4.7 Article

Coastal protected areas and historical sites in North Bulgaria - Challenges, mismanagenient and future perspectives

期刊

OCEAN & COASTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 130, 期 -, 页码 340-354

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2016.07.006

关键词

Coastal protected areas; Coastal zone management; Geodiversity; GIS; Historical heritage sites

资金

  1. HERAS Project (Submarine Archaeological Heritage on the Western Black Sea Shelf - HERAS) CBC Program Romania-Bulgaria
  2. MARSPLAN-BS Project (Cross-Border Maritime Spatial Plan for the Black Sea - Romania, Bulgaria) - European Commission [EASME/EMFF/2014/1.2.1.5/2/SI2.707672 MSP LOT1 Black Sea/MARSPLAN-BS]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Coastal protected areas and historical heritage sites in Bulgaria are established by national policy instruments/laws and EU Directives to protect a wide range of natural and cultural resources. This paper demonstrated the development of a detailed inventory based on GIS tools which is able to document a variety of protected areas and heritage sites along the North Bulgarian Black Sea coast with a landward extended zone 2100 m in width. The strip zone area is 182.6 km(2) and circa 67% has different protection status both for natural and historical heritage. Analysis concerned compliance of national and IUCN categorisation of coastal protected areas in North Bulgaria and the degree of spatial overlapping and complementarities between nationally designated sites and Natura 2000 areas. The greatest natural and human related challenges were considered for both protected areas and historical sites, i.e. impact of tourism, management conservation issues and perspectives for future development (ecotourism). Results help in providing the key issues of conservation value and proper visitation management, to managers of coastal protected areas, tourism operators, developers and visitors on, leading towards a goal of environmental, social and economic sustainability. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据