervention, the government aimed to use it as a barrier for preventing urbanization. Authorities neither wanted, neither could afford quick urbanization and its consequences. But this accumulated and exploded after the ‘80s. Meanwhile before this period the government aimed to improve the living conditions in less-favored agricultural areas, and to concentrate the resources in well-suited regions of high productivity, in order to keep the population there and occupied with the agricultural activities. But during the ‘80s the sustainability of such centralized spatial planning system collapsed totally.

Figure 1: Urban Development models 1945-1990 Albania: Transition of Planing System 1991-2014 From the beginning of the ‘90s Albania became a more open and a democratic country, so on the following years the Albanian Parliament approved two planning laws, namely “Laws of Urbanism”, No. 7693 (1993) and No. 8405 (1998), which changed many times on the later years. Both these laws presented the general regulations for the development, location and architecture of the structures, based on the land use. Even though the second law made some new changes and improvements compared to the first one, it still didn’t succeed on recognizing the recent changes of the territory: the informal developments and the ownership transference, from the state to the private sector, otherwise known as the “privatization process”. Therefore, yet, failing to set national spatial planning and development objectives. However it must be specified that until 2006 territorial planning in Albania


2614

was mainly based on the tradition of the so called “Urbanism”, with culture of “blueprint” authoritarian planning, mainly with physical objectives. In 2006 the government decided to reform legislation and move towards more abstract rules and principles of decision making related with spatial planning, regional planning and national policies, influenced by two main forces: (i) the bottom up pressure coming from the local initiatives, mainly represented by Co-Plan, Institute for Habitat Development, a local NGO inspired by the Dutch Planning Schools; (ii) and political influence of the international partners/donors in Albania, mainly represented by the development assistance programs like World Bank, UNDP and USAID, and the Dutch and Austrian Technical Assistance in Albania. The 2006 Legalization Reform, for the first time articulated the term “Spatial Planning”, but despite the recognition of such need, no Spatial Plan was drafted indeed. Instead, a policy document was drafted, but never turned into a legal document and a spatial plan. Furthermore, capacity building programs did not associate the initiative, in order to prepare the un-experienced local/regional governments, which were not yet able and trained to cope with the new spatial concepts (Toto, 2012). However, despite the new reform law, which was approved by the parliament, in 2007 a law for the formalization and integration of the informal settlements in Albania was approved, also associated by a process of self-declaration of the informal constructions. In addition, a national aerial survey, and the respective GIS applications developed into a national system, including a national registry of planning initiatives and development permits. In 2009 the parliament approved the new “Territorial Planning” law, which was a framework law for emerging spatial planning concepts and development processes, but it was still very detailed on some other aspects, and its implementation was totally depended by the relevant bylaws and specific regulations, which were yet not fully completed. It’s also important to recognize that the present Territorial Planning Law is a legal instrument, which brought new spatial development concepts and practices in comparison to the previous laws. These new concepts amongst other include the introduction of new compulsory development instruments such as the detailed local instrument/ plan (Albanian: PDV/ IDV); in order to avoid the plot based development and allow for the transference of development rights; etc. Few changes were made to this law for electoral purposes during 2013, but there still remain the same concepts for territorial planning law for Albania (Toto, 2010). On 2014 the new government has initiated the reform for the administrative and territorial reorganization of the country, which started with proposals to consolidate existing local governments and reorganize regions. So far the government has been on favor of the proposal with the 35-47 LGU and there is still no decision made regarding the reorganization of the country in regions, although several proposals have been taken in consideration. However it is very important to mention the three main priorities that the government has: (1) drafting the National Plan of Albania; (2) drafting the Integrated Coastal Zones, (3) drafting the Durrana Plan. As a conclusion, after the changes of early ‘90s till now-days, Albania practically shifted to another extreme. It has been one of the most liberal economies of the former Eastern Europe, with practically no spatial planning policies and no control of authorities over the territory. Despite several attempts to reform the planning legislation, almost nothing has been working on the ground level, especially at national scale. In spite of efforts made over the last decades, territorial development and administration still remain misunderstood by professionals and mishandled by politicians. (Aliaj, Dhamo, Shutina, 2010). The planning system will continue to go into further changes, because of


2615

regular political changes and economic recession. Therefore its instability will remain a main issue for the coming years, until a balance is reached from inertial pressures of transitional developments. However the big urbanization and construction boom, as well as consequences of informality are becoming at ease, thanks to the relatively small size of the country and “completion” of urbanization as well. Planning Problems and Consequences: During the last 20 years the so considered traditional “urbanism”, in the sense of strict application of the principles of “codes and distances”, has become more a kind of “administrative alibi” for the corruptive over-exploitation and densification of land, rather than an urban management tool. People have taken matters into their own hands, undertaking extreme individualistic solutions, and aiming to avoid inflated prices and often corrupt procedures of public administration (Aliaj, Dhamo, Shutina, 2010). So in the overall, this led to chaotic initiatives and informality, which spread all over the country. Practically 90% of businesses and 80% of properties are considered to have at least certain degree of informality (Albanian Government, ILD Peru/UNDP, 2007). This resulted in serious environmental concerns, development of an arbitrary property system, over-densification of the main living centers, and loss of agricultural land. Therefore, efforts of spatial planning, especially at the urban scale have been failing, among others, because of the lack of planning instruments and lack of national/regional visioning, as well as confusion among different ministries over such competency. Such a radical process of changes has been promoting further urbanization and displacements/changes of economic structures, while threatening irreplaceable spatial and natural potentials of the country. New Territorial Realities and Challenges On these conditions, Albania met with a new reality over its territory at the brink of EU accession. According to the latest INSTAT, Population and Housing Census of 2011, peripheral regions in the north and south of Albania have been nearly abandoned, while the central and western ones, although have been more dynamic on the urban growth perspective, they still have not kept apace with population growth. Whereas the population has tripled in the capital region, and developed land has doubled without proper physical and social infrastructure, thereby creating a problematic urban model (Aliaj, Dhamo, Shutina, 2010). This in return harms future development of the country, especially high expectations on tourism, agriculture and energy developments (Aliaj, 2008). On top of that, more than 2 decades after the social-political changes of early ‘90-s, Albanian administration has not been able yet to develop and approve a spatial vision at the national scale, not mentioning the total lack of professional capacities on the way this vision must develop and be visually represented. This consequently harms economic growth and prosperity and is worsened by the failure of authorities in establishing a stable property registration system, and fair property restitution inherited by the past. Authorities need to also learn how to formulate understandable policies and translate them properly into policy and cartographic representations, in order to ease their implementation and easily address them to their aimed institutions and audience. So far no one has been contributing to these aspects, so it’s crucial to work on both directions: the instruments of visioning and techniques of visualizing. This includes the use of statistical basis, with a constructive “dose of creativity”, in order to synthesize and reach to aimed trend-scenarios and proposals regarding the national economic, environmental and spatial development.


2616

In conclusion, despite the fact that Albania has entered a radical and quick process of change, and that there has been a combination of a set of inherited problems, it must be emphasized that the lack of national spatial development policies and plans has been seriously harming the sustainable growth of the country. This is a result of both, lack of understanding at political/ decision-making levels, as well as poor professional capacities at specialized institutions. Therefore the sustainability of future growth and the solution of the accumulated problems need now a qualitative jump at strategic level. The drafting and implementation of a national spatial development plan is considered as the next strategic step to be undertaken by Albania, to adapt to the standards of the EU family. Research Proposal & Aims: National governments in some countries, take the lead in creating a proactive and integrative spatial planning system that can encourage investment and facilitate more sustainable development (Alterman, 2001; European Commission, 1997). Indeed it is a common fact for most of the Southeastern European countries (including Albania) that lack of such initiative, results nowadays in sufferings from chaotic growth and informal developments manifested in sprawl of urbanization. Inspired by the Albanian context and its need for future sustainable development, this thesis project aims to help on drafting a series of national spatial concepts, which will be used to formulate an overall national spatial development vision for the territorial development. Since there is a lack of understanding of planning policies regarding the poor communication and poor cartographic language, which also affects their implementation, the product of this research paper will be followed also by some guidelines on how to make a proper and understandable translation, through the presentation of a set of recommendations and principles, the introduction of a spatial development vision and the visualization all of these documents with respective cartographic material. Methodology So far, there has been no research work done to address or support the creation of a spatial development vision for Albania, so it was quite essential to first start the work with the observation of other cases, where spatial development policies have been implemented. In order to collect this information, the work was based on two types of research methods:

- Field study (interviews, group discussions, meetings, conferences, etc. also considered as primary data);

- Reading and reviewing of local/international reports and literature (secondary data);

The revision of the specialized literature on the applied spatial policies in the EU countries and other cases, which are leading on this aspect, gave input on learning how spatial planning works, and how to apply it on our context. At this point, evidencing the progress of such debate on the national scale, by interviewing key-stakeholders, professionals and decision makers was very crucial. An integral part of this phase was also the participation in conferences, workshops and meetings organized in Albania on this subject, or related issues, on the framework of EU integration of the country, and national spatial development policy related. The reading and reviewing of local/international reports and literature, was particularly important for identifying the international efforts made on this subject. Regarding the Albanian situation related with this topic, despite the published written materials, there were also two main local sources that provided the necessary information: (i) Statistical instruments


2617

from the official data since the 1990’s; especially the 2001 and 2011 population and buildings censuses; (ii) Maps and areal images before the ‘90s and up to date, especially the maps of during late ‘80-s of the ‘National Institute of Military Topography’; and the national areal survey of 2007 during legalization process undertaken by ALUIZNI (albinfo.al). A NATIONAL SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT VISION FOR ALBANIA Developing a national spatial vision and formulating spatial concepts in a context like Albania, on which no previous attempts have been made, and planning has not been working, makes it challenging. It’s very important to take into the account the fact that during the period of centralized economy, territorial policies aimed mainly at agricultural purposes, while anti-urban policies were regular practices in the country. On top of such tradition, during the last 2 decades Albania was also pushed by the international partners towards an assistance, which aimed the use of agricultural potentials and natural resources (like energy and mining). Practically at this moment are considered only development issues of agriculture, forestry and tourism, but they have not been fully addressed and considered, as a complete set of potentials. Let alone they were never seen interrelated with the urbanization process. At this point, the national spatial development vision should address specifically such issues, formulating policies and related spatial concepts for protecting and using them properly, in order to provide territorial, social, economic and sustainable development. At this point working on the basis of “ecological planning” concepts, which offer practical blueprint for a new, healthier relationship between the built environment and nature, is quite essential (Ian McHarg, 1969). On the other hand, having put to practice the comparative planning theory (Faludi, 1973) it’s very important and helpful. Issues to address on a national scale - In order to establish a national spatial vision one might address several critical issues:

- The need to establish a good system of statistical database, based on the same indicators, which can allow professionals and decision makers to make research and on that basis to take the right decisions to address existing problems;

- In order to establish a long term spatial system is necessary to establish also good geographical information systems, which allows drawing different graphical outcomes, which are helping better management of territorial and spatial potentials.

- The national planning legislation and procedures must encourage and enforce the design and implementation of national visions, which serve as an instrument for central, regional and local governments for good spatial governance.

- Therefore the planning practice needs also to have a school and tradition on how to draft, design a national spatial plan, on basis of well accepted technical and graphical tools. This is important because professionals at national scale and decision makers must establish a common language and understanding of such instrument.

- Last but not least the spatial plan at national scale must be associated with sub plans of spatial importance for the country, which treat in details sectorial issues like: national trunk infrastructure plans, land use plans, environmental and sustainable development plans, social economic development plans etc. However it does not mean that the importance of spatial national plan can overshadow the importance of planning at other levels of planning (regional and local), because a


2618

combination and complementation of planning tools at three levels, can be the only solution for a long term sustainable development and positive social economic growth. Context analysis - In order to start setting up a set of principles and then visioning, is very important to understand the context in Albania, regarding the social-economic-and territorial components. The research work took in consideration several main indicators for each interest field, and for each group of analysis there was made a synthesis with conclusions (more detailed information on part 1 of the annexes).

The Social Development - The population density is higher on the central parts of the country, mainly in the metropolitan area; - Based on the altitude, the population distribution increases from the low plain areas (0-300m) towards

the low and medium mountainous (301-800), and the high mountains of over 800m; - The urban population is higher mainly on the central and southern parts of the country; - According to the age groups, the group of 15-64 years old dominates in the whole country, but

however the higher rate of 0-14 years is more accurate on the northern regions, while the higher rate of 15-64 years on the central parts, and the last group of over 64 years old has a higher rate on the southern regions.

The Economic Development - The population of the south-west and the metropolitan area works mainly on the non-agricultural

activities; - These areas have also the highest rates of own income; - Meanwhile the highest rate of investments p.c is mainly on the north-east and south-east areas (which

are poorer, but with touristic, landscape and cross border cooperation potentials); - Unemployment is higher on the north-west (agricultural and touristic values), and lower on the

northeast areas. - The Territorial Development - Sea ports play a crucial role on the import/export of goods and also on the touristic flows; - From these focal points the main national roads distribute the flows (of goods or/and people) towards

the other parts of the country, where the metropolitan area, the seaside west and south and the mountainous north and south are the most famous ones; the central inlands of the country are more abandoned, less developed and not well integrated with the rest of the country;

- The railway system could play a crucial role on connecting the less developed areas, but this infrastructural system is outdated and old, and does not play its role properly;

- The cross border areas are very important, because of the activity they generate and the opportunities they present for both parts of the territory, Albanian and/or not.


2619

Map 1: Social, Economic and Territorial Development Profiles of Albania

Set of Principles - The formulation of a spatial vision for Albania needs to be supported by a set of principles, which build on existing potentials and ensure sustainable development. These principles will be then explained and translated through a series of spatial concepts.

1. RegionalismBased on the foundation of regions of different importance within a country, which consists on the creation and implementation of institutions that express a particular identity and shape collective action within a geographic region, and also as a political ideology that focuses on the interests of a particular region or group of regions, whether traditional or formal.

2. Polycentrism and Growth Poles: - Polycentrism, based on the theory of Palmiro Togliatti refers to the organization of a region around

several political, social or financial centers. A county is said to be polycentric if its population is distributed almost evenly among several centers in different parts of the county.

- The central idea of the growth poles theory is that economic development, or growth, is not uniform over an entire region, but instead takes place around a specific pole, or cluster (Rodrigue, Comtois, Slack, 2013).


2620

3. Development Corridors and Free Economic Areas:

- Development Corridors provide connections between different nodes or hubs of urbanized and economic agents along a defined geography, and they work as a system, or in terms of the network effects, that they include.

- Free Economic Areas refers to designate areas, well equipped with infrastructure and services, in which companies are taxed very lightly, or not at all in order to encourage economic activity.

4. Sustainable Development through the consideration of Natural Potentials and Green Corridors - Sustainable Development stands for a good balance between the three components economy-

environment- society, and promotes the preservation of natural and cultural heritage on long terms. - On the other hand green corridors represent areas of habitat, which connect wildlife populations

separated as a result of urban development and human activities. - On this last principle is very important to also consider the ecological component that stands for those

planning concepts, which will ensure a healthier relationship between the built environment and nature (McHarg, 1969). Albania 2030, a Spatial Vision for the Country - Albania 2030 describes the development policies for the coming 15 years, based on the growth scenario of the four main economic pillars: tourism, agriculture, energy and mining. This is achieved by taking in consideration several spatial instruments, including:

Controlling the growth of urban centers against sprawl and informality, by consolidating urbanized areas, metropolitan regions and complementary urban centers;

Identification of industrial and economic priority areas to support employment and economic growth; Increasing the regional competitiveness of the country by strengthening the international hub, national

and regional networks and regional gateways; Identification and completion of national and regional importance infrastructure of roads, sea ports,

airports and energy; Identification of 6 main regions of the country which are specialized based on their social-economic

resources; Identification and strengthening of polycentric and cross border regions, growth poles and free

economic areas, aiming to establish a new economic model which is based on a better regional balance and corrects the effects of radical urbanization, disparities and segregation;

A special focus on environmental issues and sustainable development by identifying projects of hotspots rehabilitation, protection of forestry and green space, extension and consolidation of “green Albania”;

Recognition and cultivation of the big potentials of the country as regarding landscaping, historical and natural routes, eco-tourism etc.;

Achieving national development goals by considering with special importance the neighboring Albanian speaking territories as well as coordinating with western Balkans and Adriatic sea region, not forgetting the process of EU integration;

Improving the social-economic efficiency and effectiveness by providing integrated and equal access between the center and periphery based on a ring radial system. Therefore achieving an important


2621

objective, transforming Albania from an isolated economy, on a regional and European actor of economy. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions - This research has been dealing with spatial planning and its role to boost social-economic growth of the country. The problem is that Albania so far has not been able to develop a document that has the full meaning and role of a national spatial development plan. On the other hand EU, which is the political objective of Albania, has not imposed a law on territorial issues and a directive, because this is considered an exclusive function of the national authorities of each country. But EU has introduced its own perspective (ESDP) on this subject and has established a network like ESPON, which is trying to use the statistical data produced by each country and by the EU institutions to analyze, research and draw conclusions that help policy making and decision makers take the appropriate decision for the best use of national territory and resources in accordance to national and European interests. At the end a spatial development plan must be an instrument for better governance and better quality of life for people and communities.

As a first conclusion we can say that nowadays, when European integration is a national priority for Albania, spatial development also becomes a priority issue. And when we talk about spatial planning we mean a key instrument for establishing long-term, sustainable frameworks for social, territorial

and economic development, both within and between countries (UNECE, 2008). A second conclusion is that spatial planning although highly praised, it’s relatively a new science and

very few countries implemented it in the real meaning that it has. A third conclusion is understating what are the visualization techniques and graphical instruments of

representation to prepare the cartographic data of the national spatial plan. Since many countries have features of national spatial planning policies, but there is no common ground for the their translation into cartographic documents for the broader public, building a common reference system of visualization manners is quite essential.

The fourth conclusion is that in order to develop a national spatial development vision for the country is necessary to refer to several scientific arguments. Throughout the context analysis and case studies four main principles were considered as crucial for the national spatial visioning. Each principle was then explained through a series of analysis and spatial concepts. The four main principles list as below:


2622

Map 2: Connectivity before ‘90s; Connectivity according to Albania 2030 Vision.

Map 3: Agriculture, Mountains and Growth Poles


2623


2624

- Regionalism - There was made an adaptation of the proposal of Co-plan 2014 for the re-organization

of the country on 6 regions. This concept supports the efficiency and the effectiveness of the economic growth of the country, considers environmental sensibilities by considering the concept of river basins, and brings central government near local communities and authorities without extra costs in terms of infrastructure and services. The further analyses of this research work have evidenced the cultural historic identities and economic specializations of each of these regions, as an instrument for promoting regional development balance, for fighting regional disparities and promoting balance.

- Polycentrism and Growth Poles - On this aspect there were identified 6 main growth poles, which have two patterns of polycentric development each. Within the country they are interrelated on a radial system because of the existing patterns of infrastructure and services, with the exception of Tirana, which is interrelated on an annular system. The second pattern of polycentric interrelations has to do with the cross border perspective and in this case all the growth poles interrelate on an annular system, again with the exception of Tirana, which has a radial interrelation with the European and global markets.

- Development Corridors and Free Economic Areas - The development corridors are strongly related with the infrastructural and services corridors. Most of the Albanian economic corridors are located on the western plain of the country and few of them in the peripheral growth poles. There were identified the economic specializations of each corridor, promoting the concept of clustering areas and recommending strengthening of such specialization, in order to avoid competition and promote complementarity. The economic corridors are strongly related to the free economic areas, airports and seaports. Therefore there were identified 5 types of development corridors, 7 free economic areas, 3 strategic airports and 4 sea ports, trying to explore also the geo strategic position of the country.

- Natural Potentials and Green Corridors. - Albania is rich on natural potentials. There were outlined several green, historic and landscaping corridors, which can promote a national identity, environmental education and boosting of tourism industry. These corridors are part of a networking strategy that was added to the existing agricultural land and protected areas. On the first step is planned an increase of the existing surface of protected and green areas, and then the consolidation of this network through several linking green corridors. This goes in line not only with the conservation needs, but also with the rehabilitation of the environmental hotspots in the country, which are mainly concentrated on the western plain of the country. This green framework corrects also the negative impact on environment, because of rapid infrastructure development. Recommendations - Albania should move from the inherited spatial framework of centralized economy that was promoting self-isolation culture towards a new society, which is open and competitive towards regional and global markets. Therefore from an enclosed 8-shaped concept of the main national infrastructure, the spatial development vision on this research paper promotes shifting towards a ring radial system, starting from the capital region towards peripheral growth poles and cross border areas of interests. All infrastructure and services should be oriented towards such concept, where radials improve national and international connectivity, and rings increase national economic efficiency and courage prosperity of the Albanian speaking territories in the neighboring countries. Another recommendation is the enforcement of the creation of 6 regions with clear social economic patterns and specialized identities. Therefore the Metropolitan Region and Voskopoja Region will be focused on the regional and international strategic infrastructure and services, the


2625

Northern and Southern Regions will be focused on the sea and mountainous tourism, while two other remaining regions will focus on the main economic activities like agriculture, mining and energy. The final recommendation is that Albania 2030 spatial vision for the country must foresee a development perspective for at least 15 coming years, and it should promote a sustainable economy, based on the four economic pillars. ______________________ REFERENCES:

1. Aliaj, B.; Shutina, D.; Dhamo, S. (2010): “Between Energy and the Vacuum: Co-PLAN and Urban Planning in Albania”, Tirana, Albania.

2. Aliaj, B. (2008): “Misteri i Gjashtë: Cili është kurthi që mban peng zhvillimin dhe integrimin e ekonomisë shqiptare me botën moderne?”, Tirana, Albania.

3. Aliaj, B. (2004): “Albania, a short history of housing and urban development models during 1945-1990”, “Making Cities Work”, Tirana, Albania.

4. Alterman, R. (2001): “National-Level Planning in Democratic Countries: An International Comparison of City and Regional Policy-making”, Liverpool University Press, Liverpool.

5. Belhedi, A. (2005): “Epistemologie de la geographie: La chorematique”, Tunis. (http://epigeo.voila.net/chorematique.htm)

6. Communities and Local Government (2006): “The Role and Scope of Spatial Planning: Literature Review”.

7. Commission of the European Communities- CEC (1999): “Report on Community Policies and Spatial Planning. Working Document of the Commission Services”, Brussels: European Commission.

8. Corner, J. (1999) ”Recovering Landscape, Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture”, Princeton University Press, New York, USA.

9. CPG / Editorial Group (2006): “The Territorial State and Perspective of the European Union Document: Towards a Stronger European Territorial Cohesion in the Light of the Lisbon and Gothenburg Ambitions”, Brussels, Belgium.

10. Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht (2011): “A National Landscape Strategy for Ireland”. 11. Çobo, E.; Toto, R. (2010): “Planifikimi i territorit- Nga ligji në reformë”, “Politikndjekës apo

Politikbërës 1: Alternativa mbi zhvillimin urban, manaxhimin e territorit dhe të mjedisit”, Polis Press, Co-plan, Tirana.

12. Toto, R. (2012): “Raport i Situatës së Planifikimit të Territorit në Shqipëri”, “Politikndjekës apo Politikbërës 2: Analiza dhe Rekomandime për qeverisjen territoriale në Shqipëri”, Polis Press, Co-plan, Tirana, Albania.

13. Dühr, S. (2007) “The Visual Language of Spatial Planning: exploring cartographic representations for Spatial Planning in Europe”.

14. European Commission (1997): “Compendium of European planning systems. Regional Development Studies”, Report 28, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.

15. European Commission (1997): “Compendium of European Spatial Planning”. 16. ESPON (2011): “Nordic- Baltic ESPON Conference for Planners and Policy-makers: Transnational

perspectives on spatial planning- Experiences from the Nordic- Baltic countries”, Stockholm, Sweden.

17. Faludi, A. (2010): “Cohesion, Coherence, Cooperation: European Spatial Planning Coming of Age?”. 18. Faludi, A. (2010): “The Performance of Spatial Planning, Planning Practice & Research”.


2626

http://epigeo.voila.net/chorematique.htm

19. Forman, R.T (2008): “Urban Regions. Ecology and Planning Beyond the City”, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.c

20. GCSP- Geneva Center for Security Policy (2006): “Program on the Geopolitical Implications of Globalization and Transnational Security: Definitions of Globalization, a Comprehensive Overview and a Proposed Definition”.

21. Kuzmann, K.R (1996): “Euro-megalopolis or themepark Europe? Scenarios for European Spatial Development”, International Planning Studies.

22. McHarg, Ian L. (1969): “Design with nature”, (Wiley Series in Sustainable Design). 23. Ministeries van VROM, LNV, VenW, EZ en OCW (2006): “Nota Ruimte en de Uitvoeringsagenda

Ruimte”, The Netherlands. 24. Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment (2012): “35 Icons of the Dutch Spatial Planning”,

The Hague. 25. Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment (2011): “Summary National Policy Strategy for

Infrastructure and Spatial Planning: Making the Netherlands competitive, accessible, livable and safe”, The Hague, The Netherlands.

26. Özkan, Ö. (2008): “Strategic Way of Design in Rem Koolhaas’ Parc de la Villette Project”, Middle East Technological University.

27. PLUREL (2010): “National Spatial Planning Policies and Governance Typology”, Report. 28. Rodrigue, J.P.; Comtois, C.; Slack, B. (2013) “The Geography of Transport System”, Third Edition,

New York, USA. 29. UNECE (2008): “Spatial Planning- Key Instrument for Development and Effective Governance with

Special Reference to Countries in Transition”, Report ECE/HBP/146, Geneva, Switzerland. 30. UNDP; ILD Peru; Government of Albania (2007): “Albania: transition to the rule of law and

inclusive market economy”, Lima, Peru. 31. Vincent Nadin, Dominic Stead (2008): “European Spatial Planning Systems, Social Models and

Learning”, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands. 32. Waldheim, C. (2006): “The Landscape Urbanism Reader”, Princeton University Press, New York,

USA. 33. Waterhout, B. (2008): “The Institutionalization of European Spatial Planning”, PHD Thesis, TU

Delft, The Netherlands. 34. Wilbanks, T. (2007): "The Research Component of the Community and Regional Resilience Initiative

(CARRI)", Presentation at the Natural Hazards Center, University of Colorado-Boulder. 35. Zepf M.; Andres L. (2011): “New articulations and new challenges in spatial planning”.


2627

AUTHOR INDEX (authors included in the Book of Proceedings) Index of all authors who agreed that their Full Paper is made available for the Congress participants.

A Abrantes Patrícia 1104 Abruscato Salvatore 3372 Adams David 2995 Aharon-Gutman Meirav 762 Akbulut Ayse 1377 Akinci Burcu 3442 Akkila Ilona 20 Akyüz Zeynep Ceren 2601 Aletta Francesco 962 Alexander E. R. 39 Alfasi Nurit 50 Aliaj Besnik 2613 Alzahrani Abdulaziz 785 Amdam Jørgen 1073 Aminian Lida 1094 Appiotti Federica 1706 Ari Rahadini 1986 Ariani Camilla 1474 Asaaied Seba 1203 Askew Janet 593, 716 Aslan Sezen 1729 Assennato Francesca 2422 Ateş Burcu 3300 Aviv Moran 1292 Axelsson Östen 802, 962 B Babalık-Sutcliffe Ela 295 Badstuber Nicole 1840 Bafarasat Abbas Ziafati 1478 Bai Fei 2184 Baker Mark 1478 Baldwin Claudia 1781 Banerjee Tridib 809 Baoyu Wang 2170 Bar Roni 2643 Barbosa Ângela 2887 Barski Jacek 2662 Barski Jan 2662 Basak Merve 3312

Bassens David 3026 Basta Claudia 2436 Bastiaanssen Jeroen 2487 Batista Jorge 1524 Baumgart Sabine 2509 Bentlage Michael 2928 Bergner Benjamin Sebastian 2216 Bi Sheng 2018 Bianchi Irene 1706 Bindzarova Alena 1046 Binesh Sheila 1811 Björling Nils 2671 Boelens Luuk 1946 Bogiantzidis Nicolaos 830 Bonafede Giulia 2447 Bonnefond Mathieu 2777 Boonstra Beitske 57 Bora Zeynep 821 Borsi Katharina 785 Bortolotto Giulia 2462 Bosman Caryl 268 Botteldooren Dick 962 Boussauw Kobe 2470 Brand Peter 398, 1826 Britnell Scott 603 Broekhans Bertien 2793 Brussel Mark 281 Brussel Suzanne Van 1946 Bunea Andreea 2761 Butt Andrew 232 Buunk Willem 2487 C Caesar Beate 1621 Calor Inês 1104 Cao Jing 2356 Cao Zhan 2018 Carvalho Luis 1524, 2684 Castigliano Marica 3157 Castillejos Ana M. Martín 3456 Chang Hsiu-Tzu 611, 2231


3485

Chang Robin 2699 Chang Ying 244 Chao Tzuyuan 2003 Chao Tzu-Yuan 938, 1758, 1768, 3237 Chao Tzuyuan Stessa 593 Chen Chao 1512 Chen Hao 1512, 3285 Chen I-Hsin 2231 Chen Jianbin 480, 3011, 3066 Chen Jingshu 253 Chen Jinqing 409 Chen Jun 2413 Chen Wen 1633 Cheng Daming 2520 Chirila Corina 2761 Cinà Giuseppe 2038 Cînţa Wendy-Laura 2243 Clarke Darren 2777 Cohen Tom 1840 Cocheci Radu-Matei 1169, 1661, 2243 Congedo Luca 2422 Cotella Giancarlo 1460 Coutinho-Silva Rachel 417 Crampton Emily 1840 Cremaschi Marco 2497 Curtis Carey 1540, 1911 Čechová Kateřina 1497 D D’Onofrio Rosalba 423 da Graça Moreira Maria 2141 Dai Shenzhi 3395 Dalmina Patricia 1179 Day Jennifer Eve 570 de Assis Ana Paula Silva 3211 De Boeck Sarah 3026 de Roo Gert 2713 de Vries Jochem 2146 Decoville Antoine 1646 Dedekorkut-Howes Aysin 268 Deffner Alex 830, 920 Dehaene Michiel 112 Deng Xiaofan 3040 Deng Xueyuan 2308 Dhamo Sotir 2613

Di Salvo Giacomina 2422 Dimitriu Sabina 1661 Ding Guosheng 1270 Doležalová Šárka 651 Dopheide Emile 281 Doucet Philippe 1670 Doyle Aoife 2731 Driessen Peter 2777 Duan Fei 3320 Dubeaux Sarah 1117 Durand Frédéric 1646 Durrant Daniel 1840 Dyrssen Catharina 2671 E Elisei Pietro 1661, 2243 Ellingham Ian 1127 Engler Carina 450 Erbas Ozge 1729 Ertekin Ozhan 1743 Esposito Angela 2258 Eyuboglu Engin 1743 F Fabich Stephanie 450 Faludi Andreas 186 Fassmann Heinz 1156 Felcman Jindřich 845 Feliciotti Alessandra 3051 Feng Jia 1633, 2203 Ferro Filipa M. 385 Fertner Christian 1413 Filis Dimitris 1277 Fioretti Carlotta 2497 Fischer Karl F. 2746 Fiskaa Helge 435 Flacke Johannes 281 Fleschurz René 1203 Florescu Tiberiu 2761 Floriana Floriana 3372 Fontes Inês 1104 Förster Agnes 450 Forster Julia 1387 Fournier Marie 2777 Frank Andrea I. 2770


3486

Frantisak Lubos 701 Frenkel Amnon 1292 Frey Klaus 465 Fritz Sara 1387 Fuchs Sven 2777 G Gaeta Luca 333 Gan Xinyue 3011, 480, 3066 Garfunkel Dorit 359 Garramone Vito 1402 Gatien-Tournat Amandine 2777 Gauk Martin 2903 Gažová Daniela 2832 Ge Tianyang 2053, 2063 Gebhardt Matthew F. 621 Gedikli Bahar 295 Geng Hong 1143, 1254, 2076 Getzner Michael 1960 Giannola Elena 2271, 3372 Gielen Demetrio Muñoz 685 Gilliard Lukas 308 Gissi Elena 1402, 1706 Golan Lihi 359 Gonçalves Jorge 1524, 2684 Gralepois Mathilde 2777 Grišakov Kristi 142 Große Juliane 1413 Groth Niels Boje 1413 Gruber Elisabeth 1156 Gu Ying 583 Guanzeng Zhang 2170 Gunder Michael 85 Guo Xu 1430 Guo Yuchen 1852 H Hambleton Robin 99 Hamers David 1933 Han Jing 409, 2341, 2366, 3469 Harteveld Eline 2793 Hattori Keiro 3081 Hebbert Michael 854 Hegger Dries 2777 Hojda Alexandre 2281

Holden Meg 3095 Hou Wenjun 2053, 2063 Howes Michael 323 HuGangyu 858, 3334 Huang Ping-Geng 1758 Huang Qiao 636 Huang Wei-Ju 494 Humer Alois 1156 Hung Tzu-Han 1768 I Idt Joel 2808 Ilie Elisabeta G. 866 Ince Irem 2088 Ismail Kareem 2103 J Jachimowicz Anna Malgorzata 3290 Jambrošić Kristian 988 Janku Eranda 2613 Jian Ning 1190 Jiao Sheng 1270 Jones Zachary 2118 Joutsiniemi Anssi 1540 K Kamaras Antonis 1555 Kang Jian 962 Karafili Elona 1975 Karásek Jan 651 Karimi Maryam 2820 Karimnia Elahe 878 Kemp Adriana 2545 Kenway Steven 3182 Kim Joon Sik 2293 Klug Stefan 2928 Knierbein Sabine 893 Köckler Heike 1314, 2509 Kohout Michal 651, 908 Koll-Schretzenmayr Martina 1685 Kong Lingyu 3469 Korbel Josefine 666 Krasowska Katarzyna 3342 Krön Annette 506 Kuang Xiaoming 2308, 2413


3487

Kuffer Monika 281 Kuhk Annette 112 Kunzmann Klaus R. 1685, 3110 Kurth Detlef 666 L Lalenis Konstantinos 679 Lalou Georgia 920 Landau Dana 359 Lang Thomas 1960 Layson Joseph 2520 Lazarová Martina 2832 Le Keke 2326 Leheis Stéphanie 2808 Lechner Sarah 450 Li Charling 3095 Li Jian 3351, 3362 Li Xiangning 2184 Li Xiaoxi 1696 Lianopoulou Vasiliki 1612 Lignou Sapfo 1840 Lin Hsiao-Ching 938 Lin Jiaying 2326, 3445 Lin Yu-Tzu 3129 Lindholm Gunilla 2846 Lingua Valeria 2857 Liu Lixun 1867 Liu Wei 2341, 2366 Lo Chia-Hui 611 Lo Piccolo Francesco 2534 Lotta Francesca 341 Low Choy Darryl 3182 Low Nicholas 158 Lu Jianpu 2871 Lu Tianzan 1715 Lu Yisha 1696 Lucertini Giulia 1402 M Mady Christine 951 Machin Dean 1840 Maksimova Svetlana 1900 Mantas Neoklis 830 Mäntysalo Raine 142 Mao Weifeng 2129

Maragno Denis 1706 Margalit Talia 2545 Margaritis Efstathios 962 Marku Endrit 1975 Martínez Josefina Flores 3456 Mazza Luigi 333 McClymont Katie 1324 Mecklenbrauck Ilka 975 Mees Heleen 2777 Mehlbye Peter 11 Miano Marika 3157 Michalski Piotr 1059 Mitrea Andrei 1169, 2761 Mo Wenjing 3320 Molina Ana 3095 Moraes Sergio Torres 1179 Moroni Stefano 1448 Mulligan Helen 1127 Murphy Conor 2777 Musco Francesco 1402, 1706 N Nachshon Alvit 359 Nankai Xia 2520 Negrea Nicolae 2761 Neuman Michael 2878 Ng Mee Kam 2561 Nimrod Einat 359 Ning Jian 3194 Ntaflouka Polyxeni 830 O Oberman Tin 988 Oestreich Stefanie 1337 Okitasari Mahesti 3382 Okrah Maxwell 1349 Opris Ana 2761 Orenstein Daniel E. 3143 Oruc Gulden Demet 1743 Osborne Caroline 1781 Ou Jingzhu 2194, 3252 Ouyang Guohui 1254 Ozcevik Ozlem 1377


3488

P Palacky Jiri 701 Palestino Maria Federica 2576 Pallagst Karina 1203 Palma Isabel 385 Pata Irina 2761 Patrascu Radu 2761 Paz Anat 359 Peng Zhenwei 1696, 2018 Pérez-Molina Eduardo 1602 Petríková Dagmar 1220 Piccolo Giustino Emilio 2258 Picone Marco 341 Pimenova E.B. 354 Pittman Nathan 570 Plyushteva Anna 1840 Popa Andreea 2761 Porat Idan 359 Porta Sergio 3051 Psatha Eva 830 Puerari Emma 518 Q Qi Buri 3395 Qian Zhu 2587 Qiao Jing 2076 Qing LI 927 Qu Tingting 409 R Raats Koen 2146 Rab Nikolaus 1387 Ramisch Theresa 450 Ratnayake Rangajeewa 232 Reho Matelda 1402 Renouf Marguerite 3182 Riotta Francesco Paolo 3372 Rivolin Umberto Janin 333 Roar Amdam 2628 Rocha Jorge 2887 Rockenbauch Hannes 529 Rodrigo Catarina 2887 Romice Ombretta 3051 Roose Antti 2903 Rüdiger Andrea 2509

Rüßler Harald 506 Russo Michelangelo 3157 Rusu Sorina-Georgiana 2761 Ryckewaert Michael 3026 S Sager Tore 1883 Sanli Tugce 541 Santinha Gonçalo 197 Santoro Paula Freire 1795, 3168 Sapounakis Aris 1277 Saveleva E.O. 354 Saveleva Ekaterina 1900 Scacchi Micaela 1012 Scheurer Jan 1911 Schilleci Filippo 341 Schmidt-Thomé Kaisa 142 Scholz Wolfgang 1568 Schönwandt Walter L. 529 Schöpf Susanne 450 Schreurs Jan 112 Schuch Gemma 3182 Seak Pei Tak 2320 Searle Glen 1993 Senol Fatma 1016 Serag Yehya 1579 Serrao-Neumann Silvia 3182 Servain Sylvie 2777 Shach-Pinsly Dali 359, 3143 Shan Feng 409 Shao Hua 3418 Sheppard Adam 603, 716 Shuai Yue 3194 Silva Flávia 385 Silva Paulo 729 Singh Rohan N. 962 Skayannis Pantoleon 1592 Sliuzas Richard 1602 Smatanova Katarina 3224 Snellen Daniëlle 1933 Sobral Paula 385 Sowa Charline 1224 Sparling William 556 Stavridou Kyriaki 1612 Steffen Daniel 2216


3489

Sterzer Lena 2928 Stratis Socrates 1027 Strollo Andrea 2422 Stropnický Matěj 17 Sturup Sophie 158, 570 Sullivan Edward J. 738 Swyngedouw Erik 13 Syrman Simo 142 Szuhová Jana 1220 Šćitaroci Bojanić Bojana Obad 988 Šilha Martin 845 T Talia Michele 423 Tang Lingling 3469 Taygfeld Pazit 3182 Telle Stefan 202 Tempels Barbara 2912 Teng Yuwei 1715 Tennekes Joost 1933 Thaler Thomas 2777 Thierstein Alain 308, 2928 Thompson Ian 541 Thomsen Dana 1781 Throgmorton James A. 171 Tian Li 1430 Tichý David 651, 908 Timmermans Harry 1094 Tittl Filip 651, 908 Todaro Vincenzo 2534 Toftager Larsen Majken 130 Tong Ming 2194 Tornaghi Chiara 893 Tosics Iván 15 Townsend Craig 1911 Townshend Tim 541 Trachana Angelique 3456 Tricarico Luca 1448 Turzová Mária 3431 Tuzcu Nil 1367 U Uemura Tetsuji 1239

V Valkenburg Govert 1460 van der Knaap Wim 374 van Stigt Rien 2941 Vanoutrive Thomas 2470 Vasconcelos Lia 385 Vaz Nelson Popini 1179 Vecchio Giovanni 3409 Velibeyoglu Koray 2088 Viana Cláudia 2887 Vitkova Lubica 1046 Vlachaki Elena 830 Vlachynska Petra 2160 W Wagner Magdalena 1059 Wallin Sirkku 2954 Wan Lu 1852 Wang Lan 3252 Wang Lu 2308, 2413 Wang Sicheng 2326, 3469 Wang Weiqiang 1270, 3351, 3362 Wang Ya-Ting 3237 Wang Yi 1254 Warren Robert 2129 Waterhout Bas 2793 Watson Paul 398 Weirick James 2746 Wenner Fabian 2928 Williams Angelique 749 Williams Peter 749 Wittmann Maxmilian 701 Wlodarczyk Martyna 3290 Wong Cecilia 2968 Wu Zhiqiang 2341, 2356, 2366 X Xia Nan Kai 2320, 3285 Xiang Yijing 1852 Xu Xingjing 2356 Xue Jin 2978


3490

Y Yang Dan 2184 Yang Xiu 1715 Yao Fang 2384, 2397 Yao Kai 3273 Ye Qiming 2341, 2366, 3252 Yiannakou Athena 1555 Yiğiter Reyhan Genli 1743 Yilmazer Semiha 821 Yin Wei 1430 Yu Yunchi 2003 Yue Shuai 1190 Yue Yufeng 3351, 3362

Z Zeng Yating 1143 Zhang Hexia 2413 Zhang Shuping 2587 Zhang Yujin 858, 3334 Zhang Ze 583 Zhang Ziying 1852, 2194, 3252 Zhao Anna 2871 Zhao Qian 858, 3334 Zhong Yue 2203 Zonneveld Wil 2793


3491

Aesop 2015 Book of Proceedings

Documents

Transcript of Aesop 2015 Book of Proceedings