Local Agenda 21 – Local Plan for Sustainable Development of Miercurea Ciuc Municipality

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Local Agenda 21 – Local Plan for Sustainable Development of Miercurea Ciuc Municipality 1 MIERCUREA CIUC MIERCUREA CIUC TOWN HALL LOCAL AGENDA 21 – LOCAL PLAN FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF MIERCUREA CIUC MUNICIPALITY MIERCUREA CIUC 2002 2 MUNICIPALITY UNDP Project ROM 98/012 Copyright © 2002 Miercurea Ciuc City Hall 1 Pi ata Cetatii , Mi recurea Ci uc, 4100 Tel . +40266 17 11 37 Fax: +40266 17 11 65 © 2002 Nati onal Centre for Sustainable Devel opment 15 Alexandru Philippide Street, Bucharest 2, Tel . 201 1410, Fax 201 1402 E-mail : [email protected] Vi ews expressed in the document belong to the authors, and do not necessari ly reflect the UNDP views. Document issued with the financial support of the United Nations Development Programme, Capacity 21 Programme and the Envi romental Partnership Foundation. Technical experti se provided by the National Centre for Sustainable Development – Romania. Special thanks addressed to the Earth Council Organization – Costa Rica for the technical support provided to the Project “Local Agenda 21”. P rin ted & De sign ed b y EX CL US srl. 3 MIERCUREA CIUC LOCAL STEERING COMMITTEE PAPP ELŐD, Vice-Mayor of Miercurea Ciuc – President of LSC CSEDŐ CSABA ISTVÁN, Mayor of Miercurea Ciuc POTOZKY LÁSZLÓ, Envi ronmental Partnershi p Foundati on - Di rector ANTAL ŞTEFAN, Police of Miercurea Ciuc – Head of Local Police BOGOS ZSOLT , Chamber of Commerce and Industry - President B OKO R MÁ RTO N, Ha rghi ta Cou nt y Ho spi tal - Di re ct o r BURUS-SIKLÓDI BOTOND, Teacher’s Resources Center “Apáczai Csere János” - Director GYÖRGY PIROSKA, Head of Tourinfo Office HECSER ZOLTÁN, Hargita Népe dail y newspaper – Responsible Edi tor KOLUMBÁN GÁBOR, Sapientia University M ICU IOAN, Forestry Departm ent - Di rector SIMON MIHÁLY, Pro Democracy Association SOMAY PÉTER, Environmental Protection Inspectorate– Chief Inspector SZATMÁRI LÁSZLÓ, Town Hall of Miercurea Ciuc – Head of Cul tural Offi ce NCSD CO-ORDINATORS Căli n Georgescu – Project Manager George Romanca – Local Area Manager for Giurgiu, Baia Mare, Târgu Mureş, Ploieşti and Miercurea Ciuc pilot cities Radu Vădi neanu – Local Area Manager for Iaşi , Oradea, Râmnicu Vâl cea and Gal aţi pilot cities Valentin Ionescu – Legal Advi sor, Strategy & Planning Coordinator Tani a Mi hu – SDNP Consul tant, Program & Project Coordinator Dan Apostol – Edi torial, Publi shing and Encyclopaedi c Consul tant Carmen Năstase – Envi ronmental Economi cs Special i st Adrian Voinea – IT Specialist UNDP ROMANIA CO-ORDINATORS Peter Newton – UNDP Deputy Resident Representative Geneve Mantri – UNDP press Officer LOCAL AGENDA 21 OFFICE MARA GYÖNGYVÉR, ecologist FARKAS KINGA, geographer ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WORKGROUP DÓSA ESZTER, engi neer MAKFALVI ZOLTÁN, geol ogi st 4 MUNICIPALITY ECONOMIC RESOURCES WORKGROUP KASSAY JÁNOS, geographer-economi st BUZOGÁNY CSABA, economi st. DEMOGRAPHY AND HUMAN RESOURCES WORKGROUP BÁCS BÉLA JÁNOS, soci al -pedagogue DEMETER GYÖNGYVÉR, sociologist CULTURE AND EDUCATION WORKGROUP ANTAL ATTILA, psychologi st KÁNYA JÓZSEF, historian FERENCZ ANGÉLA, ethnographer The team of the Local Strategy would like to express its gratefulness to everybody who have helped us with the necessary data for the development plan, fi rst of all the members of the Local Steering Committee and the foll owing persons and institutions: BARTHA ÉVA – County Department for Child’s Rights Protection BUSTYA ATTILA – Publ ic Heal th Di rectorate GHINESCU GHEORGHE – Harghita County Agency for Labour Force’s Occupancy COL. FERŢU GELU – Penitentiary of Miercurea Ciuc FIKÓ CSABA – County Department for Di sabled Peopl e HARALAMBIE TRANDAFIR – County Direction of Statistics KÁLMÁN UNGVÁRI ZSÓFIA – Harghita County School Inspectorate 5 MIERCUREA CIUC CONTENTS I.5 .1. Education and learning ..................................................34 Foreword by UNDP Resident Representative in Romania..................... 7 I.5 .2. Culture and art...................................................................37 I.5.2.1. Culture institutions of the city ............................................38 I.5.2.2. Buildi ngs housing culture institutions ...............................39 Foreword by the Mayor of Miercurea Ciuc I.5.2.3. Fine art and galleries ..........................................................39 Municipality............................................ 9 I.5.2.4. Music .....................................................................................39 I.5.2.5. Publishing Hous es ..............................................................39 I. THE STRATEGY FOR SUSTAINABLE I.5.2.6. Media.....................................................................................39 I.5.2.7. Foundations, c ultural associations ...................................40 DEVELOPMENT.................................... 11 I.5. 2.8. Famous cult ural events taki ng place in Miercurea I.1 . EVALUATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES...........11 Ciuc.......................................................................................40 I.5.2.9. Religious celebrati on ..........................................................40 I.1.1. Local geography ...............................................................11 I.5.3. Sport and leisure ..............................................................40 I.1 .2. Natural environmen t........................................................11 GENERAL REMARKS..............................................................41 I.2 . BUILT-IN AREA...................................................................12 I.2 .1. In frastructure ......................................................................12 II. OBJECTIVES..............................................43 I.2 .2. Construction, land ............................................................13 GENERAL OBJECTIVES........................................................43 I.2.3. Green areas .......................................................................14 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES.........................................................46 I.2 .4. Public sanitation services..............................................15 II.1. NATURAL RESOURCES...............................................46 I.2.5. Environmental components ..........................................16 I.2.5.1. Water – (as of 2000) ...........................................................16 II.1.1 . Natural environment.......................................................46 I.2.5.2. Air – (as of 2000) .................................................................17 II.2. BUILT-IN ENVIRONMENT.............................................46 I.2.5.3. Noise .....................................................................................18 II.2.1 . Infrastructure .....................................................................46 I.3. ASSESSMENT OF ECONOMIC II.2.2 . Construction, land ...........................................................47 RESOURCES.................................................................18 II.2.3 . Green areas ......................................................................47 I.3.1. Economic situation...........................................................18 II.2.4 . Public sanita tion services.............................................47 I.3.2. Main economic activities................................................20 I.3.2.1. Agriculture, forestr y.............................................................20 II.2.5. Environmental components.........................................47 I.3.2.2. Industr y .................................................................................22 II.2.5.1 Water .....................................................................................47 I.3.2.3. Commerce............................................................................23 II.2.5.2. Air .........................................................................................47 I.3.2.4. Ser vices ................................................................................23 II.2.5.3. Noise ....................................................................................48 I.3.3. Analysis of fields of activity by turnover and II.3. ECONOMIC RESOURCES............................................48 profit....................................................................................23 II.3.1. Economic situation .........................................................48 I.3.4. Labour structure................................................................24 II.3.2 Main economic activities................................................48 I.4. ASSESSMENT OF SOCIAL AND HUMAN II.3.2.1. Agriculture, fores try............................................................48 RESOURCES.................................................................26 II.4. HUMAN RESOURCES....................................................49 I.4.1. Demography and public health ...................................26 II.4.1. Demography and public health ..................................49 I.4.1.1. Popul ation.............................................................................26 II.4.2 . Social insti tutions ............................................................49 I.4.1.2. Natural movement of the popul ation ................................26 I.4.1.3. Migration...............................................................................26 II.4.3. Religious Oragnizations................................................49 I.4.1.4. Labour forc e and s ocial protec tion ...................................28 II.4.4 . Civil society .......................................................................49
Recommended publications
  • Planul De Management Al Sitului Natura 2000 Herculian
    Planul de management al sitului de interes comunitar Bazinul Ciucului de Jos ROSCI0007 Planul de Management al sitului de importanță comunitară Bazinul Ciucului de Jos ROSCI0007 Planul de management al sitului de interes comunitar Bazinul Ciucului de Jos ROSCI0007 Cuprins A. INTRODUCERE .................................................................................................................. 7 A.1. Scopul Planului de Management.................................................................................. 10 A.2. Baza legală a Planului de Management ....................................................................... 11 B.1. Informaţii Generale ...................................................................................................... 13 B.1.1. Localizare .................................................................................................................. 13 B.1.2. Cadrul legal şi administrativ pentru management ..................................................... 14 B.1.3. Procedura de elaborare, modificare și actualizare a Planului de Management ......... 21 B.1.4. Procedura de implementare a Planului de Management ........................................... 23 B.1.5. Drepturi de proprietate, administrare și folosință a terenurilor ................................. 24 B.1.6. Factorii interesaţi ....................................................................................................... 26 B.1.7. Resurse pentru management şi infrastructura ..........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural and Linguistic Layers Embedded in Romanian Oikonyms Derived from Hagionyms
    Cultural and linguistic layers embedded in Romanian oikonyms derived from hagionyms Oliviu FELECAN and Nicolae FELECAN Introduction In addition to constituting linguistic, geographical, historical, anthropo- logical, ethnographic, social and psychological markers, toponyms may also function as religious symbols, especially in those cases when the name of a place is derived from a hagionym. In the present paper, we focus on hagionymic oikonyms, a field of research that has been explored through various theoretical frameworks within Romania and which pro- vides fruitful insights into religious and cultural practices and attitudes. In the case of oikonyms bearing a religious background, “the proper name is a linguistic sign that designates a precise referent which can be located in time and space” (Billy 1995, p. 142, apud Vaxelaire 2005, p. 161, orig. French1) and whose position is transparent. Accordingly, our study lies within the broad domain of onomastics, highlighting specific aspects related to anthroponymy, on the one hand, and toponymy, on the other. With regard to Romanian anthroponymy, Puşcariu (1976, p. 298, orig. Romanian) has pointed out that: there is no continuity between the official names of pagan Romans and Christian Romanians. […] Christianity does not seem to have greatly affected old Romanian onomastics. In fact, apart from the two names Nicoară and Sumedrea (from Sâmedru = Sanctus Demetrius)2 ­Romanian does not evidence any other hagionyms revealing ancient phonetic structures. 1 The quotations marked as being originally in French or Romanian (indicated by “orig. French” and “orig. Romanian” respectively) are only provided as translations. 2 As an oikonym, this name does not occur in the Daco-Romanian area.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategia De Dezvoltare Locala a Comunei Sa Ndominic
    STRATEGIA DE DEZVOLTARE LOCALA A COMUNEI SA NDOMINIC 2014-2020 Sândominic, 15 decembrie 2014 Cuprins 1. SINTEZA COORDONATORULUI 5 2. METODOLOGIA APLICATĂ 8 3. ANALIZA DE MEDIU 11 3.1. Așezarea geografică 11 3.2. Relații în teritoriu, caracteristici urbanistice 13 3.3. Infrastructura tehnico-edilitară 18 3.4. Gestionarea deșeurilor 21 3.5. Riscuri naturale 22 3.6. Resurse naturale și turistice 23 3.6.1. Arii naturale protejate 23 4. SITUAȚIA COMUNITARĂ ȘI CULTURALĂ 27 4.1. Procese demografice în comună 27 4.2. Spații, evenimente și actori culturali și comunitari 35 4.2.1. Viaţa comunitară 35 4.2.2. Valori spirituale 37 4.2.3. Lumea culturii materiale 39 4.3. Învăţământul local 40 4.4. Sistemul social şi medical 42 5. SITUAŢIE ŞI PROCESE ECONOMICE 45 5.1. Context economico-geografic 45 5.2. Resurse naturale locale şi utilizarea lor 49 5.2.1. Terenuri utilizabile în agricultură şi valorificarea lor în momentul de faţă 49 5.2.2. Gospodărirea pădurilor şi vânătoare 57 5.2.3. Valorificarea altor resurse naturale 58 5.2.4. Turismul 58 5.3. Situaţie şi procese în sectoarele economice 62 5.3.1. Structura economică a judeţului 62 5.4. Structura şi activitatea antreprenorială 64 5.4.1. Situaţia şi procese pe piaţa muncii 68 5.5. Atragerea de fonduri 69 5.1. Economia administraţiei publice locale 71 6. ANALIZA SWOT 75 7. IMAGINEA DE VIITOR A COMUNEI SÂNDOMINIC 79 8. OBIECTIVELE DE DEZVOLTARE 83 9. PRIORITĂȚI DE DEZVOLTARE 84 10. AXE PRIORITARE ȘI MĂSURI DE DEZVOLTARE 85 10.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Romania - Adopted on 22 June 2017 Published on 16 February 2018
    ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES ACFC/OP/IV(2017)005 Fourth Opinion on Romania - adopted on 22 June 2017 Published on 16 February 2018 Summary The authorities in Romania promote respect and understanding in society and representatives of most national minorities report an overall embracing attitude prevailing between the majority and the minorities. The authorities have made efforts to promote minority cultures and education, and particular steps which have been taken to facilitate representation of national minorities in parliament are widely recognised and appreciated. The Law on Education remains the main legislative basis for teaching in and of national minority languages. A consolidated and coherent legal framework related to the protection of minority rights is lacking and the draft Law on the Status of National Minorities, proposed in parliament in 2006, has still not been adopted. Existing legislation regulating different aspects of national minority protection is disjointed, piecemeal, full of grey zones and open to contradictory interpretation. A coherent policy to guarantee access to minority rights is still lacking and respect of rights of persons belonging to national minorities varies according to local conditions and the goodwill of the municipal or regional authorities. Persistence of negative attitudes and prejudice against the Roma and anti-Hungarian sentiment is of considerable concern. Despite the resolute stance of the National Council for Combating Discrimination, court rulings and statements from the authorities, racist incidents continue to be reported. The revised Strategy for the Inclusion of Romanian Citizens Belonging to the Roma Minority – 2012-2020, adopted in 2015, sets targets in the key areas of education, employment, health and housing and addresses also promotion and protection of Roma culture and participation in public and political life.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecoterra, No. 26, 2011 55 RELATION BETWEEN SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
    Ecoterra, no. 26, 2011 RELATION BETWEEN SETTLEMENT SYSTEM AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT IN CIUC-BASIN IN THE LAST SEVEN CENTURIES Tibor ELEKES University of Miskolc, Depatment of Geography, Hungary Abstract: In Ciuc-basin the evolution of settlement system is a centuries-old process. In 1567, 42 villages were registered. The evaluation of today’s settlement system lasted till the 20th century. In the years of 1950’s and 1960’s the scattered settlements and detached farms were declared villages. During centuries the town system had changed little. Near Miercurea-Ciuc, which had performed administrative duties for a short periods, Băile Tuşnad was declared to town in the middle of 20th century. The evaluation of settlement system, administration and environment are illustrated as a process on the 18 maps, made by myself. In this paper there are published three of them. They give a historical and stop-gap summary. Mass of facts, relating with settlements, regions, environment, administrative units placed in space can represent a base to the organising microregions in the last few years. In the same time old-centuries processes can be traced back: the natural environment was receded step by step with the evaluation of settlement systems. Keywords: settlement system, natural environment, maps. Introduction In the Carpathians the settlement-systems of intermountain basins had come into being after certain stages of development. In the process of changing settlement systems not only the role of natural features, economic and social factors are determinant, but political decisions are also important. The knowledge of the evaluation of settlements system, changing of administration and settlement-environment system plays an important role in the evaluation of settlement system and in resolving of environmental problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Proces-Verbal De Desemnare a Operatorilor De Calculator Ai
    3URFHVYHUEDOGHGHVHPQDUHDRSHUDWRULORUGHFDOFXODWRUDLELURXULORUHOHFWRUDOHDOHVHFĠLLORU GHYRWDUHFRQVWLWXLWHSHQWUXDOHJHUHDDXWRULWă܊LORUDGPLQLVWUD܊LHLSXEOLFHORFDOHGLQGDWDGH27 septembrie 2020, conform deciziei AEP nr. 52 din 04.09.2020, %LURXO(OHFWRUDOGH&LUFXPVFULS܊LH-XGHĠHDQăQU21 HARGHITA Nr. crt. UAT 1U6HF܊LH ,QVWLWX܊LD Nume Prenume ,QL܊LDOD )XQF܊LD WDWăOXL 1 MUNICIPIUL 1 TEATRUL MUNICIPAL ´CSIKI CÂMPEAN LIVIU-MANOLE Operator MIERCUREA-CIUC JÁTÉKSZÍN´MIERCUREA-CIUC 2 MUNICIPIUL 2 LICEUL DE ARTE ´NAGY ISTVÁN´ MIHALCEA 0$5(܇9,25(/ Operator MIERCUREA-CIUC MIERCUREA-CIUC 3 MUNICIPIUL 3 &$6$'(&8/785Ă$6,1',&$7(/25 PAP MARIA A Operator MIERCUREA-CIUC MIERCUREA-CIUC 4 MUNICIPIUL 4 ܇&2$/$*,01$=,$/Ă´NAGY IMRE´ INCZE RÉKA Operator MIERCUREA-CIUC MIERCUREA-CIUC 5 MUNICIPIUL 5 ù&2$/$*,01$=,$/ĂÄNAGY IMRE´ GABOR LORÁND Operator MIERCUREA-CIUC MIERCUREA-CIUC 6 MUNICIPIUL 6 ܇FRDOD*LPQD]LDOă´Nagy Imre´ POPESCU CRISTINA Operator MIERCUREA-CIUC 7 MUNICIPIUL 7 ܇&2$/$*,01$=,$/Ă´3(7ė), SZÁSZ Zsófia A Operator MIERCUREA-CIUC SÁNDOR´MIERCUREA-CIUC 8 MUNICIPIUL 8 ܇&2$/$*,01$=,$/Ă´3(7ė), OZSVÁTH-BERÉNYI HAJNALKA-JUDIT Operator MIERCUREA-CIUC SÁNDOR´MIERCUREA-CIUC 9 MUNICIPIUL 9 ܇&2$/$*,01$=,$/Ă´LIVIU GYÖRGY Adél A Operator MIERCUREA-CIUC REBREANU´MIERCUREA-CIUC 10 MUNICIPIUL 10 *5Ă',1,ğ$ÄNAPRAFORGÓ´ GALEA MIHAI-VLAD Operator MIERCUREA-CIUC MIERCUREA-CIUC ^ƚƌ͘^ƚĂǀƌŽƉŽůĞŽƐ͕Ŷƌ͘ϲ͕ƵĐƵƌĞƔƚŝ͕^ĞĐƚŽƌϯ͕ϬϯϬϬϴϰ 1/23 Telefon: 021.310.07.69, fax: 021.310.13.86 www.roaep.ro, e-mail: [email protected] 3URFHVYHUEDOGHGHVHPQDUHDRSHUDWRULORUGHFDOFXODWRUDLELURXULORUHOHFWRUDOHDOHVHFĠLLORU
    [Show full text]
  • Some Actual Aspects About the Tourism Accomodation in Harghita County
    GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites Year VII, no. 2, vol. 14, November 2014, p.158-167 ISSN 2065-0817, E-ISSN 2065-1198 Article no. 14106-162 SOME ACTUAL ASPECTS ABOUT THE TOURISM ACCOMODATION IN HARGHITA COUNTY George-Bogdan TOFAN* “Babeş-Bolyai” University, Faculty of Geography, Cluj-Napoca, 5-7 Clinicilor Street, 40006, Romania, e-mail: [email protected] Adrian NIŢĂ “Babeş-Bolyai” University, Faculty of Geography, Gheorgheni Branch, Romania, e-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The aim of the study is to synthetically present the tendencies of one of the most important elements of the tourism, the accommodation, within Harghita County. Analyzed for more than two decades, quantitatively it presents an evolution with different positive and negative rates. By categories, the tourist villas dominate at the beginning of the ’90s, especially in the tourist resorts of the county (Borsec, Lacu Roşu, Izvoru Mureşului, Harghita-Băi, Băile Tuşnad, Băile Homorod). Later the situation changed for newer categories, existing and functioning on private initiatives (tourist pensions, agritourist pensions, bungalows), plus for some of the classic categories, the tourist chalet, adapted for the mountain tourism, the hotel, present especially in urban settlements and several resorts (Miercurea-Ciuc, Gheorgheni, Odorheiu Secuiesc, Topliţa, Băile Tuşnad, Harghita-Băi, Borsec), the motel and the tourist stop, specific to the automobile travel. Key words: accommodation, comfort degree, villas, tourist pensions, Harghita * * * * * * INTRODUCTION Aspects about the evolution of the accommodation in Harghita County were presented before in several studies approaching the geographic domain at national level (Geografia României, Geografia Umană şi Economică, 1984), at county level (the Romanian Academy series about the Romanian Counties, Judeţul Harghita, Pişotă, Iancu, Bugă, 1976; Judeţul Harghita, Cocean et al., 2013) or in some doctoral theses regarding the mountain depressions (Şeer, 2004, Mara, 2008, Tofan, 2013).
    [Show full text]
  • Evidenta-Proiectanti-Final
    LISTA PROIECTANTILOR DIN JUDETUL HARGHITA NOTA: 1. Această lista are caracter pur informativ 2. Este întocmită pe baza registrului de avize de securitate la incendiu 2008 - 2017 şi internet. 2. Pentru informaţii suplimentare, completare, rectificări etc. vă rugam să vă adresați compartimentului Avizare – Autorizare din cadrul Serviciului Prevenire în Miercurea Ciuc, str. Borviz, nr. 2, jud. Harghita sau la telefon/fax: 0266 312824, e-mail: [email protected] Nr. Telefoane Denumire societate Persoană de contact Adresă firmă Crt. ARHITECTURA M.Ciuc 0266 371690 1 Albert Marton SRL Szasz Endre 0744 593694 M.Ciuc 0745 396075 2 AEDNA SRL Mathe Ede K.Cs.Sandor 3/C/2 M.Ciuc 0266 371651 3 ARC STUDIO SRL Mathe Zoltan Kossuth Lajos 11 0744 697961 Od. Secuiesc 0266 217199 4 1B HOUSE SRL Bartha Szabolcs Morii 1/B 0740 256445 Capu Corbului 0728 524601 5 CIOCÂRLIA SRL Tudoran Victor 112 Od.Secuiesc 0266 210277 6 D-SZ ATELIER SRL Dobrai Laszlo Târgului 15 M.Ciuc 0724 212311 7 ESZTANY SRL Esztany Gyozo Gall Sandor 16/18 0266 311539 0266 314576 8 WELTIM SRL Gall Vilmos M.Ciuc, N. Balcescu 2/4 Gheorgheni 0742 010144 9 LARIX SRL Kollo Istvan p-ţa Libertăţii nr. 8 0729 040040 M.Ciuc 10 MODUL SRL Nan Aurel Kossuth L. 18 0266 371511 URBAN DESIGN Od. Secuiesc 11 Magyari Istvan SRL Independenţei 53/8 0266 219499 M.Ciuc 0266 311169 12 VALLUM SRL Korodi Szabolcs Piaţa Majlath Karoly 6 0744793799 0732633944 Od. Secuiesc 13 PECTA SRL 0744345460 Breslelor 16/20 0266216426 MONTEK DESIGN Miercurea Ciuc, str. Inimii, 14 Carh.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Cultural Heritage in the Carpathians Stakeholders Conference 5Th March 2008 Cultural Centre of Harghita County, Miercurea Ciuc – Csíkszereda
    Our Cultural Heritage in the Carpathians Stakeholders Conference 5th March 2008 Cultural Centre of Harghita County, Miercurea Ciuc – Csíkszereda Name Institute Profession Contact Details +40-742-396410 1 István Botár Szekler Museum of Ciuc Archeologist [email protected] +40-745-510643 2 Irén Farkas Retired Ethnographer [email protected] Museum of Gheorgheni +40-743-034747 3 Tibor Csergõ Director "Tarisznyás Márton" [email protected] +40-745-630083 4 Zsuzsanna Mara Szekler Museum of Ciuc Restorer [email protected] Traditional Heritage Centre of 5 János Mihály Historian [email protected] County Harghita +40-740-821092 6 Sarolta Bíró Eurocultura Association Art Historian [email protected] Sapientia Regional Development 7 Tímea Köllõ Sociologist [email protected] Centre Engineer and Expert in Pogányhavas Microregion 8 Gergely Rodics environmental economics and [email protected] Association regional development Museum of Odorheiu Secuiesc +40-266-218375 9 András Sófalvi Archeologist-Historian "Haáz Rezsõ" [email protected] +40-742-834447 10 József Kristály Cultural Centre of Sândominic Cultural Referent [email protected] Our Cultural Heritage in the Carpathians Miercurea Ciuc – Csíkszereda Name Institute Profession Contact Details +40-730-006749 11 István Benkõ Eco-Trend President [email protected] +40-724-033045 12 László Balázs Cultural Centre of Plăieşii de Jos Cultural Referent [email protected] +40-266-313511 Religion and Cultural Heritage 13 Zita Mihály Engineer of Statistics +40-723-928668
    [Show full text]
  • World Bank Document
    HEALTH s·ECTOR REFORM PROJECT PHASE 2 IBRD Loan 4760RO EIB Loan 22943 RO Project Management Unit APL2 Bank approval Date of the Procurement Plan : Original: April7, 2005 Revision 3: May 19, 2010 Revision 4: March 15, 2011 Date of GPN : March 31, 2005 Period covered by this Procurement Plan: January, 2007 ·December 31, 2013 Revision 7: April 27, 2012 Revision 8: June 11,2012 Procurement Procedures for Community Participation in Procurement: Nona UPDATED PROCUREMENT PLAN : December 18, 2012 w ESTIMATED/ ACTUAL DATES a: Q Bids :I 0 t:c :c Eval1111tlon Public Disclosure Authorized Iii Report/ :IE Bank TORI REI/ Technlcel& ~ IFBI BDIITQ I Bid Opening/ l'i1 No. of Review ITOIBD Rllllflclal Contract Contract Ref No. CONTRACT DESCRIPTION ffi REI Issue Propoeala COMMENTS ... LOTS Prlod Prepare& Eval1111tlon Signing Date Completion 0 i!i Date submlsalon > a: Post Submlsalon Report & Date a: :I Date 0 0 Award 0 lil a: Recommend ...oC ... aU on 0 Component A • Mellmlty IUid Child lte.llh Cere MCH1 Procurement of equlpmen_J for component mother and child G 15 ICB Prior 12-Mar-ol 25-Jun-ol MCH1.1 Hlah Lavel Neonatology Incubator (Package I) G 6-Dec·07 Dec-08 Completed MCH1.2 Hloh Lavel Neonatology Eaulcrnent Package II) G 14-Dec·07 Dec-08 Completed MCH1.3 Hlah Lavel Neonatoloov Eauicrnent Peckaae Ill G 21·Jan·08 Jan-09 ComPleted MCH1.4 Basic Neonatology Equipment (Peckage IV) G 14-Dec-07 Jun-09 Compleled MCH1.5 Other Neonatology Equipment (PeckaQe V) G 14-Dec-07 Jun-09 COmpleled MCHt.6 Standard Neonatology ICU Equipment PeckaQe V1 G 14-Dec.07 Dec·08
    [Show full text]
  • Plan Urbanistic Zonal Proiect Regional De Dezvoltare Infrastructurii De Apă Și Apă Uzată În Județul Harghita
    s.c. ARHITECTURA s.r.l. MIERCUREA CIUC, str. ZÖLD PÉTER nr 19, jud. HARGHITA tel. 0744 593 694 PLAN URBANISTIC ZONAL PROIECT REGIONAL DE DEZVOLTARE INFRASTRUCTURII DE APĂ ȘI APĂ UZATĂ ÎN JUDEȚUL HARGHITA BENEFICIAR: S.C. HARVIZ SA PROIECTAT: S.C. ARHITECTURA S.R.L. PROIECT NR. 1602/2020 s.c. ARHITECTURA s.r.l. MIERCUREA CIUC, str. ZÖLD PÉTER nr 19, jud. HARGHITA tel. 0744 593 694 Denumirea lucrării Proiect regional de dezvoltare infrastructurii de apă și apă uzată în județul Harghita Amplasament com. SÂNSIMION, sat CETĂȚUIA com. ZETEA, sat SUB CETATE, sat IZVOARE com. SÂNCRĂIENI, sat SÂNCRĂIENI mun. ODORHEIU SECUIESC mun. MIERCUREA CIUC, zona CIBA, zona SZÉCSENY com. CIUCSÂNGEORGIU, sat COTORMANI com. PLĂIEȘII DE JOS, sat PLĂIEȘII DE JOS, sat CAȘINU NOU com. PRAID, sat BUCIN Inițiator S.C. HARVIZ SA Beneficiar S.C. HARVIZ SA Proiectant general S.C. ARHITECTURA S.R.L. Miercurea Ciuc, str. Zöld Péter nr. 19 Faza P.U.Z. Număr contract 1602/2020 Volumul Piese scrise și desenate – Plan urbanistic zonal (PUZ) Prevederi generale Director S.C. ARHITECTURA S.R.L. arh. ALBERT MARTIN Miercurea Ciuc, 07.07. 2020 s.c. ARHITECTURA s.r.l. MIERCUREA CIUC, str. ZÖLD PÉTER nr 19, jud. HARGHITA tel. 0744 593 694 COLECTIV TEHNIC DE COORDONARE GENERALĂ A PROIECTULUI S.C. ARHITECTURA S.R.L. arh. ALBERT MARTIN atestat R.U.R. PROIECTANȚI P.U.Z. ȘEF PROIECT dipl. arh. ALBERT MARTIN ARHITECTURĂ dipl. arh. ALBERT MARTIN dipl. arh. ALBERT MARIANA dipl. arh. BÍRÓ JÓZSEF dipl. arh. LÁSZLÓ BEÁTA Miercurea Ciuc, 07.07.2020 s.c.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Family Farms in Romania for Biodiversity
    Small Family Farms in Romania for Biodiversity Dominique Barjolle, Institute for Environmental Decisions, ETH, CH - 8092 Zurich & FIBL, CH - 8070 Frick, [email protected] Marie-Luce Ghib: CESAER, UMR 1041 INRA ENESAD - Centre d'Economie et de Sociologie appliquées à l'Agriculture et aux Espaces Ruraux, 26 Boulevard du Dr Petitjean - BP 87999, F-21079 Dijon Cedex and AgroParisTech ENGREF, 19 avenue du Maine, F 75732 Paris, France - [email protected] Krystyna Larkham, Rural’Est (www.ruralest.com), [email protected] Keywords: small farm, subsistence, common agriculture policy, biodiversity, mountains JEL: P32, Q15, Q18, Q57 1. Abstract A vast majority of policy tools (first and second pillar of the CAP, Natura 2000) are not yet implemented in Romania, because of lack of possibility to comply with the requirements. This contribution discusses the pro and contra arguments for the introduction of a new tool: the small farm scheme. 2. Introduction1 Asymmetric development of rural regions is a problem throughout Europe, however in few places more so than Romania. Romania’s turbulent recent history combined with its diverse biogeography has created an agricultural country of extremes, with 45% of the population living in rural areas, and around 30% managing exploitations of 0.5-5 ha, whilst 76% of the country’s agricultural payments go to around 10% of farms covering almost 40% of surface area (Luca, 2009). The Romanian Government supports the introduction of a new measure in the context of the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP): support for small farms. This is due to the myriad difficulties in applying current EU policy to small, part-time or semi-subsistence agriculture, compounded by the fact that the vast majority of payments from the first pillar support large farms and are not enough to take into account the conditions of mountain, or ‘less favoured area’ farming.
    [Show full text]