Aegean Sea—Challenges and Dilemmas in Management and Planning for Local Development in Fragmented Insular Regions

Abstract

In an age of network organization and the digital revolution, under conditions of intense international competition alongside a multifaceted economic downturn, a new form of economy is developing, shaped by the learning society and knowledge-based economy. Under exceptionally difficult conditions where, despite all intentions, economic growth remains the main concern, often without terms or criteria, and even at environmental, territorial and socio-economic cost, the issue: Development for whom, where and on what terms remains “open”. In Greece decades-long unquestioning adoption of developmental models in conjunction with a methodically organized diminishment of the territorial dimension has undermined acquis which had been promoted for years as a prerequisite for life, re-introducing to the discussion the issue of how to plan the various levels and categories of territory, protecting the history and physiognomy of place, ensuring local development in terms of social justice and sustainability in an intensely globalised environment. An answer is sought regarding how best to manage human resources and cultural heritage on the basis of territorial/sectoral and social collaborative networks that are supralocal and transnational focusing on the model of “endogenous development”. Based on research experience regarding the Mediterranean and the Aegean, the article aims to underline the absence of a comprehensive island policy in Greece and highlight crucial issues that need to be resolved at the level of developmental and planning choices in order to eliminate instances of downgrading/abandonment of vulnerable remote and insular border regions. The proposals which are formulated are intended to contribute to the debate about a more equal development for islands and insular areas at a critical juncture for Greece.

Cultural Heritage as a Means for Local Development in Mediterranean Historic Cities—The Need for an Urban Policy

“…Hence, the utilization of the research experience from the Mediterranean and Aegean areas relies on a methodology of synthetic monitoring and assessment of the results and open issues highlighted by the specific proposals. Each proposal contributes in its own way to the design of the desired urban development policy [12,13]. In particular, key determinants of the relevant discussion have been (a) the goals/objectives of the specific proposals in conjunction with the methodology and approaches adopted, (b) the development instruments proposed, (c) the spatial scale of reference and the space category on which the research interest is focused, (d) the contracting entity and participants, and (e) the existence of financing.…”

“…A solution is sought from setting up knowledge and culture networks of supralocal reach. The proposed key means are the local human resources and natural-cultural heritage [13]. The Aegean was selected mainly due its geostrategic and geo-economic significance.…”

“…This position, under no circumstances, limits the lines of inquiry, which also concern the future of urban networks (particularly those that are historical) encountered in rural regions, and especially those of the insular and mountain areas-in other words, areas in which we still encounter significant elements of cultural heritage while, in several instances, the consequences, whether the monoculture of tourism or abandonment shall shape other conditions and dynamics and bring up a series of crucial issues concerning spatial development, protection, and regulation. Thus, prevention and addressing intra-urban inequalities and ensuring the conditions for networking cities and settlements at national and supra-national levels become issues of great political significance [13,21].…”

“…Countries have long ceased to be envisaged as closed, autonomous systems, while cities seek collaboration by setting up production and distribution networks going beyond the national scale of states. The urban space acquires new forms and takes up new dimensions, where new hierarchies prevail through the organisation of spatial, thematic, quality networks in all territorial scales [13]. In such conditions of spatial reformation and of urban alliances, there is evidence to be found that it is not only cities with the infrastructure to generate knowledge, innovation, and know-how that contribute to the developmental process but also cities that can appropriate such a process in order to improve production conditions and put their tradition and creativity to use.…”

“…There is a similar interest for utilizing the historic centres of cities as dynamic "pockets of memory and action". These trends are extremely critical in spatial management and planning because they bring up issues of how to deal with these but also due to the major transitions that can be brought about in the strategic choices of urban policies [10,13].…”