DOCSLIB.ORG

(SEA) for the National Waste Management Plan in Montenegro

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(SEA) for the National Waste Management Plan in Montenegro Delegation of the EU to MONTENEGRO Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for the National Waste Management Plan in Montenegro FINAL VERSION July 2015 FWC BENEFICIARIES 2013 LOT 6: Environment EuropeAid/132633/C/SER /multi SC N° 2014/350828 The content of this publication is the sole responsibility of AGRECO Consortium and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. TABLE OF CONTENTS NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 6 1. OVERVIEW OF CONTENTS AND MAIN OBJECTIVES OF THE WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND ITS RELATION TO OTHER RELEVANT PLANS AND PROGRAMS .................................................................. 15 1.1. CONTENTS AND MAIN OBJECTIVES OF THE WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................................... 15 1.2. THE PLAN IN RELATION TO OTHER RELEVANT STRATEGIES, PLANS AND PROGRAMS ..................... 17 2. THE CURRENT STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND ITS POSSIBLE DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN ............................................................................................................... 23 2.1. CLIMATE CHANGE ........................................................................................................................................ 23 2.1.1. Global climate change .................................................................................................................................... 23 2.1.2. Climate characteristics in Montenegro ............................................................................................................ 24 2.2. METEOROLOGICAL DATA ............................................................................................................................ 26 2.3. AIR QUALITY .................................................................................................................................................. 32 2.4. GEOLOGICAL AND HYDROGEOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................ 38 2.4.1. Geological characteristics ............................................................................................................................... 38 2.4.2. Hydrogeological characteristics ...................................................................................................................... 42 2.5. WATER ........................................................................................................................................................... 44 2.5.1. Ground waters 44 2.5.2. Surface water body ......................................................................................................................................... 46 2.5.3. Coastal waters (the sea) ................................................................................................................................. 49 2.5.4. Harmful effects of water (flood water) ............................................................................................................. 50 2.6. SOIL ................................................................................................................................................................ 51 2.6.1. Pedological data ............................................................................................................................................. 51 2.6.2. Soil quality 53 2.6.3. Erosion 54 2.6.4. Salinization of soil ........................................................................................................................................... 54 2.6.5. Agrobiodiversity .............................................................................................................................................. 55 2.7. BIOLOGICAL AND LANDSCAPE DIVERSITY, PROTECTED AREAS .......................................................... 55 2.7.1. Habitats 55 2.7.2. Protected areas ............................................................................................................................................... 60 2.7.3. Ecological network areas (Emerald) ............................................................................................................... 63 2.7.4. Landscape features ........................................................................................................................................ 63 2.8. CULTURAL HERITAGE .................................................................................................................................. 66 2.9. POPULATION ................................................................................................................................................. 69 2.9.1. General population trends ............................................................................................................................... 69 2.9.2. Natural and migratory population trends ......................................................................................................... 71 2.9.3. Age structure of the population ....................................................................................................................... 73 2.9.4. Employment by sectoral activities ................................................................................................................... 74 2.10. ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................................................ 76 2.10.1. Agriculture 76 2.10.2. Forestry and hunting .................................................................................................................................... 77 2.10.3. Tourism 81 2.10.4. Mining and Industry ...................................................................................................................................... 82 2.10.5. Energy industry ............................................................................................................................................ 83 SEA Waste Management Plan of Montenegro, Final version 2 2.11. HEALTH .......................................................................................................................................................... 84 2.12. MATERIAL ASSETS ....................................................................................................................................... 88 3. IDENTIFICATION OF THE AREAS POSSIBLY EXPOSED TO SIGNIFICANT RISKS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ENVIRONMENT IN THESE AREAS ............................................................. 91 3.1. MUNICIPALITY OF BIJELO POLJE ................................................................................................................ 91 3.2. MUNICIPALITY OF BERANE ......................................................................................................................... 97 3.3. MUNICIPALITY OF NIKŠIĆ .......................................................................................................................... 100 3.4. MUNICIPALITY OF HERCEG NOVI ............................................................................................................. 104 4. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PLAN, PARTICULARLY THOSE RELATED TO AREAS WHICH ARE OF PARTICULAR SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT ...... 108 5. ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES ESTABLISHED AT THE NATIONAL OR INTERNATIONAL LEVEL THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR THE PLAN AND THE MANNER IN WHICH THESE OBJECTIVES, AND ALL OTHER ASPECTS RELEVANT FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, WERE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION DURING THE PREPARATION PROCESS .................................................................................................. 115 5.1. ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES ESTABLISHED UPON THE CONCLUSION OF INTERNATIONAL TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS, WHICH ARE IMPORTANT FOR THE PLAN .............................................................................................................. 115 5.2. THE ANALYSIS OF COMPLIANCE OF THE PROPOSED OPTIONS WITH ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES .......................... 117 6. POSSIBLE SIGNIFICANT CONSEQUENCES TO HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT ............ 122 6.1. MUNICIPALITY OF BIJELO POLJE .............................................................................................................. 123 6.2. MUNICIPALITY OF BERANE ....................................................................................................................... 129 6.3. THE MUNICIPALITY OF NIKŠIĆ .................................................................................................................. 133 6.4. MUNICIPALITY OF HERCEG NOVI ............................................................................................................. 143 6.5. ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT / RISK OF THE PROPOSED WASTE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS ................. 147 7. AN OVERVIEW OF REASONS USED AS A BASIS FOR THE SELECTION OF CONSIDERED ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS, AND A DESCRIPTION OF ESTIMATES METHODS AND OF POSSIBLE DIFFICULTIES IN THE FORMULATION OF REQUIRED DATA ................................................................ 157 7.1. OPTIONS PROPOSED IN THE PLAN .......................................................................................................... 157 7.2. ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS FOR THE PROJECT ...................................................................................... 161 8. PLANNED MEASURES TO PREVENT,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bijelo Polje - Kulturna Ruta 1
    20km 2.4 8 km 6.8 km 1 9 6.0 km 10 2 6 5 3 4 Bijelo Polje - kulturna ruta 1. Crkva svetog Petra 2. Gradska džamija 3. Zavičajni muzej 4. Park pjesnika 5. Kuća Rista Ratkovića 7 6. Glavni gradski trg 7. Crkva svetog Nikole u Nikoljcu 8. Stari most na Bistrici i crkva u Voljavcu 9. Selo Bistrica 10. Manastir svetog Nikole u Podvrhu novac kovan na ovim prostorima, koji je svoje mjesto našao čak i u Danteovoj Danas se tu nalazi monumentalni Crkva Presvete Bogorodice u Voljavcu, sagrađena krajem 12. vijeka, jedna je Crkva Svetog Apostola Petra Božanstvenoj komediji. Blaga numizmatičke, arheološke, istorijske, etnološke spomenik posvećen borcima od prvih zadužbina velikog župana Stefana Nemanje u ovom kraju. Crkva je Središte oko kog je prije osam stotina godina i umjetničke zbirke, smještena su u zgradi iz 1905. godine koja je i sama Narodnooslobodilačke borbe, koji bila poznata i po bogatim vinogradima, a još i danas pored nje raste čuvena počelo da se razvija i širi naselje nalazi se svojevrsni spomenik kulture. podsjeća brojne prolaznike na dugovječna vinova loza. upravo ovdje, na mjestu gdje je humski knez Drugi svjetski rat i žrtve koje je ovaj Miroslav 1196. godine podigao crkvu Svetog kraj podnio u borbi protiv fašizma. I Apostola Petra. Tipičan primjer preplitanja pola tone teška zvijezda petokraka romanske i vizantijske arhitekture, crkva je Park pjesnika Selo Bistrica Kada bi se pravila književna mapa najbolje se vidi baš sa Glavnog Idilični pejzaži ovog sela u dolini više puta prepravljana i dograđivana, da bi Crne Gore, bjelopoljski kraj, zavičaj gradskog trga.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case Northeastern Montenegro
    Russian Journal of Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences, 1(13) MOVEMENT POPULATION IN THE SECOND OF XX AND BEGINNING OF XXI CENTURY: THE CASE NORTHEASTERN MONTENEGRO Goran Rajovi ć, Jelisavka Bulatovi ć, Researchers College of Textile Design, Technology and Management, Belgrade, Serbia E-mail: [email protected] , [email protected] Phone: 0038161/19-24-850, 003861/ 3082651 ABSTRACT This paper analyzes population trends northeast of Montenegro in the second half of the twentieth and early twenty-first century. The population has increased in the period 1948- 2003 to 2.16%, but with a tendency to decline from 1981. The population in are period 1981- 2003, decreased by 14,674, or 21.16 %. Parameters of natural population indicate a negative trend. So the natural increase in 2003 in the municipality was Andrijevica - 4.6 ‰, in the municipality of Plav 4.21 ‰, and Berane 9.29 ‰, significantly lower than in the beginning of the seventies. Population migration indicates uneven density and population concentration. The existence of a large number of settlements up to 500 populations (81) is not suitable for modern flow to vital economic development of the region. KEYWORDS Northeastern Montenegro; Density of population; Natural change; Migration. Northeastern Montenegro covers an area of 1486 km² and the population census in 2003 there lived 54 658 inhabitants, or 36.8 in/ km². It covers three municipalities: Berane, Andrijevica and Plav. The paper provides a review and interpretation of the basic parameters of population trends northeastern of Montenegro in the second half of the twentieth and early twenty-first century. Unlike the nineties of the last century, the population of the region during the seventies, moving out to a much lesser extent, we can explain the material well-being of the former Yugoslavia.
    [Show full text]
  • Directory of Development Organizations
    EDITION 2007 VOLUME III.B / EUROPE DIRECTORY OF DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS GUIDE TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, GOVERNMENTS, PRIVATE SECTOR DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES, CIVIL SOCIETY, UNIVERSITIES, GRANTMAKERS, BANKS, MICROFINANCE INSTITUTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTING FIRMS Resource Guide to Development Organizations and the Internet Introduction Welcome to the directory of development organizations 2007, Volume III: Europe The directory of development organizations, listing 51.500 development organizations, has been prepared to facilitate international cooperation and knowledge sharing in development work, both among civil society organizations, research institutions, governments and the private sector. The directory aims to promote interaction and active partnerships among key development organisations in civil society, including NGOs, trade unions, faith-based organizations, indigenous peoples movements, foundations and research centres. In creating opportunities for dialogue with governments and private sector, civil society organizations are helping to amplify the voices of the poorest people in the decisions that affect their lives, improve development effectiveness and sustainability and hold governments and policymakers publicly accountable. In particular, the directory is intended to provide a comprehensive source of reference for development practitioners, researchers, donor employees, and policymakers who are committed to good governance, sustainable development and poverty reduction, through: the financial sector and microfinance,
    [Show full text]
  • Montenegro Old and New: History, Politics, Culture, and the People
    60 ZuZana Poláčková; Pieter van Duin Montenegro Old and New: History, Politics, Culture, and the People The authors are focusing on how Montenegro today is coming to terms with the task of becoming a modern European nation, which implies recognition not only of democracy, the rule of law, and so forth, but also of a degree of ‘multiculturalism’, that is recognition of the existence of cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious minorities in a society that is dominated by a Slavic Orthodox majority. In his context they are analyzing the history of the struggle of the Montenegrin people against a host of foreign invaders – after they had ceased to be invaders themselves – and especially their apparently consistent refusal to accept Ottoman sovereignty over their homeland seemed to make them the most remarkable freedom fighters imaginable and led to the creation of a special Montenegrin image in Europe. This im- age of heroic stubbornness and unique martial bravery was even consciously cultivated in Western and Central Europe from the early nineteenth century onwards, as the Greeks, the Serbs, the Montenegrins and other Balkan peoples began to resist the Ottoman Empire in a more effective way and the force of Romantic nationalism began to influence the whole of Europe, from German historians to British politi- cians, and also including Montenegrin and Serbian poets themselves. And what about the present situa- tion? The authors of this essay carried out an improvised piece of investigation into current conditions, attitudes, and feelings on both the Albanian and the Slavic-Montenegrin side (in September 2012). key words: Montenegro; history; multiculturalism; identity; nationalism; Muslim; Orthodox Montenegro (Crna Gora, Tsrna Gora, Tsernagora) is a small country in the Western Balkans region with some 625,000 inhabitants,1 which became an independent nation in 2006 and a can- didate-member of the EU in 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Montenegro's Tribal Legacy
    WARNING! The views expressed in FMSO publications and reports are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. Montenegro's Tribal Legacy by Major Steven C. Calhoun, US Army Foreign Military Studies Office, Fort Leavenworth, KS. This article appeared in Military Review July-August 2000 The mentality of our people is still very patriarchal. Here the knife, revenge and a tribal (plemenski) system exist as nowhere else.1 The whole country is interconnected and almost everyone knows everyone else. Montenegro is nothing but a large family—all of this augurs nothing good. —Mihajlo Dedejic2 When the military receives an order to deploy into a particular area, planners focus on the terrain so the military can use the ground to its advantage. Montenegro provides an abundance of terrain to study, and it is apparent from the rugged karst topography how this tiny republic received its moniker—the Black Mountain. The territory of Montenegro borders Croatia, Bosnia- Herzegovina, Serbia and Albania and is about the size of Connecticut. Together with the much larger republic of Serbia, Montenegro makes up the current Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY). But the jagged terrain of Montenegro is only part of the military equation. Montenegro has a complex, multilayered society in which tribe and clan can still influence attitudes and loyalties. Misunderstanding tribal dynamics can lead a mission to failure. Russian misunderstanding of tribal and clan influence led to unsuccessful interventions in Afghanistan and Chechnya.3 In Afghanistan, the rural population's tribal organization facilitated their initial resistance to the Soviets.
    [Show full text]
  • Socio Economic Analysis of Northern Montenegrin Region
    SOCIO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE NORTHERN REGION OF MONTENEGRO Podgorica, June 2008. FOUNDATION F OR THE DEVELOPMENT O F NORTHERN MONTENEGRO (FORS) SOCIO -ECONOMIC ANLY S I S O F NORTHERN MONTENEGRO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR : Veselin Šturanović STUDY REVIEWER S : Emil Kočan, Nebojsa Babovic, FORS Montenegro; Zoran Radic, CHF Montenegro IN S TITUTE F OR STRATEGIC STUDIE S AND PROGNO S E S ISSP’S AUTHOR S TEAM : mr Jadranka Kaluđerović mr Ana Krsmanović mr Gordana Radojević mr Ivana Vojinović Milica Daković Ivan Jovetic Milika Mirković Vojin Golubović Mirza Mulešković Marija Orlandić All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means wit- hout the prior written permission of FORS Montenegro. Published with support from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) through the CHF International, Community Revitalization through Democratic Action – Economy (CRDA-E) program. The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Agency for Interna- tional Development. For more information please contact FORS Montenegro by email at [email protected] or: FORS Montenegro, Berane FORS Montenegro, Podgorica Dušana Vujoševića Vaka Đurovića 84 84300, Berane, Montenegro 81000, Podgorica, Montenegro +382 51 235 977 +382 20 310 030 SOCIO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE NORTHERN REGION OF MONTENEGRO CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS: ...............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report
    Ministry of Tourism and Environment SUSTAINABLE TOURISM INDICATORS AND DESTINATION MANAGEMENT Regional Workshop Kolašin, Montenegro, 25-27 April 2007 FINAL REPORT CONTENTS Foreword by Mr. Predrag Nenezic, Minister of Tourism and Environment of Montenegro 1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... 3 2 SUSTAINABLE TOURISM IN MONTENEGRO AND THE BJELASICA AND KOMOVI REGION ........................................................................................... 5 3 WORKSHOP PRESENTATIONS AND VISITS...................................................... 11 4 METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH ........................................................................ 17 5 IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES AND INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE TOURISM IN BJELASICA AND KOMOVI.............................................................. 21 6 MONITORING AND MEASUREMENT PROCESSES ........................................... 41 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE WORKSHOP............ 43 8 BASELINE INDICATORS FOR TOURISM DEVELOPMENT IN THE NORTHERN MOUNTAIN REGION OF MONTENEGRO ...................................... 45 ANNEX A: FORMS............................................................................................................ 49 Form 1 - Field visit evaluation sheet ............................................................................. 49 Form 2 - Situation analysis worksheet .......................................................................... 51 Form 3 - Sustainability
    [Show full text]
  • Practical Information
    EXPANDING BROADBAND ACCESS AND ADOPTION 28th–29th September 2015 Hotel Maestral, Przno/Budva, Montenegro PRACTICAL INFORMATION 1. Montenegro Montenegro is a small, but extremely attractive Mediterranean country. It is located in the south of Europe, on the Adriatic coast. Montenegro is located between 41º 52´- 43º 42´ north latitude and 18º26´ - 20º22´ east longitudes and belongs to the central Mediterranean that is Southern Europe. To the north it borders Serbia, to the southeast Kosovo and Albania, to the south it is separated from Italy by the Adriatic Sea and to the west it borders Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. It has about 620,000 inhabitants and an area of 13,812 km2. Montenegro is characterized by the diversity of outstanding natural beauty in a small space. To the north, there are mountain peaks with 2,524 meters above sea level and more than 100 glacial lakes. In the region there are impressive canyons of which the most famous is canyon of Tara, with depth of 1,300 m (the second in the world after Colorado). Montenegrin coastline is 293 km long and has as many as 52 km of sandy beaches which are a real tourist attraction. The coast is dominated by the medieval Mediterranean towns with fascinating architecture (Herceg Novi, Kotor, Budva, Bar, Ulcinj). Montenegro is a popular tourist destination with a number of world-recognizable sites and resorts (hotel-town Sveti Stefan, Bay of Boka Kotorska, Porto Montenegro marina). Montenegro is a multinational state that is characterized by inter-ethnic and inter-confessional harmony. Montenegrin citizens are known for their hospitality, friendliness and cordiality.
    [Show full text]
  • Z a K O N O Teritorijalnoj Organizaciji Crne Gore
    Na osnovu člana 82 stav 1 ta čka 2 i člana 91 stav 2 Ustava Crne Gore, Skupština Crne Gore 24. saziva, na drugoj śednici drugog redovnog (jesenjeg) zasijedanja u 2011. godini, dana 2. novembra 2011. godine, donijela je Z A K O N O TERITORIJALNOJ ORGANIZACIJI CRNE GORE I. OSNOVNE ODREDBE Član 1 Ovim zakonom ure đuju se teritorijalna organizacija Crne Gore, uslovi, na čin i postupak teritorijalnog organizovanja i druga pitanja od značaja za teritorijalnu organizaciju. Član 2 Teritorija opštine, Glavnog grada i Prijestonice (u daljem tekstu: jedinice lokalne samouprave) utvr đuje se ovim zakonom. Član 3 Teritorija jedinice lokalne samouprave i naziv opštine mogu se mijenjati u skladu sa ovim zakonom. II. TERITORIJALNA ORGANIZACIJA Član 4 Teritoriju jedinice lokalne samouprave čine naselja. Član 5 Teritorija Glavnog grada Podgorica, sa sjedištem u Podgorici, obuhvata Podgoricu kao naselje gradskog karaktera, naselja: Balo či, Begova Glavica, Bezjovo, Beri, Bigor, Bio če, Blizna, Bolesestra, Brežine, Bri đe, Brskut, Buronje, Crnci, Crvena Paprat, Cvilin, Ćafa, Ćepeti ći, Dajbabe, Dolovi, Doljani, Donja Gorica, Donje Strav če, Donji Kokoti, Draževina, Du čići, Duga, Đurkovi ći, Duške, Farmaci, Fundina, Goljemadi, Gornje Stravče, Gornji Kokoti, Gradac, Grbavci, Grbi Do, Kisjelica, Klopot, Kopilje, Kornet, Kosor, Krusi, Kržanja, Leki ći, Liješnje, Liješta, Lijeva Rijeka, Lopote, Lutovo, Lužnica, Medun, Milati, Mom če, Mrke, Opasanica, Orahovo, Oraovice, Orasi, Ožezi, Parci, Pelev Brijeg, Petrovi ći, Poprat, Prisoja, Progonovi ći, Ra ći, Rade
    [Show full text]
  • REBIS) Update
    Report No. 100619-ECA Public Disclosure Authorized The Regional Balkans Infrastructure Study (REBIS) Update ENHANCING REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY Identifying Impediments and Priority Remedies Public Disclosure Authorized Main Report Public Disclosure Authorized September 2015 Public Disclosure Authorized © 2015 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org E-mail: [email protected] All rights reserved This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Western Balkans Joint Fund under the Western Balkans Investment Framework. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and can therefore in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of the Contributors to the European Western Balkans Joint Fund or the EBRD and the EIB, as co-managers of the European Western Balkans Joint Fund. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board of Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission promptly.
    [Show full text]
  • BR IFIC N° 2550 Index/Indice
    BR IFIC N° 2550 Index/Indice International Frequency Information Circular (Terrestrial Services) ITU - Radiocommunication Bureau Circular Internacional de Información sobre Frecuencias (Servicios Terrenales) UIT - Oficina de Radiocomunicaciones Circulaire Internationale d'Information sur les Fréquences (Services de Terre) UIT - Bureau des Radiocommunications Part 1 / Partie 1 / Parte 1 Date/Fecha: 09.08.2005 Description of Columns Description des colonnes Descripción de columnas No. Sequential number Numéro séquenciel Número sequencial BR Id. BR identification number Numéro d'identification du BR Número de identificación de la BR Adm Notifying Administration Administration notificatrice Administración notificante 1A [MHz] Assigned frequency [MHz] Fréquence assignée [MHz] Frecuencia asignada [MHz] Name of the location of Nom de l'emplacement de la Nombre del emplazamiento de 4A/5A transmitting / receiving station station d'émission / réception estación transmisora / receptora 4B/5B Geographical area Zone géographique Zona geográfica 4C/5C Geographical coordinates Coordonnées géographiques Coordenadas geográficas 6A Class of station Classe de station Clase de estación Purpose of the notification: Objet de la notification: Propósito de la notificación: Intent ADD-addition MOD-modify ADD-additioner MOD-modifier ADD-añadir MOD-modificar SUP-suppress W/D-withdraw SUP-supprimer W/D-retirer SUP-suprimir W/D-retirar No. BR Id Adm 1A [MHz] 4A/5A 4B/5B 4C/5C 6A Part Intent 1 105112284 F 0.0838 S ANDRE DE COR F 4E55'0" 45N55'0" FX 1 SUP 2 105112298
    [Show full text]
  • USAID Economic Growth Project
    USAID Economic Growth Project BACKGROUND The USAID Economic Growth Project is a 33-month initiative designed to increase economic opportunity in northern Montenegro. Through activities in 13 northern municipalities, the Economic Growth Project is promoting private-sector development to strengthen the competitiveness of the tourism sector, increase the competitiveness of agriculture and agribusiness, and improve the business-enabling environment at the municipal level. ACTIVITIES The project provides assistance to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, local tourist organizations, and business support service providers, as well as municipal governments to stimulate private sector growth. The project is: Strengthening the competitiveness of the tourism sector It is promoting the north as a tourist destination by supporting innovative service providers, building the region’s capacity to support tourism, assisting coordination with coastal tourism businesses, and expanding access to tourist information. Improving the viability of agriculture and agribusiness It is restoring agriculture as a viable economic activity by supporting agricultural producers and processors from the north to capitalize on market trends and generate more income. Bettering the business-enabling environment It is identifying barriers to doing business and assisting municipalities to execute plans to lower these obstacles by providing services and targeted investment. RESULTS 248 businesses have received assistance from Economic Growth Project (EGP)-supported activities. Sales of items produced by EGP-supported small businesses have increased by 15.8 percent since the project began. Linkages have been established between 111 Northern firms, as well as between Northern firms and Central and Southern firms. 26 EGP-assisted companies invested in improved technologies, 29 improved management practices, and 31 farmers, processors, and other firms adopted new technologies or management practices.
    [Show full text]