Napor na uključenju načela održivosti u osnove prostornog planiranja u današnjem postsocijalističkom svijetu traži nove odnose između ustaljenih i suvremenih sudionika. Pojedini interesenti uključeni u razvoj, upravljanje i politiku djeluju na ishod regionalnih i urbanih sustava u Hrvatskoj ponekad bez obraćanja pozornosti na održivost. Njihovo djelovanje pokazuje nedostatak svijesti i negativan odnos prema održivosti u planerskoj praksi gdje je glavni cilj unaprijediti kakvoću života sadašnjih i budućih naraštaja. Bez dobrih ideja o nosivim kapacitetima i održivosti, neki od ovih sudionika zanemaruju planerska znanja i ekspertizu (CAVRIĆ, NEDOVIĆ – BUDIĆ, 2007.). Vještinama i znanjima planeri ih savjetuju, međutim, glavna pokretačka sila još je uvijek politički utjecaj. Takvi predlagači uspijevaju zaštititi svoje osobne probitke glede prostora i zemljišta nauštrb javnosti i običnih građana, podržavajući sustav izrade "preslikanih" planerskih izvješća, pogodujući tek daljem urbanom širenju i nenadziranoj izgradnji. Na žalost, poradi dužega vremenskog društvenog ignoriranja i jake sveze lobija investitora, arhitekata i građevinara, različite međunarodne planerske ideje s "održivošću na umu" još ne utječu na hrvatsku teoriju i praksu planiranja. Neke su od njih jednostavno neprihvaćane, netočno tumačene ili odbacivane zahvaljujući krutoj zakonskoj regulativi, nepostojanju formalnog školovanja planera i povlaštenom položaju tek jednog tipa ovlaštenih planera tj. arhitekata . Osjetljivost za alternativna razvojna rješenja, sudjelovanje javnosti, novine u ponašanju, organizaciji i tehnologijama, raznovrsnost pomagala za provedbu u planerskoj "kutiji s alatima", kao i različite vrste planerskih poslova u usmjeravanju održivih promjena, tek treba prepoznati u zemlji koja je u procesu pristupanja EU. Unatoč tomu, ovaj rad teži sumirati održivost i njezine sastavnice kao nove postavke, u kojima je glavna misao vodilja novoga globalnog pristupa planiranju, objavljena od Centra za ljudska naselja Ujedinjenih Naroda (UNCHS) kako slijedi: "Novo planiranje je manje kodirano i tehničko, više inovativno i poduzetničko. Ono je više sudioničko i usmjerenije projektima nego cjelovitim prostornim sustavima. Plansku ekspertizu sve češće ne zahtijeva samo država već i dioničarski i javni dijelovi građanskog društva. Prijeporno nije planiranje samo po sebi, nego njegov cilj: da li ga voditi uglavnom učinkovitošću, jačajući postojeću razdiobu bogatstva i moći, ili bi trebalo odigrati distribucijsku ulogu da može pomoći pri stvaranju minimalnih standarda urbanog življenja" (Hague, 2001.). ; Effort to incorporate sustainability aspects into the spatial planning agenda requires new relationships between conventional and new players in today's post-socialist world. Some stakeholders engaged in development, management and governance are sometimes tailoring the destiny of regional and urban systems in Croatia without sustainability concerns. Their activities show the lack of awareness and negative attitude towards sustainable planning practices where the major goal is to improve the quality of life of current and future generations. Without sound ideas about carrying capacities and sustainability, some of these actors have ignored the planning knowledge and expertise (CAVRIĆ, NEDOVIĆ – BUDIĆ, 2007). Planners advise upon them with their professional skill and knowledge but the driving force is still political power. These proponents have managed to safeguard their own spatial and land interests on the expense of the public and ordinary citizens, by maintaining the system of "copy-paste" planning blue prints, suitable for supporting emerging urban sprawl and uncontrolled construction activities. Unfortunately, due to the long-term social ignorance and strong alliance of developer's lobbies, architects and constructors, various international planning ideas with "sustainability in mind" have not affected Croatian planning theory and practice, yet. Some of them are petrified, misinterpreted or simply abolished owing to obstinate legislation, the non-existence of formal planning education, and the privileged position of only one brand of chartered planners (e.g. architects) . Alternative development solutions, such as public participation, behavioral, organizational and technological advances, diversity of implementing instruments in the planner's "toolkit", and the planner's numerous tasks in guiding sustainable change, are still to be recognized in this EU accession country. Notwithstanding, this paper aims to summaries sustainability and its derivates as the new paradigms, in which the guiding leitmotif of the new global agenda for planning is spelled out by the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (2001b) as follows: "The new planning is less coded and technical, more innovative and entrepreneurial. It is more participatory and concerned with projects rather than whole spatial systems. Planning expertise is increasingly sought not only by the state, but also by the corporate sector and civil society. What is controversial is not planning per se, but its goal: whether it should be directed chiefly at efficiency, reinforcing the current distribution of wealth and power, or whether it should play a distributive role to help create minimum standards of urban liveability" (Hague, 2001).
Dobro mentalno zdravlje sastavni je dio općeg zdravlja populacije i dobrobiti te pridonosi kvaliteti funkcioniranja pojedinaca, obitelji i zajednica. U novijim se dokumentima Europske unije na mentalno zdravlje gleda kao na preduvjet socijalnog i ekonomskog razvoja nekog društva. Sukladno tome, uloga je donositelja odluka i odgovornost raznih pomažućih profesija da djeluju na socijalne determinante koje utječu na mentalno zdravlje građana. Cilj je ovoga rada predstaviti suvremeno interdisciplinarno područje promocije mentalnog zdravlja te ponuditi prikaz literature o promociji mentalnog zdravlja, polazeći od povijesnog razvoja područja, temeljnih koncepata pa do preporuka za kreiranje programa. Rad rasvjetljava razlike i preklapanja područja promocije mentalnog zdravlja i prevencije mentalnih poremećaja. Promocija je usmjerena na pozitivno mentalno zdravlje, a njezin je glavni cilj jačanje snaga i kompetencija, dok je prevencija usredotočena na smanjivanje rizičnih čimbenika te specifične poremećaje, a cilj joj je smanjiti učestalost, rasprostranjenost i ozbiljnost određenih problema. S obzirom na recentne međunarodne preporuke koje govore da bi se mentalnim zdravljem trebale baviti svi sektori te razne socijalne politike, a ne samo zdravstveni sustav, rad donosi temeljne modele kako bi se pridonijelo istoznačnom razumijevanju pojmova kod različitih pomažućih profesija. Promocija mentalnog zdravlja, koja je multisektorska, obuhvaća aktivnosti i programe za podršku roditeljstvu, za djecu i mlade u obrazovnom sustavu, za područje socijalne i zdravstvene skrbi, kvalitetu života u zajednici i na radnom mjestu. Kako je riječ o interdisciplinarnom području, radom se želi utjecati na znanstveno-stručnu raspravu srodnih disciplina. ; AbstractGood mental health is an integral part of population's general health and well-being that contributes to the quality of functioning of individuals, families and communities. In newer European Union documents, mental health is perceived as a prerequisite for the social and economic growth of each society. According to that, the role of the decision makers and the responsibility of various helping professions is to act towards social determinants which influence mental health.The aim of this paper is to present modern interdisciplinary area of mental health promotion through the review of the literature, starting from the historical development of the area, basic concepts and guidelines for program development. The paper highlights the differences between mental health promotion and prevention of mental disorders. Promotion is connected with positive mental health, and its main goal is strengthening protective factors and competencies. Prevention, on the other hand, aims to reduce risk factors and specific disorders to diminish incidence, prevalence, and seriousness of problems.Regarding recent international developments, which state that mental health should concern various sectors and social policies, not just health sector, this paper brings basic models to contribute to the mutual understanding of the terminology within different professions. Multi-sectoral mental health promotion involves activities and programs for supporting parenthood, and children and youth in the education system, while the area of social welfare and healthcare concerns with the quality of life in a community and within a work place settings. Regarding the interdisciplinary nature of the area, this paper wants to contribute to the scientific and professional discussion of various disciplines which are included. ; Buena salud mental forma parte de la salud general de una populación y del bienestar. Además, contribuye a la calidad del funcionamiento de individuos, familias y comunidades. En los documentos recientes de la Unión Europea la salud mental se considera un requisito previo del desarrollo social y económico de una sociedad. En consecuencia, el papel del tomador de decisiones y la responsabilidad de diferentes profesiones ayudantes es influir en las determinantes sociales que influyen en la salud mental de los ciudadanos. El objetivo de este artículo de revisión es presentar el área interdisciplinaria contemporánea de la promoción de la salud mental y presentar la bibliografía que abarca dicho tema, partiendo del desarrollo histórico y conceptos básicos, hasta llegar a las recomendaciones para crear un programa. El trabajo aclara las diferencias y puntos comunes de las áreas de la promoción de la salud mental y la prevención de trastornos mentales. La promoción está enfocada en la salud mental positiva, y su objetivo principal es fortalecer el poder y las competencias, mientras que la prevención se enfoca en disminuir los factores de riesgo y trastornos específicos, y su objetivo es disminuir la frecuencia, difusión y severidad de ciertos problemas. Como las recomendaciones internacionales recientes afirman que a la salud mental deberían dedicarse todos los sectores y diferentes políticas sociales, y no sólo el sistema sanitario, el trabajo expone los modeles básicos para contribuir a la comprensión idéntica de los términos usados por diferentes profesiones ayudantes. La promoción de la salud mental es multisectorial y abarca actividades y programas para apoyar a los padres, niños y jóvenes en el sistema educativo, para la asistencia social y sanitaria, calidad de la vida, tanto en la comunidad, como en el puesto de trabajo. Como se trata de un área interdisciplinaria, con este trabajo se quiere influir en el debate científico de disciplinas relacionadas.
RIJEČ UREDNIŠTVANaslov uvodnika potaknut je građanskom inicijativom koja se u posljednje vrijeme širi Hrvatskom. Iako na facebook grupi, koja poziva na "tri zajednička dana uživanja u sadnji diljem Države" pod motom "Zasadi drvo, ne budi panj", prevladava entuzijazam i želja za jačanjem svijesti hrvatskih građana o očuvanju i zaštiti prirode, postoje i radikalniji osvrti na šumarsku struku i na trgovačko društvo Hrvatske šume, poput pitanja zašto se ne organiziraju javni radovi pošumljavanja? Tvrdi se da je to zato jer im je sječa prioritetnija od sadnje. Podmeće se teza: "Ne smiju oni posjeći više nego što mi možemo zasaditi!" Uzori akciji su velike sadnje u nekim zemljama poput Indije i Etiopije. Također poticaj akciji su i katastrofalni požari u plućima svijeta, Amazonskoj prašumi. Pohvalna je dobra volja i želja za ozelenjivanjem, ali ne mogu se uspoređivati zemlje u kojima vladaju drukčiji klimatski i stanišni uvjeti pa nakon sječe ili uništavanja šume požarima dolazi do deforestacije, nestaje tlo i šuma se ne obnavlja. U Republici Hrvatskoj je upravo obrnuto, na djelu je reforestacija, tj. šuma se širi na napuštene poljoprivredne i druge površine, tako da je danas gotovo pola države pod šumom, ali u različitim starosnim kategorijama. Ova akcija je samo odraz zabrinutosti običnog čovjeka, ali i određene neargumentirane histerije koja je pokrenuta protiv šumara u Hrvatskoj.S obzirom na sve učestalije i nekorektne napade na šumarsku struku, što je prevršilo svaku mjeru, potiče nas da se mi kao struka oglasimo. Možemo smireno, stručno i argumentirano, a možemo i bezobrazno kao što se nas napada. Ponajprije, za laike koji to žele čuti, kažemo da je sječa uzgojni zahvat. Šuma ili stablo ima nazovimo ga početak, rast kroz razne uzgojne faze do optimuma, a potom slijedi faza "odumiranja". Zadaća šumarske struke je prebroditi tu zadnju fazu upravo sječom starih stabala, polučiti korist društvu njihovom preradom, ali osiguravši prethodno u jednodobnim sastojinama u godini dobrog uroda sjemena prirodno pomlađivanje. Svakako prije bilo kakvog negativnog stava glede sječe, treba prići vrlo blizu površini gdje je do "jučer" bila npr. stara hrastova šuma te provjeriti da li i što sada raste na toj površini. U prebornoj pak šumi, npr. bukve i jele, prebiru se sječom stara dozrela stabla i ona koja smetaju podmlatku koji treba svijetla da bi ih zamijenio. Samo tamo gdje u potpunosti nije uspjelo prirodno naplođivanje, pa tako i na opožarenim površinama, ide se na pošumljavanje sjemenom ili tzv. "školovanim" sadnicama. Održati šumu vječnom, načelo je potrajnog gospodarenja, čime se ponosi hrvatska znanost i praksa, a što joj i šumarski svijet priznaje. Što rade Hrvatske šume d.o.o. pitaju se pojedini prosvjednici? Zadaća Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o. kao trgovačkog društva u državnom vlasništvu, kojima je Država povjerila gospodarenje, je obavljati poslove sukladno Osnovama gospodarenja, što znači ne stihijski nego po Zakonu o šumama, sukladno šumarskoj politici i strategiji. Osnove gospodarenja za svaku gospodarsku jedinicu propisuju desetgodišnje aktivnosti, provjerava ih stručno povjerenstvo, a Rješenjem ih odobrava resorni ministar. U njih je ugrađeno i niz propisa i popisa koje propisuje Ministarstvo zaštite okoliša. Znači ništa se ne radi amaterski – sve počiva na znanstvenim i stručnim saznanjima u šumarskoj praksi stečenoj kroz preko 250 godina organiziranog šumarstva. Klimatske promjene, ledolomi, vjetrolomi i štetnici, čemu su posebice u zadnje vrijeme izložene šume, samo još otežavaju rad u šumarstvu i zahtijevaju još veću stručnost i znanje, a nikako amaterizam. Nije bez razloga još u pretprošlom stoljeću zaključeno da za gospodarenje šumom nije dovoljna viša, nego je potrebna visoka stručna sprema, što je kod nas ostvareno 1898. godine početkom rada Šumarske akademije (današnjeg Šumarskog fakulteta), kao četvrte visokoškolske ustanove Sveučilišta u Zagrebu.No, s prekomjernom sječom treba se boriti na dijelu privatnih šumskih parcela, ali s tom stihijom se odnosne udruge ne hvataju u koštac. U istoj rečenici pitamo se bezobrazno: tko su to "oni" koji ne smiju posjeći? Da li su to možda oni koji su pet godina studirali šumarstvo, skupljajući znanja iz botanike, više matematike, kemije, meteorologije, anatomije i fiziologije bilja, pedologije, dendrologije, dendrometrije, uzgajanja šuma, ekologije, uređivanja šuma, zaštite šuma i dr., prisegavši na promociji dipl. ing. šumarstva da će raditi po stručnim šumarskim načelima. Lekcije im pak dijele oni koji su u slobodno vrijeme malo "proguglali" i na vikend izletima uz dobru zabavu, "učvrstili" svoje znanje o šumarstvu. Njihovi stručni sufleri, a kažu da ih imaju, mogli bi konačno javno polemizirati. Očekivali bi od odnosnih udruga da nas podupru u protivljenju smanjenja naknada za općekorisne funkcije šuma (OKFŠ), iz kojih se financiraju izgradnja protupožarnih prometnica, gašenja požara, pošumljavanje opožarenih površina i razminiranje površina, no one očito pristaju da se to "gura" u parafiskalne namete. Hrvatska Vlada od Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o. očekuje uplatu u državni proračun, dok čitamo, Njemačka Vlada ulaže 500 mil. EURA za sanaciju šuma, jer ih se prošle godine osušilo preko 110.000 ha.Nemamo ništa protiv toga da se ozelenjuju neke gradske površine, ali i to mora biti planski, kako izborom površina, tako i vrstom drveća, poznavajući i poštujući njihove ekološke i biološke zahtjeve. Saditi bilo što i bilo gdje, što iščitavamo iz upućenog poziva, je neodgovorno i prema prostoru, ali i prema biljci.Uredništvo ; EDITORIALThe headline of the editorial was prompted by a civil initiative sweeping through Croatia in recent times. The Facebook group, which calls for "three enjoyable days of planting trees across the State" under the motto "Plant a tree, don't be a stump", is imbued with enthusiasm and a wish to raise the awareness of Croatian citizens of the need to preserve and protect the nature; however, there are also more radical views on the forestry profession and the company Croatian Forests Ltd. Among others, they ask why there are no public afforestation activities and conclude that the reason lies in the fact that cutting trees has priority over planting them. There is an undergoing statement: "They cannot fell more than we can plant!" The campaign was prompted by large-scale planting campaigns in some countries such as India and Ethiopia. Another incentive to the campaign was provided by the devastating fires taking place in the lungs of the world, the Amazonian rain forest. The will and wish to plant trees deserves full credit, but we cannot be compared with the countries with different climatic and habitat conditions, in which felling or forest fires result in deforestation, loss of forest soil and inability of forests to regenerate. The situation in the Republic of Croatia is diametrically opposite: reforestation is an ongoing process; in other words, the forest spreads into abandoned agricultural and other areas, so that currently almost half of the country is covered with forests of different age categories. This campaign reflects the concern of the ordinary person, but also contains certain ill founded hysterical reactions targeted at foresters in Croatia.In view of the ever more frequent and unfounded attacks on the forestry profession, which has gone out of hand, it is time for the profession to voice its opinion. We can do it in two ways: we can either put forward professional and well founded arguments, or retaliate in the same impertinent manner in which we are being attacked. To start with, for those who are ready to listen, let us stress that felling is a silvicultural operation. A forest or a tree has its beginning, followed by growth through different silvicultural stages until it reaches its optimum and finally the stage of "dying". The task of the forestry profession is to deal with this last stage by cutting down old trees, making profit for the society by processing these cut trees, and ensuring natural regeneration in even-aged stands in the years of good seed mast. Before any negative attitude on a felling operation is taken, it would be advisable to inspect closely the area which was until "yesterday" covered by an old oak forest and check what is being planted in this area, if anything. In a selection forest of, e.g. beech and fir, felling is applied to remove old mature trees and those trees which prevent young trees from reaching the necessary light for growth. Reforestation with seeds or with so-called "trained" seedlings is applied only in those areas in which natural seedling has not been completely successful or in areas badly affected by fires. Maintaining the forest in a perpetually stable condition is the principle of sustainable management. This principle is something that Croatian science and practice is rightly proud of and for which it receives acknowledgement from the global forestry world.What does the company Croatian Forests Ltd do, some protesters ask? The task of the company, as a state-owned company which has been entrusted by the State with caring for the forests, is to manage forests and carry out all the jobs set down in management plans, in line with the Forest Act, the forestry policy and strategy. There is no question here of chaotic and disorganized management. Management plans for every management unit prescribe the execution of ten-year activities. These plans are verified by expert committees and approved by the corresponding minister. They also contain regulations and rules set down by the Ministry of Environmental Protection. As seen from the above, nothing is done on an amateur basis - everything is firmly grounded on scientific and expert knowledge of the forestry practice, which has been acquired through 250 and more years of organized forestry. Climate change, damage caused by ice and wind, as well as pests, to which forests have been particularly exposed in recent times, make work in forestry even more difficult and require even more expertise and knowledge - certainly not amateurism. This is the reason that as far back as the 18th century it was realized that management of forests required not just a college degree but academic education. In Croatia, this was put to practice in1898, when the Forestry Academy (the present day Faculty of Forestry) was opened as the fourth institution of higher education within the University of Zagreb.A battle against excessive felling should be fought in parts of privately owned forest areas, yet the above groups fail to grapple with this problem. Allow us to be impertinent enough to ask: who are "they" who are not allowed to perform felling operations? Perhaps those who have studied forestry for five years, acquired knowledge of botany, higher mathematics, chemistry, meteorology, plant anatomy and physiology, pedology, dendrology, dendrometrics, silviculture, ecology, forest planning, forest protection and other fields, and who have, when receiving their degrees of graduate engineers of forestry, pledged to adhere to expert forestry principles in their work? Such professionals are then lectured by those who have "googled" something about forestry and who have gained their knowledge of forestry at weekend outings in forests. We would welcome with open arms their expert advisors, which they claim there are many, to finally come out and engage in public debates. We would expect from these groups to support us in opposing the move to cut down on non-market forest function fees, which are used to finance the construction of fire breaks, fire suppression, reforestation of burnt areas and demining areas. Obviously, they prefer these fees to be "pushed" into parafiscal levies. While the Croatian government expects from the company Croatian Forests Ltd to pay into the state budget, the German government invests 500 million euro into the recovery of forests, since over 110,000 ha of forests dried only last year.We have nothing against making city areas green, but this should be carried out in a planned manner, both as regards the choice of areas and the choice of tree species, taking into account their ecological and biological requirements. Planting anything and anywhere, as seen from the initiative, is irresponsible both for the area and for the plant.Editorial Board
Najopsežnije i sigurno najcitiranije djelo o povijesti »grada baroka«, epitet je kojim se nesumnjivo može opisati Povijest grada Varaždina renomiranog hrvatskog povjesničara Rudolfa Horvata (Koprivnica, 14. ožujka 1873. – Zagreb, 25. svibnja 1947.). Njegovim se tiskom namjeravalo dostojno obilježiti proslavu jubileja sedamstogodišnjice grada Varaždina (1909.) – ali nije; rukopis je tiskan 1993. godine. Godine 2017. navršilo se sedam desetljeća od piščeve smrti, a 2018. godine, 125 godina od njegova rođenja i četvrt stoljeća od tiskanja povjesnice. Na temelju podacima obilne arhivske građe u varaždinskom i zagrebačkom arhivu, upotpunjuje se slika o njezinom nastanku. Iz sačuvanih točaka sjednica gradske vlasti, dopisa gradonačelnika i Prosvjetnog odbora, korespondencije između gradske vlasti i Horvata iščitava se napor autora u provođenju opsežnog istraživanja povijesti grada Varaždina i obradi građe za sastavljanje buduće povjesnice, njegovoj viziji o njezinom sadržaju i ustrajnosti u isplati honorara koji je on neprestano smatrao primjerenim za svoj gotovo tridesetogodišnji rad. Također se iščitava napor njezinog naručitelja da primjerenu visinu honorara provjeri sa znanstvenim i nakladničkim institucijama, te je ugovori u skladu s tadašnjim lošim gospodarskim uvjetima. Naručitelj se o troškovima tiskanja buduće povjesnice raspitavao kod različitih tiskara unaprijed im poslavši predloške tiskanih historiografskih radova, pa tako i Horvatovog. U njezin nastanak uključivao je i mjerodavne osobe – zastupnike i ne-zastupnike grada Varaždina koji će na temelju svog stručnog iskustva i rada, putem triju višečlanih odbora donositi stručne zaključke o predanom rukopisu. Horvat je na njemu radio nepunih trideset godina. Zaključuje da je rukopis predao u dijelovima: u ožujku 1934., 1935., 1936., kolovozu 1938. i proljeće 1939. godine, izravno osobnim dolaskom u Varaždin ili posredstvom gradonačelnika Novakovića ili dragog mu prijatelja. Zaključuje se da je zamislio višedijelni sadržaj rukopisa: njegov I. dio, opća ili politička povijest tiskana je 1993. godine, a tematski II. dio sa zasebnim poglavljima ostao je neobjavljen; pod naslovom Dr. Rudolf Horvat: Kulturna povijest grada Varaždina, skupa s objavljenim prvim djelom, čuva se u Gradskom muzeju Varaždin. Želeći omogućiti Horvatu vrijeme za istraživanje i pisanje povjesnice, gradska vlast je uz pomoć tadašnjeg hrvatskog bana Pavla Raucha, piscu ishodila premještaj u tadašnji Zemaljski kraljevski arhiv u Zagrebu, kako bi tamo mogao istraživati sačuvanu arhivsku građu, a novčanom isplatom pripomogla njegova arhivska istraživanja u austrijskim i mađarskom arhivu i tisak studije Varaždin koncem 16. vijeka. U zagrebačkom arhivu Horvat je imao mogućnosti i vremena istraživati građu ne samo o povijesti Varaždina, nego i o povijesti drugih hrvatskih gradova, na temelju koje je također mogao raditi i na povjesnicama tih gradova. U tom se pogledu ističe i skroman doprinos varaždinskih gradskih zastupnika davne 1909. godine za hrvatsku historiografiju. U vezi s tim, s obzirom na to da je Horvat na rukopisu radio nepunih trideset godina i da ga je u dijelovima predao do 1939. godine, neminovno je uspoređivati rukopis i promatrati ga u kontekstu historiografskih radova nastalih tijekom 1930-ih godina. ; The most comprehensive and most cited work on the history of "the Baroque Town" is undoubtedly the best description of The History of the Town of Varaždin by the renowned Croatian historian Rudolf Horvat (Koprivnica, 14 March 1873 – Zagreb, 25 May 1947). The manuscript was meant to be printed on the 700th anniversary of the founding of the town of Varaždin (in 1909), but the plan failed; it was only printed in 1993. In 2017 it was seven decades since the author's death, and in 2018 we marked 125 years since his birth and a quarter of a century since the publishing of his historiographic work. With the help of rich and comprehensive archive material in State Archive in Varaždin and Croatian State Archives in Zagreb, we get the full picture about the making of his work. Reading the minutes from town assembly sessions, the letters by vice-mayor and Education board, and the correspondence between town officials and Horvat, we see how ardent the author was in conducting a comprehensive research of the history of Varaždin, in collecting the materials for the future historiographic work, in his vision regarding the work's content, and in his persistence in negotiating the fee he deemed reasonable for his 30-years effort. We can also see the commissioner's efforts to discuss the reasonable fee with scientific and publishing institutions, in order to agree a fee in accordance with the poor economic situation of that day and age; they negotiated the cost of printing of his future historiographic work with different printing offices having sent them similar examples of historiographic works, including Horvat's own. The commissioner was keen to involve other competent people in this process – representatives and non-representatives of the town assembly of Varaždin – who were supposed to use their professional and work experience and draw an expert conclusion about the manuscript by means of three multimembered committees. Horvat had worked on it for almost thirty years. He handed over his manuscript in parts in March 1934, 1935, 1936, August 1938 and in the Spring of 1939; he used to com to Varaždin in person or send the text via the mayor Novaković or one of his close friends. It is thought he planned to publish the manuscript in multiple volumes: the first part, general and political history, was published in 1993, whereas the topic-based, second part with separate chapters has never been published. This text titled Doctor Rudolf Horvat: The Cultural History of the Town of Varaždin, together with the published first part, is kept in the Varaždin City Museum. Wanting to give Horvat the time for research and writing of his historiographic work, the town authorities, with the help of the former governor of Croatia Ban Pavao Rauch, sent the author to the then Royal State Archive in Zagreb, where he studied archive materials, and helped him financially to continue his research in Austrian and Hungarian archives, as well as to publish the study Varaždin in the Late 16th Century. In the Royal State Archive in Zagreb (today's Croatian State Archives), Horvat had the time and opportunity to research not only the history of Varaždin, but also the history of other Croatian towns, which allowed him to write historiographic works about these towns as well. That way the representatives of the Varaždin town assembly from 1909 made a small contribution to the development of historiography in Croatia. Regarding that and keeping in mind that Horvat worked on the manuscript for almost thirty years up until 1939, it is necessary to compare this manuscript in the context of historiographic works from the 1930s.
Zagrebački Botanički vrt Prirodoslovno-matematičkog fakulteta sačuvan je u urbanističko-arhitektonskoj koncepciji u gotovo izvornom obliku, kako je izgrađen 1892. godine. Članak donosi sažeti prikaz specifične povijesne arhitekture koja je dio Vrta. Građevine su opisane na temelju istraživanja arhivske građe, analize sačuvanih prvotnih i novijih projekata te izvedenih građevina od nastanka Vrta. Obuhvaćene su sve za Botanički vrt značajne građevine: izložbeni staklenici, vrtlarska kuća, izložbeni paviljon, fiziološki laboratorij, javni zahod te bazeni s "vodometom", uresna ograda, mostić, sjenice i vodosprema. Vrijedna povijesna arhitektura postupno se obnavlja pod konzervatorskim nadzorom nadležne službe za zaštitu kulturnih dobara od 1998. godine do danas. ; Almost the entire original layout of the urban and architectural concept of the Zagreb Botanical Garden of the Faculty of Science has been preserved as it was conceived in 1889 by its founder, Prof. Antun Heinz, a professor of botany at the University of Zagreb. The Garden was designed and built in accordance with contemporary European standards for the design of botanical gardens. From its foundation until today, the Garden has retained its multiple purposes. As an integral part of the Faculty of Science of the University of Zagreb for more than a century, the Garden has played an extremely important role in university teaching and scientific research in the field of botany, as well as education of the general public. The Garden also has cultural, historical and touristic value for the city of Zagreb and the Republic of Croatia. Since it was founded, it has remained open to the public free of charge, providing visitors with numerous educational and popular activities. It is part of the Green Horseshoe in Donji grad, a cultural good inscribed in the Register of Cultural Goods of the Republic of Croatia as an original architectural achievement, and as a completed, urbanistic, architectural space in the form of a park in the centre of Zagreb, and also as a horticultural monument in the botanical-garden category. In the first decades after its foundation, a series of functional buildings and structures of park architecture, such as a gazebo, a lookout and small bridges on the lake, shelters and similar elements in various historic styles, were built in the Botanical Garden. As a permanent residence for gardeners, a garden house was built in 1890 in the west part of the Garden, in the direction of Savska cesta. Later, greenhouses were erected and the pavilion was transported from the Second Jubilee Exhibition of Economy and Forestry held in Zagreb in 1891. A rare example of a communal building, a public toilet for parks, based on the 1905 project by Milan Lenuci, has been preserved. The last two buildings were designed by professors from the Faculty of Architecture. In 1933, in the south part of the Garden, Prof. Juraj Denzler built the well of the City Water Supply Network, used by the Garden to this day; and, in 1942, along with the already-built physiological laboratory, Prof. Zvonimir Vrkljan started building the Division of Botany. Buildings, park architecture, parterre and installation network were reconstructed and renovated over the past twenty years in accordance with the defined priorities and conservation guidelines, projects and supervision of the City Institute for the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Heritage. Several selected examples present recent projects and renovations. Industrial development in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, and new materials – iron and glass – enabled the construction of large halls illuminated from above. Constructors applied this type of knowledge to build greenhouses, essential for the successful cultivation of tropical, subtropical and Mediterranean plants in botanical gardens. Often, this type of old greenhouse is a valuable example of specific architectural heritage. A unique historical structure of this type is preserved in the Botanical Garden of the Faculty of Science in Croatia. Professor Dr. Antun Heinz took a sabbatical in 1889 and visited European botanical gardens in order to gather experience and the latest ideas he needed for the design and construction of the Botanical Garden of the University of Zagreb. He chose a situational solution, a combination of geometric and landscape style. He decided to design the largest part of the Garden in the landscape – or socalled English – style, with randomly planted groups of trees and shrubs, and curving paths. Only the parterre (ornamental flower beds), located in the west part of the Garden, was built in the French style, with a strict geometric and symmetrical ground plan. Around the long central axis, a conception typical of Baroque park heritage of the 17th and 18th centuries, he placed the main building of the Garden and the greenhouses with a geometric floral parterre with two symmetrical paths on each side, and most of that open surface is a free composition of the parterre with high and low greenery. The original shape of the exhibition greenhouses built at the end of the 19th century was preserved, but they were in very bad condition. Therefore, renovation was planned and is underway in order to restore the original condition of the complex of exhibition greenhouses. Fence around the Botanical Garden was gradually added as the city in the immediate vicinity of the Garden developed. In 1900, after the construction of the new street (today's Mihanović Street), the north fence of the Garden was built with the main entrance portal based on a design by the Royal Building Department of the Land Government, and then the east and west fence were built. Since the aesthetically shaped southern fence did not exist, it was designed as a public walkway with a pergola, and the construction began in 2018. The oldest fair building in Croatia was preserved in the Botanical Garden of the Department of Biology, Faculty of Science in Zagreb, and restored in 2007. The wooden pavilion was presented at the international exhibition in Vienna in 1890, and in Zagreb in 1891. In 1892, it was moved to the Garden as a building where plants susceptible to frost were kept during winter. Over time, the domes and façade were removed. However, the roof structure and the volume of the building were preserved, and all characteristic elements of the lining were found before the 2005 reconstruction. Based on sufficient data and archival photographs, it was possible to restore the exhibition pavilion to its original form. Reconstruction and renovation of the Botanical Garden complex and functional historic buildings will continue and contribute to the preservation of the complete historical architectural heritage in the park section of the Green Horseshoe of Zagreb Donji Grad.
RIJEČ UREDNIŠTVAZa tematiku i aktualnost ove rubrike Šumarskoga lista očito nije potrebno brinuti. Naime, svako malo mediji nam prenose vijesti o novim nesporazumima pa i sukobima šumarske struke i amaterskih udruga, koje si umišljaju da sve znaju o šumarstvu. Interesantno, primjerice u kirurgiju se ne petljaju! Tako ovih dana u Glasu Istre čitamo: Nastavlja se fajt oko Motovunske šume – Tartufari uzvraćaju udarac: Hrvatske šume ponašaju se kao feudalac! Šire o tome pisat ćemo na temelju egzaktnih podataka u jednoj od rubrika sljedećeg dvobroja Šumarskoga lista. Ovdje ćemo komentirati Zakon i ulogu Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o.Feudalizam je oblik društvenog odnosa koji je prevladavao u srednjem i dijelu novoga vijeka, ukinut 1848. godine, a feudalac je vlasnik zemljišta za kojega drugi rade. Da li su Hrvatske šume d.o.o. vlasnik zemljišta-šume i da li odgovaraju tome kriteriju? Za odgovor na ovo pitanje pozivamo se ponajprije na zakon, u ovome slučaju Zakon o šumama, koji u članku 2. (1) kaže: Šume i šumska zemljišta dobra su od interesa za Republiku Hrvatsku te imaju njezinu osobnu zaštitu, a u istom članku (3) Vlada Republike Hrvatske upravlja šumama i šumskim zemljištem u interesu Republike Hrvatske, prema u daljnjem tekstu navedenim načelima. Članak 3. (1) navodi: Šume i šumska zemljišta specifično su šumsko bogatstvo te s općekorisnim i gospodarskim funkcijama šuma uvjetuju poseban način planiranja, gospodarenja i korištenja na načelu održivog gospodarenja šumama. (2) Održivo gospodarenje šumama znači korištenje šuma i šumskog zemljišta na način, i u mjeri, koja održava njihovu bioraznolikost, produktivnost, kapacitet za regeneraciju, vitalnost i potencijal da trenutačno i ubuduće ispune odgovarajuće ekološke, gospodarske i društvene funkcije na lokalnoj, nacionalnoj i globalnoj razini te koja ne uzrokuje štetu drugim ekosustavima. Po tome načelu potrajnosti, hrvatskim šumama šumarska struka gospodari već više od 250 godina. Uz gospodarske funkcije šuma (proizvodnju drvnih sortimenata, proizvodnju šumskog reprodukcijskog materijala i proizvodnju nedrvnih šumskih proizvoda), treba imati na umu da ona osigurava i njene općekorisne funkcije navedene u članku 4. (1) do (9). Dakle, u gospodarenju s tim najsloženijim ekosustavom nema mjesta amaterizmu i interesnim skupinama! Žalosno je i nelogično, ali istinito, da je politika koja treba strogo zagovarati Zakon, češćesklonija njima nego struci. Imajući u vidu prethodno rečeno o šumi kao specifičnom šumskom bogatstvu, logično je da operativno njima može upravljati i gospodariti specifična pravna osoba koja posjeduje potrebnu infrastrukturu, opremu i posebice visoko stručne kadrove. Kada je riječ o visokostručnim kadrovima opetovano ističemo, kako se još u 19. stoljeću odlučilo da šumama trebaju upravljati i gospodariti fakultetski obrazovani stručnjaci, pa ističemo da je i šumarska fakultetska nastava u Hrvatskoj uspostavljena već 20. listopada 1898. godine. Stoga je logično da upravljanje i gospodarenje šumama Vlada Republike Hrvatske povjerava javnom šumoposjedniku Hrvatske šume d.o.o. čiji je osnivač. Članak 44. (1) propisuje: Javni šumoposjednik i Ustanova (kada se radi o zaštićenim šumama) dužni su osigurati zaštitu šuma i šumskih zemljišta u vlasništvu Republike Hrvatske od protupravnog prisvajanja, korištenja i drugih protupravnih radnji te provoditi šumski red. Iz svega je razvidno da je sve zakonom propisano i da su Hrvatske šume d. o. o. provoditelj Zakona o šumama, a nikako feudalac. No, kada raspravljamo o stanju u našoj Državi, počevši od društvenih odnosa, gospodarstva, pa sve do prevelikog uvoza "svega i svačega", svima su "puna usta" Pravne države, naravno samo kada to njima ide u prilog, a briga ih za opći interes.Uredništvo ; EDITORIALWe should never be concerned about the themes and topicality of this column of Forestry Journal. Every now and then the media reports on the latest misunderstandings and even conflicts between the forestry profession and amateur associations which imagine that they know everything about forestry. Interestingly, they never meddle in surgery, for example. The Voice of Istria recently wrote: The battle of the Motovun Forest continues - Truffle hunting people strike back: The company Croatian Forests Ltd behaves like a feudal lord! This topic will be dealt with more extensively on the basis of exact data in one of the columns of the next double issue of Forestry Journal.Feudalism is a form of social system that prevailed in the Middle and part of the New Age and was abolished in 1848. A feudal lord was a land owner who had other people working for him. Is the company Croatian Forests Ltd the owner of the land - forest and does it match these criteria? To answer these questions we should first consult the law, in this case the Forest Law. Article 2 (1) of the said Law states: Forests and forest land are natural goods of interest to the Republic of Croatia and enjoy its particular protection. In the same article (3) it is stated that the Government of the Republic of Croatia manages forests and forest land in the interest of the Republic of Croatia according to the principles listed further on. Article 3 (1) states: Forests and forest land constitute specific forest wealth and together with non-market and market forest functions dictate a particular manner of planning, management and usage according to the principles of sustainable forest management. (2) Sustainable management of forests means using forests and forest land in the manner and to the extent to which it maintains its biodiversity, productivity, regeneration capacity, vitality and potential to, now and in the future, fulfil the relevant ecological, economic and social functions locally, nationally and globally without inflicting harm to other ecosystems. The Croatian forestry profession has applied the principle of sustainability to Croatian forests for over 250 years. In addition to commercial forest functions (production of wood assortments, production of forest reproductive material and production of non-wood forest products), we should bear in mind that it also ensures its non-market functions listed in article 4 (1) to (9). Therefore, management of this most complex ecosystem excludes amateurism and interest groups! Sadly and illogically, but true, politics which should strictly enforce the Law, is more often inclined to them than to the profession. In view of what was said above about the forest as specific forest wealth, it is logical that it should operatively be managed by a specific legal entity which has the necessary infrastructure, equipment and highly skilled personnel in particular. As for highly skilled personnel, we repeatedly point out that it was decided no later than 19th century that forests should be managed by academically educated experts. Furthermore, the university forestry education in Croatia was established as early as 20th October 1898. It is logical, therefore, that the Government of the Republic of Croatia entrusted the company Croatian Forests Ltd, a public forest owner which it founded, with forest planning and management. Article 44 (1) states: The public forest owner and Institution (in case of protected forests) are obliged by law to ensure the protection of forests and forest land owned by the Republic of Croatia from unlawful appropriation, use and other illegal activities, as well as enforce the forest order. Clearly, everything is regulated by law: hence, the company Croatian Forests Ltd is the law enforcer and by no means a feudal lord. Yet, when we discuss the situation in our State, starting from social relations, economy and excessive import of "anything and everything", we all swear by the legal State, but only when it is in our favour, while public interest is of no concern whatsoever.Editorial Board
RIJEČ UREDNIŠTVAPriprema se novi Zakon o šumama, prema kojemu, nadamo se, neće biti opetovanog smanjivanja postotka naknade za općekorisne funkcije šuma. U vrijeme kada nam priroda daje kataklizmičke odgovore za našu nebrigu o njoj, a najveći svjetski zagađivači ne pristaju na njenu zaštitu, šumarskoj struci se već po običaju "sječe grana" na kojoj, ne samo šumari, nego svi sjedimo. Sve više čuju se i glasovi koji sugeriraju izdvajanje priobalnog područja iz dosadašnjeg načina upravljanja, no bez jasne kompenzacijske financijske podloge. Ne opamećuje nas niti rekordan broj požara i potreba saniranja šteta upravo na tome području.S motrišta Hrvatskoga šumarskog društva koje objedinjuje hrvatsku šumarsku znanost, obrazovanje i praksu, ponajprije sa žaljenjem zaključujemo da resorni ministar do danas nije našao vremena za razgovor s njegovim predstavnicima. Bilo to nekome drago ili ne, moramo reći da je to, uz ostalo, i pokazatelj kakav status ima šumarstvo unutar resornog ministarstva. Željno smo očekivali pozitivne promjene nakon gotovo petogodišnjeg zastranjivanja u vođenju šumarske struke i zanemarivanja pojedinih načela potrajnog gospodarenja šumskim resursima, o čemu smo argumentirano pisali. Svakako, Vlada RH između ostalog, mora odlučiti očekuje li i dalje od šumarstva klasičnu "dobit" za državni proračun, ili gospodarenje šumama po načelu potrajnog gospodarenja, gdje se dobit ne mjeri novčanicama, nego optimalnim pomlađivanjem, maksimalnim prirastom, poželjnom bioraznolikošću, prirodnošću i stabilnošću, što naposljetku osigurava očuvanje, a istovremeno i sve benefite šumskog ekosustava. Nismo primijetili ni promjene glede netržišnog gospodarenja, dapače neki i dalje zahtijevaju osiguranje dobave drvnim sortimentima zajamčenim ugovorima, a ne tržišnim nadmetanjem.Da li se nešto radi na proklamiranom restrukturiranju i decentralizaciji Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o., nije nam poznato. Svakako, vidimo da nema vidljivog utjecaja na tu temu nikakav poziv na raspravu, kao primjerice tekst bivšeg ministra Tarnaja, objavljen u Šumarskome listu 3-4/2017. Svakako promjene i građenje novog ustroja, trebalo bi krenuti od poprilično zanemarenih revira i revirnika, neposrednih i najodgovornijih čimbenika gospodarenja šumama, a ne od vrha, koji neprestano buja. Sve to zahtijeva širu stručnu i društvenu raspravu na državnoj razini, ponajprije neovisnih znalaca/stručnjaka, a ne predstavnika raznih interesnih skupina i nedovoljno educiranih političara. Te rasprave nema, bez obzira na činjenicu da se radi o gotovo polovici kopnene površine Hrvatske i šumi koja je prema Ustavu resurs od posebnog interesa za Republiku Hrvatsku. Problemi svakodnevno niču od stručnih – saniranja šteta od ledoloma u Gorskome kotaru, sušenja jasena, šteta od hrastove stjenice, potkornjaka, pošumljavanja opožarenih površina, privatnih šuma, šteta uzrokovanih klimatskim promjenama, do zapošljavanja mladih, kadroviranja pa i političkog nepotizma. Sve probleme u stanju smo uspješno riješiti, jer imamo stručnog i infrastrukturnog potencijala kao malo koja struka, ali uz eliminiranje kadrova koji su struku doveli u današnju situaciju, a koji su se očito unaprijed ugovorima dobro zaštitili. No, nažalost šumarstvo je struka gdje se pogreške u gospodarenju vide tek nakon više godina, kada je "kasno plakati", pa se mnogima čini da je trenutno sa šumarstvom sve u redu. Uredništvo ; EDITORIALPreparations are under way to formulate the new Forest Law, which will, hopefully, eliminate the continual decrease in the fee for non-market forest functions. At the time at which Nature responds with cataclysmic consequences to our indifference towards it and major global polluters refuse to protect it, the branch on which not only foresters but all of us are sitting is again being cut off. There are increased requests to exclude the coastal region from the current management policy, but at the same time no clear compensational financial bases are provided. Not even the record number of fires and the need to recover the damage in these very areas have brought us to our senses.From the aspect of the Croatian Forestry Association, which unifies the Croatian forestry science, education and practice, we can only ascertain with regret that the relevant minister has not yet found time to discuss these hot issues with its representatives. Whether we like it nor not, it should be said that this is, among other things, one more indicator of the status of forestry within the relevant ministry. We had eagerly awaited positive changes after an almost five-year period of a misguided attitude to the forestry profession and the negligence towards the principles of sustainable management of forest resources, which we have already discussed in our Journal. Definitely, the Croatian government should decide, among other things, whether it expects classical "profit" for the state budget from forestry or whether it supports forest management according to the principles of sustainable management. In the latter, profit is not measured by banknotes but by optimal regeneration, maximal increment, desirable biodiversity, naturalness and stability, all of which ensures the preservation of the forest ecosystem and of its multiple benefits. We have not seen any changes in the attitude towards non-market economy, either; on the contrary, some continue to demand the acquisition of wood assortments through guaranteed contracts rather than through market competition.We do not know if anything is being done regarding the proclaimed restructuring and decentralisation of the company Croatian Forests Ltd. What we do see is that no invitation to a debate on the subject has had any effect, such as the text of the former minister Tarnaj, published in Forestry Journal 1-4/2017. In order to develop a new system it is necessary to start from the relatively neglected forest districts and district rangers, the most direct and responsible factors in forest management, rather than at the top management, which is constantly expanding in numbers. This requires a broader professional and social debate at the state level with the participation of independent experts/professionals and not representatives of different interest groups and insufficiently educated politicians. However, such a debate is missing, even though this issue concerns almost half of the land area of Croatia and the forest which the Constitution describes as a resource of particular interest for the Republic of Croatia. There are problems on a daily basis, including the recovery of the damage from ice break in Gorski Kotar, ash dieback, damage from the oak lace bug, bark beetles, reforestation of burnt areas, private forests, damage caused by climate change, employment of the young, personnel policy and political nepotism. We are capable of solving all these problems successfully because we have professional and infrastructural potential that very few professions can boast, but we should primarily eliminate the cadres who have reduced the profession to a current unenviable situation and who have protected themselves with contracts well in advance. Unfortunately, forestry is a profession in which mistakes in the management come to light only after several years, when it is too late to "cry over spilt milk". This is the reason that many erroneously believe that forestry is currently in a good shape. Editorial Board
Prilagodba nacionalnog okvira za dijalog dionika poljoprivrednog sektora o pitanjima Zajedničke poljoprivredne politike prema standardu dijaloga koji se provodi na razini Europske unije važna je zbog kreiranja učinkovitih politika, a posebice sprječavanja netransparentnih političkih odluka. U istraživanju se polazi od pretpostavke kako nacionalni okvir za dijalog dionika o pitanjima ZPP-a nije strukturno prilagođen formalnom standardu EU-a te dionici poljoprivrednog sektora RH nisu koordinirani za dijalog o pitanjima ZPP-a prema protokolu komunikacije i standardu EU-a. Cilj ove disertacije bio je ustanoviti razlike između nacionalnog okvira za dijalog dionika o pitanjima ZPP-a i okvira EU-a. Nadalje, cilj je bio identificirati ključne nacionalne dionike i njihovu ulogu u dijalogu te odrediti mogućnosti prilagodbe nacionalnog dijaloga o pitanjima ZPP-a prema standardu EU-a. Istraživanje je provedeno u pet faza: (1) analiza okvira dijaloga, (2) dubinska analiza dionika poljoprivrednog sektora, (3) analiza stajališta 17 stručnjaka, (4) ispitivanje 31 poljoprivrednika putem fokus grupa (5) testiranje rezultata prethodnih faza istraživanja anketnim ispitivanjem 132 ispitanika. Rezultati istraživanja pokazali su kako nacionalni okvir za dijalog dionika o pitanjima ZPP-a nije strukturno prilagođen formalnom standardu EU-a te postoje razlike u dijelu analitičkih, organizacijskih i edukacijskih kapaciteta. Prema ispitanicima, nedostaje razmjena informacija i znanja koja je temelj za koordinaciju javnih politika. Predloženim istraživanjem metodološki su identificirani ključni dionici dijaloga te su znanstveno potvrđeni potreba i mogućnosti prilagodbe nacionalnog okvira dijaloga prema standardiziranom postupku EU-a. Predložena unaprjeđenja moguće je proceduralno primijeniti i na izradu poljoprivrednih politika za druge države koje su u postupcima pregovora za članstvo u EU-u. Istraživanje može poslužiti kao koncept za izradu nacionalnog okvira za transparentan i redovit dijalog u poljoprivrednom sektoru. ; The adjustment of the national stakeholder dialogue on questions of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) according to the EU-level dialogue standard is important for the creation of effective policies, in particular the prevention of non-transparent policy decisions. The research is based on the assumption that the national framework for stakeholder dialogue on CAP is not structurally adjusted to the formal EU standard and that national stakeholders are not sufficiently coordinated for dialogue on CAP questions. The aim of this dissertation was to find the differences between the national framework for stakeholder dialogue on CAP and the EU framework. Furthermore, the aim was to identify key national stakeholders and their role in the dialogue and to identify options for adapting the national dialogue on CAP to the EU standard. The research was conducted in five phases: (1) analysis of the dialogue framework, (2) in-depth analysis of the agricultural stakeholders, (3) analysis of the dialogue from 17 expert standpoints, (4) focus groups with 31 farmers on the dialogue framework and stakeholders, (5) questionnaire for 132 relevant stakeholders in order to test previous phases of the research. The proposed research methodologically identified key stakeholders in the dialogue and scientifically confirmed the need and possibilities to adapt the national dialogue framework to the EU standardized procedure. By analysing the documents, performing individual interviews with experts, examining the four focus groups and conducting a survey, H1 was confirmed, according to which the national framework for stakeholder dialogue on CAP issues is not structurally adjusted to the formal EU standard. The results showed that according to C1, there are differences between the national framework for stakeholder dialogue on CAP issues and the EU framework, especially in terms of analytical, organizational and educational capacities. It was confirmed that although there are a number of formal meetings, e-Consultations do not follow the tempo of the negotiations at EU level as well as standards related to the publicity of data from meetings, the openness of the information system and the time frame for presenting opinions. The general consultations on agricultural policies with public comments are partially covered through the e-Consultation portal. However, abstracts are necessary in order to facilitate the understanding of the documents under discussion, as well as longer time frames. The e-Consultation portal is not a tool that stakeholders can follow yet and additional consultations are needed. Furthermore, the paper confirms H2, in which the stakeholders of the agricultural sector of the Republic of Croatia are not coordinated for dialogue on CAP issues according to the information, communication and dialogue structure protocol. The results of the second phase survey through C2 and the identification of key national stakeholders and their role in the dialogue on CAP issues according to EU standards, the interviewing of experts and farmers through focus groups and the final survey showed that a large number of different associations, sometimes politically coloured, offer weak arguments during debates and institutions perceive them lightly. Also, the selection of stakeholders is not completely transparent. There is no public invitation to participate in the work of the committees and the selection takes place according to decisions of the officials or heads of the Ministry. There is a need for a transparency register, which could determine who is entitled to present views and be invited to meetings according to certain criteria. Associations initiate meetings themselves and they depend on the good will of the leaders. There is a high level of politicization, mistrust and division in large and small, which contributes to weaker cooperation among stakeholders compared to EU policies. According to the respondents, there is a need for an institution or a coordinating body that will profile the interests of farmers towards decision makers. The Croatian Chamber of Agriculture (HPK) is most often mentioned as a key institution that should connect the views of farmers and CAP decision makers. The exchange of information and knowledge, which are the basis for policy coordination, were assessed negatively by experts (third phase), farmers (fourth phase) and stakeholders participating in the negotiations (fifth phase). The component of an analytical approach to planning and joint organized action at the EU level through the linking of the CAP positions of national representatives in the Council, EU representatives and member associations at the EU level is missing. According to C3, the paper identifies the possibilities of adjusting the national dialogue on CAP issues according to the EU standard. The results showed the need for: •establishing a regular dialogue on CAP at the national level modelled on the CDG of the EC, •establishing a transparency register and clear criteria for selecting stakeholders, •producing summaries that will facilitate the understanding of the documents that are discussed and allow for longer time frames for consultations, •increasing the number of representatives of the real agricultural sector in the negotiation process, especially those for whom agriculture is of vital importance, •offering education and accreditation of the stakeholders who participate in CAP negotiations, •strengthening the overall AKIS (synergy of advisory service, science and farmers) system, bringing the CAP closer to stakeholders in the field with the help of an advisory service and local action groups, •public disclosure of data from meetings at the Ministry of Agriculture and feedback on the implementation of the agreed changes, •strengthening the human and financial capacities of associations participating in negotiations at the EU level, •facilitating the translation of documents that are in the process of negotiation and meetings that include civil society stakeholders. The proposed improvements can be procedurally applied to the development of agricultural policies and to other countries that are in negotiations for EU membership. The research can serve as a concept for developing a national framework for transparent and regular dialogue in the agricultural sector.
Obilježavajući 250-tu obljetnicu šumarstva u Hrvatskoj kroz mnogobrojna događanja i aktivnosti, naznačene u programu objavljenom u Zapisniku 4. sjednice Upravnog i Nadzornog odbora HŠD-a u Šumarskome listu 11-12/2014., svoj doprinos ovoj značajnoj obljetnici nastojali smo dati i u ovoj rubrici.U dvobroju 1-2/2015. tekstom "Lutanja u gospodarenju privatnim šumama" ukazali smo na neke probleme u gospodarenju tim šumama, koristeći se i tekstovima iz povijesti šumarstva. Naime, mogli bismo reći da se tim problemima prilazi kao da se radi o zanemarivoj površini, a zapravo je to više od 1/5 površina šuma u Hrvatskoj, za koju također vrijedi Zakon o šumama, što se nažalost zaboravlja. Posebno smo ukazali na nekontrolirane sječe i "haračenje" bez učinkovitog nadzora i mjera suzbijanja takvoga stanja, te bez jasnih zakonskih podloga za kažnjavanje odnosnih sudionika. Još jednom se ukazuje na potrebu udruživanja malih privatnih šumo-posjednika, čime bi se izbjeglo dosadašnje gospodarenje na razini čestice i osigurala mogućnost lakšeg gospodarenja u duhu ZOŠ-a, te mogućnost učinkovitijeg korištenja EU fondova.U dvobroju 3-4/2015. ukazujemo na sve očitiji odmak od načela potrajnog gospodarenja i upravljanja šumom kao obnovljivim resursom i najsloženijim ekosustavom, poistovjećujući ga sve više s "tvorničkom halom". U svrhu proizvodnje najveće kvalitete i kvantitete drvnih sortimenata, potrebno je maksimalno korištenje potencijala šumskog staništa, ali strogo se držeći načela potrajnog gospodarenja, jer bi njegova degradacija vodila u katastrofu. Stoga je neophodno da cijelim procesom upravljanja i terenskog rada rukovode i nadziru ga "teoretično i praktično naobraženo gospodarstveno osoblje". Ako je proklamirani cilj gospodarenja proizvodnja najvrjednije drvne mase, onda i njeno korištenje mora biti racionalno, usmjereno ponajprije na domaći visoko finalizirani proizvod, koji uz financijski rezultat osigurava i visoku zaposlenost.U dvobroju 5-6/2015. uz "pomoć" teksta "Državni ispiti za samostalno vođenje šumskog gospodarstva" iz Šumarskoga lista 1880. i 1881. godine, osvrnuli smo se na važnost stručnog upravljanja i gospodarenja šumama, zalažući se ponajprije za stručno, a ne političko kadroviranje. Ističe se, kako nije dovoljno imati samo odgovarajuću stručnu spremu, nego je potrebno postepeno stjecanje praktičnih znanja i iskustva za rukovođenje šumskog gospodarstva. Tako osposobljeni šumarski kadrovi imaju svoj limit. "Ne ima svatko sposobnosti, da ono bude, što hoće, i uz najbolju volju može se dogoditi, da komu njegove vlastite naravne sposobnosti reknu: dovde i ne dalje. Ne treba tumačenja, da uslied ovakovih pogrešaka trpi ponajprije šuma".U dvobroju 7-8/2015., također uz "pomoć" teksta iz Šumarskoga lista iz 1895. godine, povlačeći paralelu s današnjicom, skrenuli smo pozornost na već tada traženu stručnu i organizacijsku sposobnost šumarskoga kadra na najodgovornijim radnim mjestima u šumarskim institucijama, ponajprije "nadšumara, protustavnika i šumara (upravitelja šumarije)". Zaključak, kako uz postepeno stručno usavršavanje kroz praksu "poštenje je kruna vrlina čovjeka, kojemu su povjereni milijuni narodnog imetka" i danas bi trebalo biti sastavnica etičkog profila šumarskoga stručnjaka.Riječ Uredništva "Jesmo li iz povijesti nešto naučili" iz dvobroja 9-10/2015., kako čujemo "uzbudila je duhove", a mi smo samo "pušuć i na hladno" uz primjer iz povijesti upozorili na ono što bi se moglo dogoditi osnivanjem većinske privatne tvrtke Hrvatsko drvo d.o.o., s udjelom od 25 % Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o. kao suosnivača. Razvidno je, da je tema bila pogođena.Kako "nada umire posljednja", i mi se u idućoj godini nadamo boljitku i adekvatnom vrednovanju šumarske struke na svim razinama. S tom željom svim čitateljima Šumarskoga lista želimo Čestit Božić te sretnu i uspješnu 2016. godinu. Uredništvo ; The 250th anniversary of forestry in Croatia was marked by a number of events and activities set down in the Minutes of the 4th meeting of the CFA Managing and Supervisory Board and published in Forestry Journal 11-12/2014. Our column has also tried to give a contribution to this grand anniversary.In the double issue I-2/2015, the text "Disorientation in private forest management" highlights some problems in the management of these forests. Some tests from the history of forestry were also used to reinforce the problem matter. It could almost be said that the problems are treated as if the area in question was almost negligible, while in fact private forests account for one fifth of the forested area in Croatia and are governed by the Law on Forests, a fact often forgotten. We particularly pointed to uncontrolled felling operations and "pillage" and to lack of efficient supervision, measures of preventing such activities and clear legal bases for the punishment of perpetrators. A renewed plea was made for small private forest owners to unify in order to avoid management at the level of a plot, make management easier in line with the Law on Forests and ensure the possibility of more efficient use of EU funds.The double issue 3-4/2015 is concerned with a growing shift away from the principle of sustainable management and planning of forests as a renewable resource and the most complex ecosystem, as well as with the treatment of this system as a "factory hall". In order to achieve the best quality and quantity of wood assortments, it is necessary to make maximum possible use of forest site potential, at the same time taking care that the principles of sustainable management are strictly adhered to, since its degradation would lead to catastrophe. It is therefore essential that the entire process of management and field work is undertaken and supervised by "highly educated management personnel who posses theoretical and practical knowledge for useful and sustainable management of forests". If the proclaimed goal of management is to produce the most valuable wood mass, then its use should also be rational and directed primarily to domestic highly finalized product, which guarantees not only financial gains but also high employment.In the double issue 5-6/2015, drawing on the text "State exams for independent management of a forest enterprise" from Forestry Journal of 1880 and 1881, we tackled the importance of expert forest planning and management and advocated professionally based rather than politically based selection of personnel. It is not sufficient to possess adequate school credentials: what is necessary it to gradually gain practical knowledge and experience for the management of a forest enterprise. Even forest personnel trained in such a way have their limits. Not everybody is capable of being what he wants to be; try as hard as one might, one's own natural abilities tell you: you can get no further than this. Needless to say, it is the forest that suffers the most in the aftermath of such errors".The double issue 7-8/2015, also using the text from Forestry Journal of 1895, draws a parallel with the present time and highlights expert and organisational abilities of the forest personnel in the most responsible work places in forestry institutions. This refers primarily to county foresters, accountants and foresters (chief forest managers). As in the past, gradual specialized education through practice, combined with "honesty as the crown virtue of a person who has been entrusted with the wealth of national property", should constitute the ethical profile of a forestry expert today as well.The Editorial "Have we learnt something from history" in the double issue 9-10/2015, as we hear, has "stirred up the ghosts"; however, what we only attempted, just to be on the safe side, was to use some historical examples to warn of what might happen if a major private company Hrvatsko Drvo Ltd is founded, with 25% share of Hrvatske Šume Ltd as a co-founder. Clearly, the topic hit the target.As we all know, "hope dies last", so we truly hope that the forestry profession will be improved and adequately evaluated at all levels in the year to come. With this in mind, we would like to wish all the readers of Forestry Journal Merry Christmas and Happy and Successful New Year 2016.Editorial Board
The Manuscript Legacy of Miroslav Krleža, filed in the Manuscripts and Old Books Collection of the National and University Library in Zagreb under a unique shelf number R 7970, includes two letters which Ivan Supek addressed to Krleža in 1954. The first letter was sent on 1 March, accompanied by an "Open Letter to the Assembly of the Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts (JAZU)," which the Council of the Ruđer Bošković Institute of Physics dated 26 February 1954. The second letter Supek addressed to Krleža on 13 May 1954, and as far as we know, it marked the end of their correspondence in 1954. The Legacy of Ivan Supek, in family possession, contains an official letter dated 5 May 1954, by which Miroslav Krleža, acting as vice-president of the Academy at the time, informs Ivan Supek about two decisions passed at the informal session of the Assembly of the Yugoslav Academy on 29 April 1954; in his intellectual autobiography entitled Krivovjernik na ljevici [Heretic on the Left], Supek cites but a single characteristic fragment of that letter. For the first time a full text of these four documents is published here in my transcription which most faithfully follows the original without any interventions in terms of either punctuation or devices used for emphasis. The Open Letter of the Council of the Ruđer Bošković Institute to the Assembly of the Yugoslav Academy includes a host of hitherto unknown data on the Institute's first four years of development, as it closely documents the chronology of the conflict between the Institute's Council and the Presidency of the Yugoslav Academy from 1950 till 1953, at the root of which was the decision making on the development of the Institute. As Council president, Ivan Supek made huge efforts to reconcile "two different tendencies of development," first by drawing up a Temporary Statute of the Institute in 1952, and later, in the spring of 1953, by making a proposition to the University Senate and the Presidency of the Yugoslav Academy by which "the Academy and University should collaborate at the Ruđer Bošković Institute on common goals." Since the draft of the Institute's Statute at the turn of 1953 to 1954 had stood at a standstill for three months, the Institute's Council decided to send an Open Letter to the Assembly of the Yugoslav Academy with a counter-proposition by which "the Academy Statute should be changed in accordance with scientific development in our country." From the perspective of Ivan Supek, that is, "us physicists," the Institute's successful development was to rest on its self-governance and organic connection with the University, but the Academy's administration was not willing to consider such a formally-based legal framework of the Institute's operation within its system. The Open Letter emerged during a heated debate on the organisation of scientific work in Croatia and Yugoslavia. Academic circles could not reconcile with the fact that, according to the Soviet model, the research work would be organised exclusively at the academies. From this standpoint, the topics of the Open Letter reverberate two strong voices: the addresses of the Nobel Prize winner Lavoslav Ružička during his visits to Yugoslavia in November 1949 and October 1952, and a speech that Ivan Supek delivered on 22 January 1953 at a meeting of the Department of the Mathematics and Physics at the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences of the Zagreb University, published in the March issue of Pogledi. While Ružička firmly stated that the "University ought to be a supreme place for higher education and for the fundamental research in the field of pure and applied science, and a unique place for the attainment of academic degrees," in the interest of the Institute Supek publicly advocated for "a harmonic community of University and Academy," although deep at heart he shared Ružička's views. In the letter of 1 March 1954, Ivan Supek appealed to Miroslav Krleža, vicepresident and Communist Party secretary of the Academy, to help him untangle the relations between the Institute and JAZU, and whom he wished to address in person and elaborate the motives behind the Open Letter. Judging by the events that followed, Supek's attempt proved futile. In the absence of Andrija Štampar, Academy president, Krleža, acting as vicepresident, on 5 May 1954 sent an official letter to Supek concerning the decisions of the informal session of the Academy Assembly held on 29 April 1954. From this letter alone we can learn that the Academy Assembly established 23 March 1954 as termination date of Supek's Academy membership on the basis of his letter on the renouncement of membership, but also that on 29 April 1954 an additional penalty was issued against Supek: that "he disqualified himself for any work at the Academy or collaboration with it." Nevertheless, he retained his leading position at the greatest institute within the Yugoslav Academy. In a letter dated 13 May 1954, Supek asked Krleža to send him the minutes of the Commission which the formal Academy Assembly of 16 March 1954 appointed with an aim to establish his responsibility for the Open Letter, so that he could finally learn "the reasons underlying the accusation against me. The consequences which I may suffer are not an issue here, but it is in the Academy's interest to establish the truth, along with the true motives for drawing up an Open Letter." Here he expressed his disappointment by the fact "that some places [from the Open Letter] were understood as offences, and that they actually distracted discussion away from the principal issues," but insisted on the key point from the Open Letter "that for the selfgovernance of the Institute and its organic connection with the University a change of the Academy Statute was necessary." In the spring of 1954, the Yugoslav Academy headed by Andrija Štampar definitely gave up on the concept of an inter-disciplinary research institute, although under the pressure of the 'young lions' from its largest institute, and in accordance with the Soviet model and the original ideas and decisions of Boris Kidrič (died on 11 April 1953), had an opportunity to take this path in its own development, too. Upon the Assembly's 'reply' to the Institute Council, the concept of multi- and inter-disciplinary approach to fundamental research in natural sciences in organic connection with the University as development model for the Ruđer Bošković Institute faced new risks, including those of political nature, but the research community gathered at the Institute, despite the circumstances, managed to live its 'dream' of self-governance and development in harmony with the University, as confirmed by a decision on the new organisation of the Institute passed on 7 September 1954. This step in the Institute's development was also approved by the Republic government, when on 22 November 1954, in agreement with the Yugoslav Academy, it decided that as from 1 January 1955 the Institute was no longer part of the Yugoslav Academy. Five months after the Republic's decision, another step towards the Institute's lasting 'independence' took place, when by a decision of the Federal Government of 30 April 1955 the Institute as a "self-financed institution" came under the authority of the Federal Nuclear Energy Commission headed by Aleksandar Ranković, and in this formally legal frame operated for eleven years – until Ranković's political downfall on 1 July 1966. Miroslav Krleža, to whom in the crucial days of early March 1954 Ivan Supek offered a mediating role, as a highly-positioned Academy member failed to see this historical opportunity to support the development of natural sciences in Croatia in a new direction, perhaps less exposed to political pressure. Ivan Supek and Mladen Paić, who on different legal grounds by 29 April 1954 no longer were correspondent members of JAZU, seven years later–on 16 June 1961–were elected full members, which is a unique case in the history of the Yugoslav Academy.
30. ožujka 2021. godine u 83. godini života napustio nas je akademik, prof. emeritus Fakulteta šumarstva i drvne tehnologije Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, doktor honoris causa Mendelovog poljoprivrednoga i šumarskog Sveučilišta u Brnu (Češka) i Tehničkoga sveučilišta u Zvolenu (Slovačka), član predsjedništva HAZU, jedan od osnivača i prvi predsjednik Akademije šumarskih znanosti u Zagrebu, član kluba dekana Zagrebačkog sveučilišta i dugogodišnji predsjednik Hrvatskog šumarskog društva Slavko Matić. Ovdje nećemo iznositi njegovu znanstvenu ostavštinu o kojoj govori dovoljno njegova bibliografija, dostupna na WEB stranicama HŠD-a, kao i brojna priznanja koja je primio u bogatoj karijeri šumarskog pedagoga i znanstvenika. Iako je uže područje znanstvenoga rada Slavka Matića, unutar znanstvenoga područja biotehničkih znanosti, uzgajanje šuma, on je svojim širokim poljem aktivnosti obilježio cijelo jedno razdoblje šumarske povijesti konca 20. i početka 21. stoljeća. Ljubav prema šumama i šumarstvu usmjerila je njegov životni put te je često isticao da šumarstvo nije samo struka, već i način života. Uporno je zagovarao i promicao jedinstvo šumarske politike, znanosti, obrazovanja i struke. Njegove riječi izgovorene na 107. godišnjoj skupštini HŠD-a u Županji misao su vodilja i njegovo poimanje šumarske struke. "Ponosni smo na svoju dugu tradiciju obilježenu ponajprije brigom za šume i šumarstvo Hrvatske, u želji da svi oni koji aktivno rade u toj struci daju najviše u prilog poboljšanja kvalitete i vječnosti šuma. Isto tako, uvijek smo vjerovali, a i danas, da će nam se uloženi trud i ljubav prema šumi višestruko i trajno vratiti, ne u enormnim i za pristojan život nepotrebnim materijalnim dobrima, nego u zadovoljstvu i saznanju da pripadamo struci gdje je rad, ljubav i poštenje temeljna odrednica i zakon. Bez tih odrednica ne bi bilo moguće uzgojiti i danas održati šume, koje su po svojoj strukturi i vrijednosti najljepše i najvrjednije u Europi. Bez takvog uvjerenja ne bi bilo moguće šume uzgajati i održavati u stanju da daju materijalna i općekorisna dobra, dobra namijenjena svakom čovjeku ove zemlje".Bio je u pravom smislu zaštitnik šuma i šumarske struke. Sjetimo se njegovih reakcija kada je znao "zagrmiti" ukoliko se nešto unutar struke nije odvijalo u skladu s njezinim pravilima bez obzira da li se to odnosilo na izdvajanja šuma i šumskog zemljišta za potrebe građevinske infrastrukture ili za poljoprivrednu proizvodnju, ili kod primjene građevinskih zahvata (Kanal Dunav-Sava, Projekt Zagreb na Savi, Hidrocentrale na Dravi, šuma Kalje) s negativnim posljedicama na šumski ekosustav. U svojim istupima često je bio protiv politike pasivne zaštite šuma provođene od strane Zavoda za zaštitu okoliša i prirode pri današnjem Ministarstvu gospodarstva i održivog razvoja, naglašavajući sječu kao sredstvo njege šuma.Kada bi se poduzimali zahvati u šumama koji nisu bili u skladu s načelima Zagrebačke škole uzgajanja šuma, kojoj je bio jedan od utemeljitelja, šumari su znali da je tu profesor Matić, koji će reagirati i adekvatno odgovoriti.Otvoreno je istupao protiv plaćanja vodne naknade za površine šuma i šumskog zemljišta koje istovremeno jedine omogućuju prirodni vodni režim i čistu vodu. Uvijek je naglašavao važnost općekorisnih funkcija šuma, dok je drvo smatrao kao nusproizvod gospodarenja šumama.Prostore Hrvatskoga šumarskoga društva smatrao je svojim drugim domom gdje je često raspravljao o šumama i šumarstvu. Iskazivao je nezadovoljstvo aktualnom politikom prema šumarstvu, koja je posebice nakon brisanja imena šumarstva iz naziva resornog ministarstva, sustavno zanemarivala interese šumarske struke. Žalostilo ga je ponašanje brojnih naših kolega, koji su pod uticanjem politike pretpostavili konformizam trenutnih rukovodećih funkcija osnovnim šumarskim postulatima koje su učili na Fakultetu,. Odlaskom profesora Matića završilo je jedno razdoblje koje će nama suvremenicima ostati u sjećanju kao nezaboravno iskustvo, plemenitog, šumarskog načina života i zajedništva, a koje je rezultiralo njegovanim i očuvanim šumama. Hoće li novi trendovi koji su sve izraženiji u današnjem šumarstvu, a prema kojima su šumarski stručnjaci sve manje povezani sa šumom, ali i međusobno, uspjeti odgovoriti na nove izazove, posebice u okolnostima sve izraženijih klimatskih promjena, tek je za vidjeti.Uredništvo ; Slavko Matić, Academy member, Professor Emeritus of the Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology of the University of Zagreb, Doctor Honoris Causa of the Mendel University of Agriculture and Forestry in Brno (Czech Republic) and the Technical University in Zvolen (Slovakia), member of the presidency of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, one of the founders and the first president of the Academy of Forestry Sciences in Zagreb, member of the Deans' Club of the University of Zagreb and long-standing president of the Croatian Forestry Association, passed away on March 30th, 2021, at age 83.We are not going to discuss his scientific achievements here. His bibliography, available from the web site of the Croatian Forestry Association, fully testifies to his immense scientific legacy, as do numerous awards and recognitions which he received during his rich career of forestry pedagogue and scientist. Although Slavko Matić's scientific work focused more specifically on silviculture within the scientific area of biotechnical sciences, his broad spectrum of activities left an indelible mark on the whole era of forestry history at the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century.His life path was determined by his love for forests and forestry. He would often say that forestry was not only a profession but also a way of life. He staunchly advocated and promoted the unity of forestry policy, science, education and profession.His words, spoken at the 107th annual assembly of the Croatian Academy of Sciences in Županja illustrate his mission and his understanding of the forestry profession. "We are proud of our long tradition marked above all by the utmost care for forests and forestry of Croatia. We would like all those who are actively involved in this profession to do their best in order to improve the quality and eternity of forests. We have always believed and we still believe that all our efforts and love invested in the forest will be paid back manifoldly and permanently, but not in enormous and unnecessary material goods, but in the satisfaction and knowledge that we belong to a profession in which work, love and honesty are the basic principles and laws. Without these principles it would not be possible to raise and maintain forests today, whose structure and worth rank them among the most beautiful and valuable in Europe. These beliefs allow us to cultivate and preserve forests in the state in which they provide both market and non-market goods, goods dedicated to every person in this country".He was the protector of forests and the forestry profession in every sense of the word. We still remember vividly how our professor would "storm and thunder" if something was not done according to the rules of the forestry profession. It might have been a number of things, such as the conversion of forests and forestland for the needs of building infrastructure or for agricultural production, when construction interventions would be undertaken in the affected zone with negative impacts on the forest ecosystem (the Danube-Sava Canal, the Zagreb Project on the River Sava, hydropower stations on the River Drava, the Kalje forest). He also frequently spoke against the policy of passive forest protection promoted by the Croatian Ministry of Environmental Protection, stressing felling as a means of tending forests. When interventions were made in forests which went against the principles of the Zagreb School of Silviculture, of which he was one of the founders, foresters knew with certainty that it was Professor Matić who would react and respond adequately. He openly opposed the payment of the water fee for forests and forestland, while at the same time they are the only ones that ensure a natural water regime and provide clear water. He always highlighted the importance of non-market forest functions and viewed timber as a side product of forest management.He considered the Croatian Forestry Association as his second home. Here, we would often discuss in detail issues related to forests and forestry.He expressed dissatisfaction with the current policy towards forestry, which systematically neglected the interests of the forestry profession, particularly after the word forestry was omitted from the name of the corresponding ministry. He was also saddened by the fact that a number of our colleagues who, under the influence of politics, put the conformism of current managerial functions above the forestry postulates we were taught at the faculty.The demise of Professor Matić ends a period which we, his contemporaries, will always look upon as an unforgettable experience of living a noble foresters' life in togetherness, the result of which are well-tended and preserved forests. Will the new trends increasingly visible in present day forestry, in which foresters have less and less contact with forest and with their colleagues, be able to respond to all the challenges, particularly in conditions of growing climate changes, remains to be seen.&Editorial Board
RIJEČ UREDNIŠTVAU Večernjem listu početkom studenog čitali smo tekst Premjera iz njegovog izlaganja na sjednici Rektorskog zbora u sklopu Rasprave o odluci Vlade RH o programskom financiranju javnih Visokih učilišta u Ak. god. 2018-/2019. – 2021/2022. U jednom dijelu teksta on pita i procjenjuje da je akademska zajednica "vidljiva" za oko 0,3 % populacije, što je katastrofalno. Stoga poziva na veći društveni, javni angažman, koji može biti i sto posto kritičan prema Vladi – važno je biti vidljiviji i čuti se u društvu, ali i biti prezentiran od ljudi "s imenom", a ne onih "bezimenih", što je najčešći slučaj. Ako to usporedimo sa šumarskom strukom, nismo daleko od sličnoga postotka "vidljivosti" u društvu, pa bi ovo mogao biti i poziv šumarskoj struci. Ako je ta vidljivost veća, ona je ponajčešće negativnoga predznaka, a struka je zapostavljena. Počesto je struka prezentirana od šumarsko "bezimenih" ljudi ili pak od nedovoljno šumarski educiranih novinara koji teže ponajprije aferama. To se odnosi i na volontere raznih "zelenih udruga" koji nisu spremni slušati struku i promijeniti svoje zacementirano mišljenje o šumarskoj struci, unatoč pojašnjenju stručnih zahvata u šumi. Ne poštuje se činjenica da šumarska struka već preko dva i pol stoljeća gospodari šumom po načelima potrajnog gospodarenja, i da ona na velikoj površini zadovoljava sve kriterije posebne zaštite. Tko je onda, ako ne šumari, zaslužan za status i rang zaštitnih područja i od koga to treba čuvati šumu?Na državnoj razini nema argumentirane rasprave o šumarstvu i šumi, o njenoj važnosti, kako o klasično sirovinsko gospodarskoj grani gospodarstva, tako i o njenoj ulozi s ekološko zaštitnog i socijalno zdravstvenog stajališta. Uz već više puta spomenutu činjenicu kako je šumarstvo izbačeno iz naziva resornog ministarstva, unatoč podatku da je 47 % kopnene površine RH pokriveno šumom, što inducira važnost struke, u jednom od napisa u ovoj rubrici kritizirali smo činjenicu da je šumarstvo unutar resornog ministarstva svedeno na razinu primjerice mljekarstva, povrćarstva i sl. Nažalost, sada nije niti na toj razini. Pisali smo o netržišnom gospodarenju glede prodaje drvnih sortimenata, i tako već nažalost uvriježenom terminu o raspodjeli drvnih sortimenata. Raspodjela drvnih sortimenata i tržišno gospodarenje su dva suprotna pojma. No, pitanje je kako tržišno gospodariti kada su prethodna rukovodstva Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o. potpisala višegodišnje ugovore po načelu raspodjele, koje je bez posljedica teško mijenjati. Kako pak pokriti troškove uzgojnih, uređivačkih i zaštitarskih radova iz tako smanjenih prihoda, a ne "preskakati" ih? Glede racionalne uporabe drvne sirovine i njene kvalitete koja u raznim fazama prerade osigurava dodanu vrijednost i zapošljavanje, posebice visoko stručnih kadrova, ne navode se podaci. Npr. u promidžbenom spotu "Ambijente" vidjeli smo uglavnom ojastučeni namještaj bez drvnih elemenata. Kada se drvni sektor hvali proizvodnjom namještaja i izvozom, nigdje ne vidimo podatke o proizvodnji primarne prerade (furnira, masivnog drva, panela i sl.) i njenoj uporabi u domaćoj proizvodnji, regala, ostalog sobnog i kuhinjskog namještaja te kojih i koliko je drvnih sortimenata završilo u domaćoj finalnoj preradi.Zašto smo i pod čijim pritiscima odustali od uspješnog integralnog gospodarenja šumama koje uključuje sporedne i prateće djelatnosti u šumarstvu, koje imaju značajan udio u prihodu primjerice austrijskih šuma, a osiguravaju i veću zaposlenost? Interesantno bi bilo raspraviti, kako su, zašto, kome, na koje vrijeme i po kojoj cijeni dani u koncesiju razni objekti, npr. odmarališta za radnike, koji su se odricali dijela svojih prihoda da bi sagradili i koristili te objekte. Koliko je to promijenilo njihov socijalni status, a skloni smo pričama o brizi za čovjeka i obitelj. O svemu tome i mnogo čemu još nema rasprave, a mi krajem svake godine zaželimo da se u idućoj godini značajnije promijeni status šumarstva. Kako nada umire posljednja, tako mi i na kraju ove godine priželjkujemo pozitivne promjene, čestitajući našim čitateljima Čestit Božić i uspješnu 2019. godinu.Uredništvo ; EDITORIALAt the beginning of November, the Evening Paper (Večernji list) published a speech by the Prime Minister given at a meeting of the Rector's Collegium held to discuss the Government decision related to funding higher education programmes in the academic year 2018/2019 - 2021/2022. In one part of the text the Prime Minister observes that the academic community is "visible" to about 0.3 % of the population, which is devastating. Therefore, he calls for a greater social and public involvement, which can be 100 % critical to the Government. What is important is to be seen and heard by the society, but also to be presented by people "with a name" instead of by "no-name" persons, which is a typical occurrence. If transposed to the forestry profession, we are not far from a similar "visibility" percentage; therefore, this could also be an appeal to the forestry profession. In cases in which visibility is higher, it usually carries a negative prefix, while the profession is in the background. The profession is often presented by "no-name" foresters, or by journalists who are insufficiently educated in forestry matters and who are mainly interested in scandals and affairs. The same goes for volunteers in various "green associations", who are not prepared to listen to the profession and to change their deeply rooted opinions about the forestry profession. In vain are all attempts to inform them about professionally and expertly executed forestry operations. No heed is paid to the fact that the forestry profession has managed forests according to the principle of sustainable management for over two and a half centuries and that it meets all the criteria of special protection over a large area. Who then, if not foresters, should be in charge of the status and rang of protected areas and who should a forest be protected from?There are no reasoned discussions about forestry and forests at the state level, nor is there any mention of its importance as the classical primary sector of economy and of its ecological-protective and social-health role. We have already mentioned several times that the word 'forestry' was omitted from the name of the sector ministry despite the fact that 47 % of the landed area of the Republic of Croatia is covered with forests, which should indicate the importance of the profession. In one of the articles in this column we criticized the fact that within the competent Ministry forestry has been reduced to the level of dairy production, fruit production and similar. Regrettably, it has lost even this status now. We have also written about non-market sale of wood assortments and the already established term "distribution of wood assortments". Distribution of wood assortments and market management are two completely opposite notions. However, how can market management be applied in view of the fact that the previous management boards of Croatian Forests Ltd signed long-term agreements on the principle of distribution, which are hard to change without heavy consequences? How can the cost of silvicultural, management and protective operations be covered from such small profits and not be "skipped over"? As for the rational use of raw material and its quality, which ensures additional value and employment to highly educated people in particular, there is no data. For example, the promotional spot of the "Ambijenta" furniture fair showed mainly upholstered furniture without any wooden elements. When the wood sector brags about the production and export of furniture, there is no data about primary processing production (veneer, massive wood, panelling OPLATA and others) and its use in the domestic production of massive cabinets and other room and kitchen furniture, nor is there any data about which and how many of wood assortments have ended up in the domestic final processing. Why have we and under whose coercion retracted from successful integral forest management which includes auxiliary and secondary activities in forestry and which contributes significantly to the profit of e.g. Austrian forests, as well as increases employment? It would be interesting to discuss how, why, to whom, for what period and at what price have concessions been granted on various facilities, such as, for example, workers' resorts, which workers themselves built from a part of their income so as to be able to use them? We like to talk about the care for workers and their families, but how much has this fact alone changed their social status? There are many more topics to discuss here. Our wish at the end of every year is for the status of forestry to change for the better in the year to come. As hope dies last, we again expect positive changes in the next year and wish our readers Merry Christmas and a Happy and Successful New Year 2019.Editorial Board
RIJEČ UREDNIŠTVAViše puta pisali smo o tome kako smo očekivali da će ova Vlada ponajprije vratiti šumarstvo u naziv resornog ministarstva, a potom i promijeniti odnos prema šumi i šumarskoj struci. To se na žalost nije dogodilo, tako da je šumarski resor u Ministarstvu na razini dijelova poljoprivrede, primjerice povrtlarstva, iako se radi o resursu koji pokriva gotovo polovicu kopnene površine Republike Hrvatske. O tome da je šuma najsloženiji ekosustav na svijetu, koji samim time zahtijeva visoku stručnost gospodarenja njime pa je i u Ustavu naznačeno da je šuma uz tlo i vode resurs od posebnog interesa za Republiku Hrvatsku, u uređenom gospodarstvu ne bi trebalo to opetovano govoriti. Ne inzistiramo na tome da resorni ministar mora biti istaknuti šumarski stručnjak, ali to onda mora biti državni tajnik ili pomoćnik ministra zadužen za šumarstvo. Ministar pak treba koristiti svaku priliku da se informira o struci, sastavnici njegovog resora, a najlakše će to učiniti nazočnošću barem na nekoliko stručnih skupova na kojima se znanstveno-stručno raspravlja o stanju i problemima u struci – njegovom resoru. Nažalost, smijenjeni resorni ministar nije nazočio niti jednom takvom skupu, pa niti onome u organizaciji Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti, što ocjenjujemo i podcjenjivanjem struke, ali i ove znanstvene institucije. Vidljivi trag u šumarstvu ostavio je jedino osnivanjem "svoje" Uprave šuma, smanjujući površine susjednih Uprava. Trenutno naš resor vodi drvni tehnolog, što je nelogično, a s čime se očito šumarska struka prešutno slaže, što je pak sramotno. Tko nam uopće vodi i kakvu šumarsku politiku i imamo li dobru strategiju da je provodimo? Kome je zapravo podređena šumarska politika? Opći je dojam da je vode drvoprerađivači i to nažalost oni primarne prerade drva, naravno po netržišnim uvjetima i zanemarujući načela potrajnog gospodarenja. U svome obraćanju nazočnima na znanstveno-stručnom skupu održanom u povodu Dana hrvatskoga šumarstva, predsjednik Hrvatskoga šumarskog društva Oliver Vlainić, naznačio je sadašnje probleme šumarstva i stavove struke. Nemamo ništa tome za dodati, nego upućujemo čitatelje da u prošlom dvobroju časopisa pročitaju prikaz sa spomenutoga skupa. Dakle, struka opominje i ukazuje na alarmantno stanje u šumarstvu, kojega resorno ministarstvo očito ne prepoznaje.Za saniranje stanja nakon ledoloma i vjetroloma u Gorskom kotaru i situacije s katastrofalnim sušenjem jasena te nadolazećega problema s hrastom, našom najvrjednijom vrstom drveća, bit će potrebna znatna financijska sredstva. Gdje ih pronaći ako smo novim Zakonom o šumama znatno smanjili priliv financijskih sredstava od naknade za općekorisne funkcije šuma (OKFŠ), a drvne sortimente prodajemo i dalje po netržišnim uvjetima? Nismo trebali dugo čekati da nova ministrica Odlukom o smanjenju naknada za šume i šumska zemljišta, pokaže kako će se odnositi prema šumi i šumarstvu. Vrijednost bodova je smanjena za 30 do 90 %, ovisno o uzgojnom obliku šume. To će, kaže ona, ubrzati investicijske projekte, jer su navodno mnoge investicije u kojima je bilo potrebno izdvojiti šumu ili šumsko zemljište iz šumsko-gospodarskih planova, bile dovedene u pitanje zbog previsoke naknade za lokalnu i regionalnu samoupravu. Naravno, "nisu ludi" platiti privatnicima, koji imaju na stotine tisuća hektara zapuštenog i zaraslog zemljišta, kada je državno (čitaj općenarodno) gotovo besplatno. Uostalom, za njih primjerice: šikara, šibljak, makija, garig i nije "neka šuma". A najnovije je najava novoga smanjenja naknade za općekorisne funkcije šuma "povećanjem granice ukupnog godišnjeg prihoda i primitka s 3.000.000,00 kn na 7.500.000,00 kn " što je obrazloženo opterećenjem, kako na poduzetnike, tako i na administrativnu obradu". Ionako smanjenim sredstvima OKFŠ-a, koja se danas većinom koriste za razminiranje i vatrogasnu zajednicu, za "zelene" radove u šumi na oko milijun hektara krša, preostaje jako malo novaca. Što reći na sve to?Idemo malo pričati o klimatskim promjenama, kisiku, ugljičnom dioksidu, eroziji, pitkoj vodi, rekreaciji i općenito zaštiti okoliša, gdje je šuma jedan od najznačajnijih i najsloženijih ekosustava, o kojoj i bez stručnog obrazovanja, nažalost svi sve znaju, jer jako vole šumu.Često spominjemo načelo potrajnosti i osiguranje višenamjenske uloge šume, što je moto poslovanja u šumarstvu, ali za to je ponajprije potrebno promijeniti mišljenje da šumu možemo samo koristiti, a ne ulagati u nju, odnosno vratiti joj dio benefita kako bi bila vječna.Uredništvo ; EDITORIALWe have written on several occasions about how we expected the present Government to bring the word forestry back into the name of the line ministry and to change its attitude towards forests and the forestry profession. Regrettably, this has not happened, with the final result of the forestry sector within the Ministry being at the level of parts of agriculture, vegetable growing for example, although forests cover almost half of the land area of the Republic of Croatia. Needless to say, the forest is the most complex ecosystem in the world, whose management requires supreme expertise. The Constitution itself states that, along with soil and water, the forest is a resource of particular interest for the Republic of Croatia. We do not insist that the sector minister should be a renowned forestry expert, but the state secretary or assistant minister in charge of forestry should definitely be one. The Minister should take every opportunity to get to know the profession which is a constituent part of his Ministry. The best way to do it is to attend at least several professional symposia in which the status and problems of the profession are discussed on a scientific-professional basis. We regret to say that the deposed department minister did not attend one single gathering, not even the one organized by the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts. This we regard as both the belittling of the profession and of the mentioned scientific institution. The only visible trace that he left in forestry was the establishment of "his" Forestry Administration at the expense of reducing the area of the adjacent Administrations. At present, the forestry department is headed by a wood technologist, which is illogical, but even worse, the forestry profession seems to approve of this. Who runs the forestry policy and do we have a good strategy for running it? Who is the forestry policy subjugated to? There is a general impression that the forestry policy is led by wood processors, and what is tragic, by wood processors in primary wood processing, who are guided by non-market conditions and who disregard the principles of sustainable management. At the scientific-professional gathering held to mark the Days of Croatian Forestry, Oliver Vlainić, President of the Croatian Forestry Association, mentioned current problems in forestry and attitudes of the profession. We have nothing more to add to this but to ask the readers to read the reviews of the gathering in the past double issue of the journal. Clearly, the profession repeatedly warns of the alarming conditions in forestry which the competent ministry obviously does not recognize. Considerable financial means will be required to repair the damage caused by ice and wind storms in Gorski Kotar and to remedy the situation with disastrous ash dieback and the oncoming problems with oak, the most valuable tree species in Croatia. Where to find these means if, according to the new Forest Act, the financial means from non-market forest functions fees have been significantly reduced while wood assortments continue to be sold at non-market conditions? We did not have to wait long to see how the new lady minister will treat forests and forestry by her Decision to lower the fees for forests and forest land. The value of the points was reduced by 30 to 90%, depending on the silvicultural form of the forest. To quote her words, this will accelerate investment projects, because, allegedly, many investments in which it was necessary to exclude forests or forest land from forest management plans, were called into question due to excessive fees for local or regional self-managing units. Of course, they are "not crazy" to pay to private owners, who have hundreds of thousands of hectares of abandoned and overgrown land, when the state (read: public) land is almost free of charge. For them a scrub, a thicket, maquis, and garrigue is not much of a forest anyway. The latest is the announcement of a new reduction in the non-market forest function fee by "increasing the level of total annual income from 3 000 000.00 kuna to 7 500 000.00 kuna, which was explained by a burden, both on the entrepreneurs and the administrative processing". Due to reduced means from non-market forest functions, which are currently mainly used for demining and for the fire fighter service, very little is left for "green" operations on about one million hectares of karst. What is there left to say?Let us talk a little bit about climate change, oxygen, carbon dioxide, erosion, potable water, recreation and environment protection in general, where the forest is one of the most important and most complex ecosystems, and about which everybody, although lacking professional education, knows everything because they all love forests.We often mention the principle of sustainability and the insurance of the multipurpose role of a forest, which is the motto of business-making in forestry. However, the first step is to change the general belief that the forest can be used without investing into it or without returning to it a part of the benefits. Only if we do so will forests remain an eternal asset.Editorial Board
The geo-economy presents Lebanon with challenges associated with being a nexus for regional fault lines and risks from its dependence on capital inflows. Despite markedly improved security conditions since the start of 2015, anxiety over regional turmoil and potential spillover effectspersist. All the while, Lebanon continues to be, by far, the largest host of Syrian refugees (in proportion to the population). In addition, the economy's dependence on its diaspora to finance internal and external imbalances exposes Lebanon to economic and political conditions beyond its influence. Despite these challenges and risks, the political process remains impaired with the vacant presidency completing its second year with uncertain prospects of a near-term resolution. On the other hand, a short-term solution has been found to the garbage crisis that has left piles of trash uncollected on the streets across the country since summer 2015. The Lebanon Economic Monitor provides an update on key economic developments and policies over the past six months. It also presents findings from recent World Bank work on Lebanon. It places them in a longer-term and global context, and assesses the implications of these developments and other changes in policy on the outlook for Lebanon. Its coverage ranges from the macro-economy to financial markets to indicators of human welfare and development.
