DOCSLIB.ORG

Assessment of Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services in Romania

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Assessment of Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services in Romania This document was developed under the project “Demonstrating and promoting natural values in support of decision-making processes in Romania - Nature4Decision-Making-N4D”, project financed by a grant from Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway (EEA 2009 - 2014) within the RO02 Program - Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, for which the Ministry of Environment is a Program Operator. National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA), project promoter, contributed to chapters 1, 3 ,4, 5: Roxana Mihaela STOIAN – project manager; Elena GIUREA – assistant manager; Roxana MIHAI - biodiversity expert coordinator; Silvia ENE – biodiversity expert; Laurențiu APOSTOL – biodiversity expert; Andreea BOGDAN – biodiversity expert; Ileana MATEI, Georgiana PÂRLAC – communication officers. Romanian Space Agency (ROSA), partner in the N4D project, contributed to chapters 1, 3, 4, 5: Florian BODESCU – project manager; Marius-Ioan PISO – scientific coordinator; Alexandru BADEA – GIS and RS expert; Ion NEDELCU – DSS expert; Cristian MOISE – GIS and RS expert; Viorel IONESCU – ecology expert; Violeta Domnica POENARU – GIS and RS expert; Viorel MANCIU – statistics expert; Sandru Ioana VLAD – GIS and RS expert; Mihaela COMĂNESCU – biology expert; Roxana ION – biology expert; Iulia Florentina PAUCA – GIS and RS expert; Iulia MIU – assistant manager; Denisa BADIU – geograf specialist; Liliana BALTASIU – biology expert; Vlad Gabriel OLTEANU – GIS and RS expert; Cosmin NISTOR – IT expert; Florin SOARE – IT expert; Alexandru BOBE – IT expert; Irina MANCIU - statitics expert; Catalin FLORESCU – GIS and RS expert; Alina RĂDUȚU - GIS and RS expert. WWF România, partner in the N4D project, contributed to chapters 1, 2, 5, 6: Monia MARTINI – project manager, Corina GHEORGHIU – project specialist green economy, Andrei MOARCAS – public policy specialist, Raluca DAN – public policy manager, Diana COASMOIU - regional coordinator public policy, Camelia IONESCU – freshwater manager, Cristina MUNTEANU – project manager freshwater projects, Radu MELU – senior forests specialist, Julio TRESIERRA – international technical expert. The Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), partner in the N4D project, contributed to chapters 1, 3, 5: Graciela RUSCH; Evind ARONSEN; Monica RUANO. Scientifc Group (in alphabetic order) contributed to validation and testing of the methodology and evaluation results: Valeria ABAZA, Dan BĂLTEANU, Daniel DIACONU, Monica DUMITRAȘCU, Vladimir GANCZ, Petre GÂȘTESCU, Iuliana Florentina GHEORGHE, Cristian IOJA, Minodora MANU, Teodor MARUȘCA, Răzvan MATEESCU, Mircea MIHALACHE, Mirela Mădălina MOLDOVEANU, Marilena ONETE, Oliviu Grigore POP, Cristina RADNEA, Diana SILAGHI, Gabriel - Ovidiu VÂNĂU, Ruxandra VINTILĂ, Ana VÎRSTA Only by integrating nature into public decisions at all levels can be ensured the upholding of biodiversity and, along with it, the long-term human well-being. For more information project-related, please visit the N4D project website: maesromania.anpm.ro and for more information about EEA grants visit www.eeagrants.org, www.eeagrants.ro and www.eeagrantsmediu.ro. Assessment of Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services in Romania ISBN 978-606-8038-23-0 © 2017 NEPA, NINA, ROSA, WWF Romania photos © Dan Dinu Assessment of Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services in Romania Table of Contents 4 1. Introduction 2 1.1. Objectives of the Report 4 1.2. Background 4 2. Selection of ecosystems and ecosystem services 8 2.1. Policy analysis methodology 9 2.2. Assessment of Romanian sectoral policies 13 2.3. Results of the policy assessment: analysis and conclusions 40 2.4. Recommendations for policy and decision making towards a Sustainable Green Economy 46 3. Methodologies underpinning scientific work 48 3.1. Mapping of ecosystems 49 3.2. Mapping of ecosystem services 70 3.3. Mapping results 130 3.4. Assessment of ecosystems and ecosystem services 134 3.5. Assessment results 134 3.6. Valuation of ecosystem services 138 3.7. Monetary value assessment methods 145 Assessment of Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services in Romania 3.8. Economic valuation of ecosystem services 149 from Romanian forest using reported national statistics 3.9. Summary of results 171 4. Decision Support System 172 5. Conclusions 180 6. Glossary 184 Appendix 1 - The functional zoning system of Romanian forests 187 References 190 1 EEA Grants 2009-2014 Chapter 1 Introduction 2 The complexity of today’s environmental problems has amplified to the point where we have finally admitted that we have been ignoring sustainability in human action with great impact on the functioning of natural systems. The process of Mapping and Assessing Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) promoted by the European Commission is considered a first step to achieve good state of ecosystems and their services. Romania has launched the MAES process in March 2015 with the implementation of the project “Demonstrating and promoting natural values to support decision-making in Romania” (shortly N4D – Nature for decision-making). MAES is a complex process that goes beyond its title of Mapping and Assessing Ecosystems and their Services. In fact, MAES is about science, policy, capacity building and communication/ awareness raising, which altogether constitute the conceptual framework1 used for the implementation of the N4D project (Figure no.1). Figure 1. MAES conceptual framework underpinning the implementation of the N4D project. Assessment of Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services in Romania 3 Action 5 of the Biodiversity Strategy requires Member States, with the assistance of the Commission, to map and assess the state of ecosystems and their services in their national territory by 2014. Given the later start of the process in Romania, the opportunity to adopt, since the beginning, an integrated approach between the four MAES pillars was taken based on the following considerations: a policy analysis is a 1 The conceptual framework used for the MAES process in Romania is based on the fact that to achieve Good Ecosystems Governance, scientific information on ecosystems and their services need to be integrated into public policies dealing with natural resources and environmental management. Once ecosystems and their services are mapped and assessed, scientific information needs to be communicated to relevant stakeholders. Awareness must be raised on the importance to improve public policies in order to avoid EEA Grants 2009-2014 biodiversity loss and achieve a Sustainable Green Economy in the context of sustainable development. If necessary, stakeholders’ capacity to use MAES knowledge needs to be built. necessary complement to the scientific assessment of ecosystems and their services to be able to improve decision and policy making, using MAES process results in order to achieve Good Ecosystems Governance and sustainable development; also, awareness raising and capacity building of relevant institutions take time and are fundamental for the successful uptake of scientific information into decision and policy making since it is not possible to manage what it is not known. Assessing the economic value of all ecosystems services, and promote the integration of these values into accounting and reporting systems at EU and national level is to be done by 2020, so a follow up of the N4D project is also a necessity and a logical step towards achieving good state of ecosystems and their services and consequently human well-being. 1.1. Objectives of the Report The purpose of this report is to inform EU and Romanian Government and other stakeholders (scientific institutions, civil society) about the implementation of the MAES process in Romania, the results of the implementation and recommendations. This report is mainly addressed to national policy and decision makers as well as government administrations and institutions responsible for implementing national policies. It is primarily intended for the Ministry of Environment (MoE), responsible for the MAES process, and the National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA), with delegated responsibilities for implementing the MAES process at national level. Scientific circles including national research institutes, universities as well as independent experts also constitute a primary audience due to the strong link between scientific research and policy elaboration. This report is also relevant for civil society organizations active in the environmental and development fields on issues such as improvement of public policies, protected area management, natural resources management, sustainable production and consumption, etc. Finally, the European Commission is interested in Member State’s experience and progress towards implementation of the MAES process and thus, the report will be shared with their representatives. 1.2. Background The problem of biodiversity loss has been recognized globally along with the fact that adequate indicators are needed to address the global challenges of the 21st century such as climate change, poverty, resource depletion, health and quality of life, and last but not least, the consequent mounting migration phenomena of “political- 4 environmentally (resource) displaced people”. Economic indicators such as GDP were never designed to be comprehensive measures of prosperity and well-being. In 2007, the European Commission (EC), European Parliament, Club of Rome, OECD and WWF hosted the high-level conference “Beyond GDP” with the objectives to clarify which indices are most appropriate to measure
Recommended publications
  • Tradenet Presentation Chamber of Kavala 13 3 2012

    Tradenet Presentation Chamber of Kavala 13 3 2012

    PROJECT BLACK SEA TRADENET DOING BUSINESS WITH ROMANIA RODICA BELTEU – CONSTANTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INDUSTRY, SHIPPING AND AGRICULTURE WORKSHOP DOBRICH, BULGARIA, 13-14 MARCH 2012 COUNTRY PROFILE Official name: ROMANIA Flag and coat of arms: Legal system: Romania is a parliamentary republic. The Parliament represents the legislative power in the state. It is a bicameral 471-seat Parliament composed of the Senate (137 seats) and the Chamber of Deputies (334 seats). The Government, led by a prime-minister appointed by the president of the country, is the executive power. Geographical location: Romania is located in the geographical center of Europe (southeastern of Central Europe), on the Black Sea coast. It lies on north of the Balkanic peninsula, inside and outside the Carpathian arch, on the lower Danube (1075 km) and by the Black Sea. Frontiers: The length of Romania’s frontiers is of 3150 km, of which 1085.5 km are terrestrial frontiers, and 2064.5 km water frontiers. Romania shares a border with Hungary and Serbia to the west, Ukraine and Moldova to the northeast and east, and Bulgaria to the south. Area: With a surface area of 238,391 km², Romania is the largest country in southeastern Europe and the twelfth-largest in Europe. 1 COUNTRY PROFILE COUNTRY PROFILE Relief: Romania’s relief is composed of three main levels, namely the high level of the Carpathian Mountains, the middle level of the Sub-Carpathians, hills and plateaus, and the lowlands of plains, meadows and Danube Delta. These major relief forms are disposed in balanced concentric areas: 31% mountains, 36% hills and 33% lowlands.
  • Usaid and Child Welfare Reform in Romania

    Usaid and Child Welfare Reform in Romania

    USAID AND CHILD WELFARE REFORM IN ROMANIA CHALLENGES, SUCCESSES, AND LEGACY JULY 2006 This report was produced for the Social Transition Team, Office of Democracy, Governance and Social Transition of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID/DGST/E&E) by Aguirre International, a division of JBS International, Inc. It was prepared under Task Order 12 of the Global Evaluation and Monitoring (GEM) IQC, Contract No. FAO-I-00-99-00010-00. The authors are Lucia Correll, Tim Correll, and Marius Predescu. USAID AND CHILD WELFARE REFORM IN ROMANIA Challenges, Successes, and Legacy The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. Romanian Child Welfare Legacy Report TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYM LIST.......................................................................................................................... V EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ IX Background on USAID’s Child Welfare Programs in Romania .............................................. ix The Politics of International Adoption..................................................................................... xi The Legacy ............................................................................................................................ xi Key Lessons Learned ..........................................................................................................
  • Romania, December 2006

    Romania, December 2006

    Library of Congress – Federal Research Division Country Profile: Romania, December 2006 COUNTRY PROFILE: ROMANIA December 2006 COUNTRY Formal Name: Romania. Short Form: Romania. Term for Citizen(s): Romanian(s). Capital: Bucharest (Bucureşti). Click to Enlarge Image Major Cities: As of 2003, Bucharest is the largest city in Romania, with 1.93 million inhabitants. Other major cities, in order of population, are Iaşi (313,444), Constanţa (309,965), Timişoara (308,019), Craiova (300,843), Galati (300,211), Cluj-Napoca (294,906), Braşov (286,371), and Ploeşti (236,724). Independence: July 13, 1878, from the Ottoman Empire; kingdom proclaimed March 26, 1881; Romanian People’s Republic proclaimed April 13, 1948. Public Holidays: Romania observes the following public holidays: New Year’s Day (January 1), Epiphany (January 6), Orthodox Easter (a variable date in April or early May), Labor Day (May 1), Unification Day (December 1), and National Day and Christmas (December 25). Flag: The Romanian flag has three equal vertical stripes of blue (left), yellow, and red. Click to Enlarge Image HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Early Human Settlement: Human settlement first occurred in the lands that now constitute Romania during the Pleistocene Epoch, which began about 600,000 years ago. About 5500 B.C. the region was inhabited by Indo-European people, who in turn gave way to Thracian tribes. Today’s Romanians are in part descended from the Getae, a Thracian tribe that lived north of the Danube River. During the Bronze Age (about 2200 to 1200 B.C.), these Thraco-Getian tribes engaged in agriculture, stock raising, and trade with inhabitants of the Aegean Sea coast.
  • The FSC National Forest Stewardship Standard of Romania

    The FSC National Forest Stewardship Standard of Romania

    Forest Stewardship Council® The FSC National Forest Stewardship Standard of Romania Cover photos: James Morgan/WWF; Doru Oprisan; Radu Grigore Vlad FSC International Center GmbH · ic.f sc.org · FSC® F000100 Adenauer Allee 134 · 53113 Bonn · Germany T +49 (0) 228 367 66 0 · F +49 (0) 228 367 66 30 Geschäf tsf ührer | Chief Policy Officer: Dr. Hans-Joachim Droste Handelsregister | Commercial Register: Bonn HRB12589 Forest Stewardship Council® Title: The FSC National Forest Stewardship Standard of Romania Document reference code: FSC-STD-ROU-01-2017 EN Status: Approved Geographical Scope: National Forest Scope: All forest types Approval body: Policy and Standards Committee Submission date: 15 January 2017 Approval date: 12 July 2017 Effectiveness date: 15 April 2019 Validity Period: Five years after the effectiveness date Marius Turtica Asociatia pentru Certificare Forestiera Country Contact: E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] Mobile: 0040 740 300 616 FSC International Center - Performance and Standards Unit - Adenauer Allee 134 FSC Performance and Stand- 53113 Bonn, Germany ards Unit Contact: +49-(0)228-36766-0 +49-(0)228-36766-30 [email protected] A.C. All rights reserved. No part of this work covered by the publisher’s copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means (graphic, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, recording taping, or information retrieval systems) without the written permission of the publish- er. The Forest Stewardship Council® (FSC) is an independent, not for profit, non-government organisation established to support environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and eco- nomically viable management of the world's forests.
  • Electronic Waste Management in Romania: Pathways for Sustainable Practices Florin Mihai

    Electronic Waste Management in Romania: Pathways for Sustainable Practices Florin Mihai

    Electronic waste management in Romania: pathways for sustainable practices Florin Mihai To cite this version: Florin Mihai. Electronic waste management in Romania: pathways for sustainable practices. Handbook of Electronic Waste Management, Elsevier, pp.533-551, 2020, 10.1016/B978-0-12-817030- 4.00024-3. hal-02561115 HAL Id: hal-02561115 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02561115 Submitted on 3 May 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Electronic waste management in Romania: pathways for sustainable practices (Preprint version ) Florin-Constantin MIHAI*, Department of Research, Faculty of Geography and Geology, Alexandru Ion Cuza University of Iasi, Romania, *Corresponding author: email: [email protected] Final publisher version is available at: Mihai FC 2019. Electronic waste management in Romania: pathways for sustainable practices. Chapter 22 in Prasad M.N.V., Vithanage, Meththika and Borthakur, Amesha (Eds). Handbook of Electronic Waste Management: International Best Practices and Case Studies pp 533-551 doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-817030-4.00024-3 ISBN: 978-0-12-817030-4 Elsevier Science and Technology Abstract This chapter aims to examine the current challenges in electronic waste (e-waste) management in a new EU Member State like Romania.
  • REFERENDUM in ROMANIA 29Th July 2012

    REFERENDUM in ROMANIA 29Th July 2012

    REFERENDUM IN ROMANIA 29th July 2012 European Elections monitor Romanian President Traian Basescu avoids impeachment once again Corinne Deloy Five years after 17th April 2007, when the first referendum on his impeachment as head of State took place, Traian Basescu, President of the Republic of Romania again emerged victorious in the Results battle that opposed him, this time round, against Prime Minister Victor Ponta (Social Democratic Party, PSD). A majority of Romanians who were called to vote for or against the impeachment of the Head of Sate indeed stayed away from the ballot boxes on 29th July. Only 46.13% of them turned out to vote whilst turn out of at least half of those registered was necessary for the consultation to be deemed valid. The government made an attempt to abolish this threshold that has been part of the electoral law since 2010, before being reprimanded by the European Commission and other Western leaderships. Victor Ponta did do everything he could however to achieve the minimum turnout threshold by leaving the polling stations open for four hours more than is the custom (7am to 11pm) and by opening fifty other stations in hotels and restaurants on the shores of the Black Sea where some Romanians spend their holidays. “The Romanians have rejected the coup d’Etat “Whatever the final turnout is no politician can deny launched by the 256 MPs and led by Prime Minister the will of millions of voters without cutting himself Victor Ponta and interim President Crin Antonescu. The off from reality,” declared Prime Minister Ponta.
  • Investing in Central Europe 2016

    Investing in Central Europe 2016

    Investing in Central Europe Your move in the right direction December 2016 Investing in Central Europe | Your move in the right direction Content 1. Investing in Central Europe 3 Introduction The investment process 2. Why Central Europe? 9 3. Comparison of selected data 10 Basic facts Main macroeconomic data GDP growth in CE Taxation 4. Country guides for Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia 15 General overview of economy Tax structure Legal entities Labor and wages Education Infrastructure The most active industries / sectors Industrial parks Investment Incentive Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Expatriate life Weather and climate 5. The Social Progress Index and Foreign Direct Investment in CE Region 149 6. Deloitte Central Europe 164 Deloitte Central Europe Our expertise 7. Contact us 168 2 Investing in Central Europe | Your move in the right direction Introduction The economic and business outlook Indeed, Romania is “the new sexy” and we • When the Eurozone grows by an extra for Central Europe have “taken Romania out of the Balkans”. 1%, then the CEE region grows by In 2016-17 the core/central CEE region Growth exceeds 4% and a large majority an extra 1.3%. looks like a “safe haven” globally. When of companies report excellent business • But South-eastern Europe (SEE), with many emerging markets and developed and this is across most sectors. Romania the exception of Romania, was not ones face strained economic and is not as roller-coaster as it sued to be and performing as well due to structural political developments, core CEE looks the recent 18 months have been some economic issues such as budget comparatively much better.
  • Tourism Demand in Romania

    Tourism Demand in Romania

    Tourism Demand in Romania Manuela Sofia STĂNCULESCU1 Research Institute for the Quality of Life, Romanian Academy University of Bucharest Monica MARIN2 Research Institute for the Quality of Life, Romanian Academy Abstract This paper presents an analysis of the evolution and main characteristics of tourism in Romania from the demand side. The study is organized in two parts.The first part focuses on the holiday trips of at least one overnight stay. The approach is comparative, Romania being benchmarked against the EU-27 average. The analysis shows that the touristic demand in Romania has followed a trend parallel with the GDP curve as the touristic demand is strongly correlated with the level of population disposable income. The second part of the analysis refers to the same-day trips (with no overnight stay). Among the same-day visits of the Romanian residents, the domestic trips predominate by far. Main purposes include visiting relatives or friends, shopping, leisure and recreation (including picnic) or medical treatment. Key words: tourism; tourism demand; holiday trips; same-day trips. Introduction This paper analyzes the statistics in the field of tourism from the demand side. ‘Tourist’ is considered here in line with the definition adopted at the UN Conference on Tourism and International Travel (Rome, 1963), as completed at the International Conference on Travel and Tourism Statistics in Ottawa (Canada, 1991), which has been implemented by Eurostat at the European level since 2004. Thus, ‘tourism means the activities of persons travelling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes’3 (Eurostat, 2011).
  • Romanian Exceptionalism 2016 Irina Oana Gheorgh

    Romanian Exceptionalism 2016 Irina Oana Gheorgh

    Explaining the Persistence of Unprofessional Bureaucracy in a Modernising State: Romanian Exceptionalism A Thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In the Faculty of Humanities 2016 Irina Oana Gheorghe Alliance Manchester Business School/People, Management and Organisations Table of Contents Chapter 1: The Challenge of Modernising Public Administration in Romania 1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………… 9 1.1 The problem with Romanian Public Administration................... 13 1.2 Aims and Objectives.................................................................... 16 1.3 Structure of the Thesis…………………………………………………………… 22 1.4 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………… 26 Chapter 2: Public Administration in Romania: The legacy of the Past 2.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………… 28 2.2 Institutional Theories…………………………………………………………..… 29 2.3 International level of analysis for Public Management…………… 39 2.4 European/Regional level of analysis of Public Management…… 48 2.5 Adapting Managerialism to Public Administration………………… 53 2.6 Towards a Framework of Analysis…………………………………………… 59 2.7 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………… 61 Chapter 3: Research Data and Methodology 3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………… 63 3.2 Institutionalism and Method…………………………………………………… 66 3.3 Research Design and Method………………………………………………… 67 3.4 Developing the Research Methods: Elite interviewing…………… 73 3.5 The use of Secondary Data……………………………………………………… 75 3.6 Developing the Interview Questions……………………………………….
  • Romania's Approach to Managing the Refugees'

    Romania's Approach to Managing the Refugees'

    Journal of Identity and Migration Studies Volume 13, number 1, 2019 FOCUS: MANAGING REFUGEES' STITUATION Romania's Approach to Managing the Refugees’ Situation Andreea Florentina NICOLESCU Abstract. In the context of the crisis of refugees and sharing the responsibility of receiving refugees in the member states as a result of the wave of refugees which arrived in Europe, Romania is one of the countries which confronted with the reception of refugees on its territory. The main objective of this research is to identify the capacity of Romania to grant asylum and to integrate refugees in the Romanian society. The article is structured in 3 parts, in which it is presented the situation of refugees in Romania. In the first part of the article it is analyzed the flow of refugees who arrived in Romania and requested protection from the Romanian state between 2008 and 2018. This analysis presents the characteristics of the asylum applicants who handed in an application of humanitarian protection in Romania. The second part of the research displays the reality from the accommodation centers from Romania, as well as the possibility of extending the capacity for these in case of crisis situation. The final part of the study exposes the measures adopted by Romania regarding the integration of the refugees through the programs applied with the help of Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (FAMI). Keywords: refugees, accommodation centers, integration, grant projects Introduction The purpose of this article is to identify the situation of the refugees from Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Algeria in Romania, who, because of the war conditions from their countries were forced to migrate.
  • The Remaking of the Dacian Identity in Romania and the Romanian Diaspora

    The Remaking of the Dacian Identity in Romania and the Romanian Diaspora

    THE REMAKING OF THE DACIAN IDENTITY IN ROMANIA AND THE ROMANIAN DIASPORA By Lucian Rosca A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of George Mason University in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Sociology Committee: ___________________________________________ Director ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Department Chairperson ___________________________________________ Dean, College of Humanities and Social Sciences Date: _____________________________________ Fall Semester 2015 George Mason University, Fairfax, VA The Remaking of the Dacian Identity in Romania and the Romanian Diaspora A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts at George Mason University By Lucian I. Rosca Bachelor of Arts George Mason University, 2015 Director: Patricia Masters, Professor Department of Sociology Fall Semester 2015 George Mason University Fairfax, VA ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my thesis coordinators: Professor Patricia Masters, Professor Dae Young Kim, Professor Lester Kurtz, and my wife Paula, who were of invaluable help. Fi- nally, thanks go out to the Fenwick Library for providing a clean, quiet, and well- equipped repository in which to work. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Tables................................................................................................................... v List of Figures ...............................................................................................................
  • COPERTA INT Curbe.Cdr

    COPERTA INT Curbe.Cdr

    Descrierea CIP a Bibliotecii Naţionale Barbu Ion, Barbu Cătălina Silver fir (Abies alba Mill.) in Romania/Ion Barbu, Cătălina Barbu Câmpulung Moldovenesc Editura Tehnică Silvică, Staţiunea Experimentală de Cultura Molidului, 2005 220 p., 24 cm ISBN 973-96001-3-1 Silver fir (Abies alba Mill.) in Romania 5 Contents Preface 7 1. Main features of Romanian forests 9 1.1 Introduction 9 1.2. Biodiversity in Romanian forests 11 1.3. Ecological, economic and social importance of forest in Romania 12 1.4. Specific characteristics of socio-economic development and the forest 14 1.5. Factors of forest instability 18 1.6. Current condition of Romanian's forests 18 1.7. Conceptions and tradition in Romanian silviculture 20 1.8. State of the National Forest Land Base 23 2. Silver fir in Europe 31 3. Silver fir forests in Romania 37 3.1. General ecological treats of silver fir in the Romanian Carpathians 43 3.2. Ecological zoning of Romania's forests. Focus on the silver fir actual area 46 3.3. Distribution of silver fir in the Romanian Carpathians in relation with complex 61 ecological conditions 3.4. Forest types classification in Romania 70 3.5. Conservation of the biodiversity in the forest ecosystems with silver fir in 79 Romania 4. Natural ecosystems with silver fir in the Romanian Carpathians 81 4.1. Classification of forest ecosystems in Romania 82 4.2. Pure silver fir ecosystems 85 4.3. Mixed silver fir and spruce ecosystems in the Romanian Carpathians 101 4.4. Mixed forest ecosystem of silver fir, spruce and beech 117 4.5.