LED2LEAP 2020 - Freising Team 4: Difference between revisions

From Ledwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 27: Line 27:


= Landscape Democracy Rationale =  
= Landscape Democracy Rationale =  
*'' Chosen community now is on the edge of changes, and the process of these changes needs to be stimulated with innovative aprroaches. Landscape democracy makes it possible for every stakeholder to be heard, and that can be achieved with the help of democratic instruments.  The inevitability of change conception is applicable to our case, because it reveals the recurrence of landscape story. Now we see the site in period of uncertainty and in need of reorganization. At the same time actors want to concervate the best key assets of landscape, which will be the best solution after renovating and growth of democracy in the community.
*'' Chosen community now is on the edge of changes, and the process of these changes needs to be stimulated with innovative aprroaches. Landscape democracy makes it possible for every stakeholder to be heard, and that can be achieved with the help of democratic instruments.  The inevitability of change conception is applicable to our case, because it reveals the recurrence of landscape story. Now we see the site in period of uncertainty and in need of reorganization. At the same time actors want to concervate the best key assets of landscape, which will be the best solution after renovating and growth of democracy in the community.
 
*''Format: 3-4 sentences''


= Location and scope =
= Location and scope =

Revision as of 19:39, 27 April 2020

>>>back to working groups overview

Area please enter the area name here
Place please enter the town/village name
Country please enter the country here
Topics please enter the main coast-related topics here
Author(s) Please enter your name(s)- optional
LED2LEAP DUMMY.JPG

Landscape Democracy Rationale

  • Chosen community now is on the edge of changes, and the process of these changes needs to be stimulated with innovative aprroaches. Landscape democracy makes it possible for every stakeholder to be heard, and that can be achieved with the help of democratic instruments. The inevitability of change conception is applicable to our case, because it reveals the recurrence of landscape story. Now we see the site in period of uncertainty and in need of reorganization. At the same time actors want to concervate the best key assets of landscape, which will be the best solution after renovating and growth of democracy in the community.

Location and scope

  • Location: The park zone around the Olympic rowing regatta course Oberschleißheim, Freising-Dachau Region, Upper Bavaria, Germany]]
  • Next to showing us where you are, you may also use this map to localise different focus themes of your community
Loading map...

Phase A: Mapping your Community

Welcome to your community and its landscape

  • Location - Metropolitan region of Munich, Germany

The only regatta course in southern Germany out of 5 all over Germany

Protected landscape area (landschaftsschutzgebiet)

Recreational oasis (naherholungsoase)

The regatta center’s first plans were developed in the late 1960’s. It was built to host the rowing and canoeing events of the 1972 Olympic Games. Oberschleißheim was chosen because of its closeness to Munich, making it an ideal location for post-Olympic usage. It was designed to accommodate 25,000 spectators. The course is 2 kilometers long and 135 meters wide.

  • add 1-2 graphical representations to the image gallery, you can add more if you like, these can be based on your PPT presentation

Groups of actors and stakeholders in your community

  • The most visible actors:

Locals, tourists (local explorers of hike, bicycle, ski routes, travellers, foreigners)

Athletes (national, foreign, training, non-professional sportsmen, former athletes, sport associations)

Business owners and retailers (small shops, cafes, other services)

Municipalities, landowners (decide on the future scenarios of the place)

  • The less visible actors:
Churches, banks, hospitals, universities, police.

Visitors want to see this place as a flourisching site, they need to have access to different sport activites, social events, shopping poins, want safety and comfort. Municipalities and landowners want to see Regatta course as a profitable place. Everybody needs eco-friendlu democratic scenarios of renovation.

  • add 1-2 graphical representations to the image gallery based on your PPT presentation, you can add more if you like

Relationships between your actors and groups

Visitors of all social groups have many schared interests, mainly recreational.

Governmental and political stakehoders are interested in providing well-being, health and safety, while the most visible actors (direct visitors) wish to accept it.

Athletes and regular visitors can have conflicts on the base of using the same territory simultaniously.

Government and land-owners are interested in Regatta's site being economically sustainable.


  • add 1-2 graphical representations to the image gallery based on your PPT presentation, you can add more if you like

Summary of your learnings from the transnational discussion panel on April 22

The most valuable key to successful democratic landscape planning we found in questions of Bologna team: You schould of course think about "What can I do?", "Where can I do", and "How can I do", but the first question should be "For whom I do?"

Theory reflection

  • Reflect on at least three readings from the first section 'Democratic Landscape Transformation
  • You can choose references from our reading list or suggest others
  • Scope: 250 words

References

  • give a full list of the references you have used for this section

Phase B: Democratic Landscape Analysis and Assessment

* template coming

Phase C: Collaborative Visioning and Goal Setting

* template coming

Phase D: Collaborative Design, Transformation and Planning

* template coming

Phase E: Collaborative Design, Transformation and Planning

* template coming

= Phase E: Collaborative Evaluation and Future Agendas * template coming

Process Reflection

  • Reflect in your intercultural and interdisciplinary team on the outcomes of your study
  • Which limitations were you facing?
  • What have you learnt from each other?
  • What would you do differently next time?
  • You can also use diagrams/visuals
  • 250 words text