Speech by Prof. Dr. Holger Magel on 7 June 2000, Rural 21,
original
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Conference is drawing to a close now with a "summary and
presentation of the Potsdam declaration" being on the agenda. I will
just briefly try to summarize the highlights again. Don't be afraid, I am
not going to repeat the statements made by the workshop chairmen. There
has been a great deal of discussion on that outside in the corridors. I
will simply try to give you my personal impressions as a participant in
this excellent congress. May I therefore congratulate you first of all,
Professor Schlagheck, as the representative of the Federal Ministry of
Food, Agriculture. I am also congratulating you as Vice-President of the
International Federation of Surveyors. This Federation is in contact with
several United Nations agencies and addresses many issues discussed at
this Congress. Also from this perspective I would like to pay my
compliments to you. I am doing this also as President of the Academy on
Rural Areas, fully aware of the backing by many colleagues here in the
region. The President of the Academy for Rural Areas of Lower Saxony is
also present here today, for example. This is the clientele you also
require and about whom there was so much talk in the implementation of
your policy, Mr. Schlagheck. And finally I should also like to extend my
thanks as a representative of science and research.
I am very pleased with the presence of so many university professors
here. I sometimes find it hard to understand why practitioners are always
so stubborn and why they have a hard time with theory and science. They
all know that a sound theory is the key to practice tomorrow. Nobody knows
this better than you yourself, Prof. Schlagheck, as you cross this bridge
everyday.
Ladies and Gentlemen, we experienced many exciting moments and splendid
highlights. If I try to bring out a few, I would not please the others too
much, I guess. Just think back to the first day, in the afternoon, when
imbued with this exciting and international atmosphere we left the
European stage and Minister Morales guided us into a completely different
world. Or think back to this morning when Mayor Gira from Beckerich
casually mentioned that his village makes a contribution to the
partnership with the Third World, a statement he later qualified to some
extent. This evoked the atmosphere again, the main issue of this Congress
that we want to talk at a truly global level here and strive for solutions
together.
We had some excellent workshops. I took the liberty of switching from
one to the other, I therefore participated in all five workshops and I
must say this was a highly stimulating affair and you had an opportunity
to judge the practical examples in the municipalities first hand this
morning.
First, a very important realization for many of my German colleagues:
We are not alone in this world. You sometimes tend to get this impression
in your everyday work and there are certainly some bosses here and there
saying:" this person must have plenty of time if he can attend such a
Congress. What's the use for our everyday work?
I would like to expressly encourage you to continue to attend these
congresses. We must simply try to understand and familiarize ourselves
with the major differences in the world: in the initial situation, in the
framework conditions, in politics, culture and history and we must broaden
our own understanding.
Apart from these many highlights we even had a formula presented to us
today, this bit is for brain workers needing formulas for something to
become serious and tangible. I also say this with a view to my own
department as I occasionally also espouse soft aspects; if there are no
formulas in dissertations and doctoral theses, then they can be
"nothing good". Now Mr. Zimmermann presented us a nice formula
from the Philippines.
We heard many very thoughtful, virtually philosophical remarks: "What
kind of world do we want for our children?" This is something
which concerns us all and must move us all. And we also heard that other
people's problems are increasingly becoming our own". Professor von
Braun put it differently: "global problems in rural areas are also
our concern." In spite of all this reflectiveness, you also sensed a
lot of optimism like: "we will manage in the end. We are going to
tackle the problems!
A central issue was, of course, but this was not the proper disposition of
this international conference, this would be other people's
"business", e.g. that of development cooperation agencies: how
can we transfer to third countries what we practice here in Europe, in
Eastern Europe? But this was not the central issue of this congress and
would take up own seminars lasting for days. But it is quite
understandable that this question came up again and again and I am also
thankful to our guests from abroad for raising this question. Our
colleague, Mr. Hirsch, for example, had a concrete reason for doing so as
he is very anxious to establish contact with Europe as a Chilean of German
origin. And he is always distraught about the fact that there are German
governments and German enterprises displaying no interest at all in moving
into this country or asking what they can benefit or only intent on
getting a good return as fast as possible. Professor Hirschs-Reinhagen's
statement today as workshop chairman must be seen against this backdrop.
We recorded a further enormous success in a different respect if I may
judge this from my own perspective requesting you to acknowledge what is
not self-evident: two UN authorities were represented here, two top-level
representatives of FAO and UNCHS from Nairobi. Several federal ministries
were represented here and may I point out our Federal President, our head
of state, in particular. The EU Commission and World Bank were represented
here. This was indeed a tribute to our Congress and I would like to thank
these representatives again in particular, we gained a lot from their
presence! But maybe they also picked up a little of what we have to offer.
And I am quite confident, Mr. Hundsalz, Mr. Feder, what you heard from
these superb representatives of the rural communities will inform your
future ideas.
You master the theoretical and abstract levels like hardly any other. But
that this lived optimism, this confidence in one's own strength can get so
much moving in practice as we have witnessed today this must have
immensely impressed and enriched you, too. I take your nodding as
approval. Many ministers from abroad were there - this, too, is a great
tribute to us. And thanks God, and I emphasize this, the NGOs were also
present, German Agro-Action, WWF and this is a new quality and will be
common practice tomorrow that we will confer more frequently with the NGOs
and struggle for solutions together.
What I find regrettable is that there were too few planners and architects
here: the old syndrome.
They are absent when major issues are at stake. But politics also concerns
planners!
Some overriding messages were also driven home to us all.
- The developing countries themselves must give more priority to
strengthening their regions. Mr. Diouf made this very clear indeed.
- It has been said and claimed: the industrialized countries must
provide more assistance to the developing countries. Why? We just
heard that their problems increasingly affect us too.
Add to this the "gentle" criticism made by the German
President regarding the European agricultural policy, which subsidizes
exports. Mr. Fischler replied to this supremely well. But I find it
noteworthy that a German President says this at such a congress. He even
added that we should not only apply minimum environmental standards. I
hope that he did not only say this because our opening day on Monday
coincided with the day of the environment.
- Something else clearly transpired from the general messages: We need
a broader conception of agriculture. We must create more non-farm
jobs. We heard often enough that this is still a problem in everyday
life.
Ladies and Gentlemen, maybe you occasionally wonder: "Why are
we in Potsdam?" You could say: "Well, of course, we are here
in a new Land where the problems of restructuring and development can be
seen directly on the spot." And this was certainly remarkable for our
guests from the Central and Eastern European countries, also for us from
the West, that we learn to understand again and again why this process is
so difficult and why we must continue to make transfer payments in the
future.
Ladies and Gentlemen, we are also in Potsdam because Potsdam offers the
genius loci for what kept us busy for three days now. Just recall what
Lord Mayor Platzeck said. He pointed out on Monday that Potsdam boasts
world cultural heritage, that is to say its marvellous château, parks and
cultural landscapes. They are part of the treasures of this "one
world". I only hope that you already had or will have an opportunity
to see some of this. Mr. Platzeck mentioned land embellishment, a great
intellectual idea and movement at the beginning of the 19th century under
whose influence Johann Wolfgang von Goethe wrote his famous novel
"The Elective Affinities".
Lenné, a great man and exponent of this land embellishment and shaper
of these landscapes never hoped to achieve anything else in his aims and
philosophy than what we are constantly talking about today. He sought the
trinity, the entirety of horticulture, architecture and agriculture, in
today's words: the "interrelations between ecology, social affairs
and economy". If we were to phrase this today, we would arrive at the
sustainability principle. Land embellishment wanted to foster work and
agriculture, whilst making allowances for landscapes, aestheticism and
people.
And if you look at the newly reorganized Bornimer Feldflur, one of our
tour destinations, you will discover these traces and efforts.
This is an age-old concern of human sentiment, it is not by chance that
we heard the Netzeband representative say some words about landscape
aesthetics and the idea to combine the pleasant with the useful this
morning. This should be the timeless motto without being dismissed as a
visionary right away: to combine the pleasant with the useful. It stands
for what the concern over sustainability represents today. This is why we
are in Potsdam, Ladies and Gentlemen! I can only congratulate this city
for having provided this magnificent ambience.
II.
This brings me to the seven keywords or topics in my summary:
1st keyword: Sustainability
We learnt that we are unfortunately still far away from sustainable
action. On the contrary, we must fear a step backwards, at least at a
global level. I would like to convey some of the zest and enthusiasm
earlier mentioned by Federal President Rau to our guests from abroad: in
Germany, in Europe, the sustainability debate is in full swing and taken
seriously. We believe in the precept of sustainability and try to make our
contribution, with every country setting its own priorities, of course.
"Global sustainability, says Rau, "only works if justice
prevails." if justice prevails and if we make our
contribution. Fischler pledged to withdraw export promotion if others do
it too.
Sustainability also contains an ethical aspect which always comes off
badly in the trinity of the economic, ecological and socio-cultural
aspects. What counts is also a spiritual and emotional sustainability! How
can we achieve sustainability if our set of values is not right?
Therefore: ethics is a crucial point.
Also think of the following aspect if you contemplate the issue of
sustainability: we heard of a Chinese example today where with great
commitment nature was regained so to speak and the pleasant combined with
the useful. In China and elsewhere devastation is progressing. Yesterday,
a newspaper reported that one fifth of China's territory is already
desertified today. You see that this is a major issue and despite that we
still lack technologies for resource conservation. We heard that we should
actually be able to copy our success in achieving productivity gains in
industry, for example, in this field, too. We were so successful there
that we are virtually running out of work. Now we would have to make
headway and find new work in the growth sectors of resource conservation,
resource management and land use.
A point preoccupying us, especially the practitioners again and again:
sustainable action is integral and cross-sectoral per se. Such an
integral, cross-sectoral action is hard to implement in administrative
terms. It goes beyond the scope of normal sectoral departmental thinking.
And it is therefore still difficult to act sustainably and quite a
challenge. And this is not just meant as a warning sign to all other
countries, to eastern Europe or to the countries of the so-called Third
World, but to our own country. That's where we still get stuck.
Today, the Mayoress Petra Köpping coined the best term for
sustainability (we already know that of Brundtland etc. by heart):
sustainability means for her and the inhabitants of her village "give
back more than you have consumed". If you take this quotation home
with you, you will have benefited enormously from this Congress, you will
have a vision at any rate.
2nd major keyword: Property
Mr. Zimmermann professionally reported what was discussed in his
workshop, but what we also already heard in the speech by Minister Funke: issues
of land management, land use, land reform, access to land are
extremely important at a global level, to be precise, and to clarify them
is a necessary prerequisite for economic development - so says the 1999
UN-FIG Declaration of Bathurst, also signed by the World Bank, Mr. Feder,
you were there personally. Rural development does not succeed without
intensive discussions on this issue. Related to this are, of course, all
the issues we also addressed. Are there administrations specifically for
this purpose? In Germany we even have special administrative agencies for
this purpose because property is a particularly sensitive good for which
you should have neutral institutions at disposal, if possible. I am saying
this deliberately to our friends from abroad that we should try to
maintain real neutrality.
We also addressed in some detail the issues of Public Private
Partnership (PPP) and of university education in these fields. We still
have some deficits in this area in Germany, I am saying this emphatically,
in Austria and elsewhere too. There is still too little training in this
field in many European countries. This is why the English, Americans and
Australians rule the market. The topic PPP is, of course, also an issue
concerning civil society. How seriously does the civil society treat the
division of responsibility and its delegation to citizens and the market?
3 rd issue: structural measures
We emphasized this particularly when planning the Congress: we are
doing to deal with this part in European terms because it is highly
topical. Our friends from abroad and especially from Africa and Asia may
have thought when they heard the reports and complaints that they wouldn't
mind having this kind of problems! This is what they are talking
about...." I can even understand their point of view. But: we live
here and have these problems. This is why we have to deal with them. But I
have to concede that some of this might be hard to understand from a
non-European perspective.
So what remains as the key statement? Laying greater stress on
investment measures and on village renewal which seems to be very
promising, this is particularly pleasing for me as a representative of
this discipline. This became very clear again today so that I would like
to impart it as a message to other countries all over the world: village
renewal is a paradigm of a combination of democratic civil involvement, of
interdisciplinary and integral cooperation with government organizations
and NGOs as well as local policy in the sense of a civil society. Here,
too, we heard: if there is money and there must be money, we are not that
starry-eyed - then in the right order, please. First the fascinating idea
or catching vision and then the money. If we invest money in people
enjoying life and in the future, every state and every ministry can be
happy.
4th issue: Civil society
This sounds so English or American, but we will have to deal with this
issue here in Germany, here in Central Europe to a far greater extent.
This is a topic cutting across all parties, be it Tony Blair, Bill
Clinton, Gerhard Schröder from the social democrat side with their third
way or the conservatives with their pro-active civil society or the greens
or liberals etc. This is set to become an issue for our society (must). We
would be well advised to integrate our structural measures, our rural
development policy in this movement, illustrating that our ideas and
concepts are the ideal embodiment, the ideal implementation of this new
movement especially. I don't see any problems in presenting this. With
rural development we ideally meet the principles of participation, civil
involvement and civil responsibility.
Access to land and resources, property and safe ownership, observance
of social capital, these are the major new issues at stake worldwide, plus
the activation of the honorary office. Rural development wonderfully
complies with these aspects all over the globe.
5th keyword: Education is the key factor
This is no surprise to us anymore, but we must point it out again and
again. What matters is vocational training and further training, but also
the empowerment of citizens for honorary commitment. The EU calls this
capacity building, those wanting to get involved, must be empowered in the
first place so that they can get involved. There are quite a few who dread
public speeches or disputes, who cannot understand planning procedures
right away because of their great complexity. We must therefore train and
encourage these citizens. And we heard today that there is already much
underway in rural communities in this respect. This capacity- building
includes besides technical equipment public awareness first of all, of
course. And it also encompasses the conveying of values as a key point.
Those wanting to cooperate must first agree on values. Those intending to
get married should first be clear about values and as much common ground
as possible or else the marriage won't work. This is an age-old
experience.
6th issue: We need engines, locomotives, key players etc.
There are various nice expressions for this. This is also an important
experience for all those engaged in development projects. Plenty of money,
ideas and administrative experts are only of little use. We need people on
the spot acting as engines, never grow weary, go on and on and who are not
aiming at short-term success above all.
Village renewal starts in the mind and must be driven and moved by the
heart. This emotional part of participation is a key factor in our
experience in the European area. We heard a very satisfying solution for
fearful politicians: do not be afraid of participation! Participation
provides satisfaction and ultimately reduces conflicts - even if there are
a few clashes from time to time - ensures identification and attachment to
the native soil we simply cannot do without.
7th keyword: Methodology of planning
The issue "How should our planning unfold - top down or bottom up?
was a key aspect today.
But how could it be otherwise.
Ten years ago the concepts of top down or bottom up were not in everyday
use, but we knew even then what it meant for village renewal, that we
actually need both! We need strong, guiding, steering, enabling
administrations and experts on the one hand. But we also need citizens and
partners on the spot ready to take charge of their own destiny. I believe
that this approach is transferable by all means. Some countries might
attach more importance to the first aspect than others. Depending on the
situation, progress and previous experience, the participatory bottom up
approach already carries more weight.
But let me stress this again: both are necessary. I myself had
some painful experience in Croatia, for example. We have guests from
Croatia among us. We have not been very successful in Croatia so far
because we miss the accompanying firm hand and backing from the
administration. The administration obviously had some difficulty in
accepting the type of direct participation we and the rural communities
opted for and desired. We can gather from this that rural development
always has an impact on politics and on sociopolitics, of course. We
cannot act as in a political vacuum, we must realize this. If we were to
start modern village development in China, the village inhabitants would
grasp very soon that this calls for their involvement. And the old
mechanisms that nobody lifts a finger or tongue unless the mayor has acted
or said something first are all in the past. You are thus very close to
the interface with politics, all our colleagues from development
cooperation know this.... There is nothing better really than believing in
people and their own strengths and development potential.
III
This brings me to our final statement already you all have
available.
We can have some nice discussions about the following: here a comma is
missing, there an important reference, we could do this or that different,
there is a topic missing maybe and, and, and...
We are all aware of this. Anybody knows this who summarizes things in a
synopsis and is then spoilt for choice to find a common denominator. I saw
this only a moment ago: there has been a lot of mumbling in the break as a
response to the workshop reports saying for example, that the workshop
chairman failed to render all facets precisely or did not mention some
important aspects addressed in the working group etc.
I thank you on behalf of BML and also personally for your key proposals
and also for your other responses. There has been isolated criticism, but
also a lot of praise. You can imagine that it is not easy to take
everything into account in so short a time and without jeopardizing the
framework. We tried to include those things we trusted would form a common
platform because it has to be acceptable internationally. Have we
addressed too many problems instead of opportunities? The critic Sixtus
Lanner just gave an answer to this: we responded, also to the issue of
fisheries by the way. This congress and this final statement do not
specifically deal with the problems facing deep-sea fishing.
Some other aspects were mentioned to us, e.g. the aspect of SMEs
(small- and medium-sized enterprises) and, and, and. I would like to note
that there are many, many other individual aspects.
But I checked everything through again especially from the angle of
summarizing and understanding everything on a broader scale. And from that
stance I have no problem, for example, with classifying SMEs under the
economic locational factor. Otherwise I could demand that local supply
must also be specifically mentioned and, and, and. There are so many
individual aspects which were and cannot be the specific concern or
substance of this declaration.
The main concern of this Potsdam Declaration rural 21 is, and this
is our joint concern uniting politics and society, in view of the presence
of a German president and so many international experts, to communicate
that we are advocates of rural areas that we want to fight for rural areas
all over the globe and we are signaling to society where the problems lie
and where the opportunities.
If you would just pick up this final declaration - I won't read it to
you, of course, this would be impossible - then I would just briefly go
through it with you again.
You see that the first part is dedicated to the initial situation. I think
the congress contributions, especially the speeches and workshops made it
plain that the international community is still faced with major problems
and challenges, just think of the speeches by Rau, Diouf, Morales, the
workshops yesterday or just now the speech by Mr. von Braun and that we
are all obliged to master these problems to do something for
sustainability. Food, agriculture, rural development and natural resources
constitute a key part of this problem. There are people in our country, in
Germany who have been wondering for a long time why we still care about
agriculture?
We would have to send them out into the world more. Then they would
realize how important agriculture is. Sixtus Lanner showed us today that
there is another important aspect to agriculture, i.e. the indispensable
"cultural and ecological benefits" for society.
If we carry on reading the declaration we find a common and
incontestable statement formulated to this effect: despite of the
differences in starting conditions " rural areas fulfill equally
vital functions for developing and developed countries".
There are some variations in the priorities set by the respective
countries for this task to be met by agriculture.
Rural21 aims at pointing out objectives, opportunities, ways and
strategies for the sustainable development of rural areas as well as ways
of implementing them.
The second part of the Declaration - what do we want?" deals with
framework conditions being established and secured so that rural areas can
develop as areas with their own identity.
If you think that through you will realize that this has some significant
implications: "with their own identity", whereas our Regional
Planning Act, even our Basic Law state that there should be equal living
conditions everywhere. This is a statement with a lot of depth. This is
what Diouf meant in saying that developing countries must pay more
attention to their rural areas, if only because of food security. I
believe that it has become very clear that the key to such a sustainable
development in rural areas, which will also be viable in future, lies in
developing specific and equal prospects for them, if possible, and not in
being attachments to urban areas or compensatory areas with recreational
and protective functions. In Chile I was told by ministries that they did
not even know the concept of "regional planning policy in rural
areas".
There is only urban regional planning with policies being focused on urban
areas. The Declaration means something else: specific prospects for rural
areas, the development of endogenous potential and an exchange of
experience with other regions.
Add to this what we are constantly being told by UN experts and by all
global players: of course these strategies for development cannot be
"sold" and exported 1:1, and allowances must be made for the
diversity of initial conditions and the respective chances and
constraints.
You experienced it yourselves: the fields of action set out in the
Declaration were basically illustrated to you in the speeches, especially
in the workshops and in the examples given.
1st Field of action; combating poverty, securing food supplies, overcoming
inequality.
Or the 2nd field of action: investing in people, creating more and better
jobs.
If you examine all these aspects, you will see that this conference dealt
with all of them, maybe not in every detail, this was impossible, but they
were touched upon. The same goes for the 3rd issue: guaranteeing access to
productive resources, settling conflicts over land use. I refer to
workshop 1, for example, or the speech held by Mr. Morales.
All issues were raised, even technology was included despite some
complaints to the contrary today.
Fourth point, 4th field of action: conserving natural life support
systems, integrating environmental aspects in all decisions. This is
surely a delicate point. But we cannot issue a declaration where we shirk
these issues and utter vague and meaningless statements. The Congress made
it plain that the environmental issue is a crucial matter of concern all
over the world.
Fifth point: establishing a balanced partnership between urban and rural
areas.
We heard this, too, so many times today, the workshop chairmen, von
Lanner, von Hirsch-Reinshagen called this to mind, it was the subject of
one workshop even.
6th field of action: creating an efficient infrastructure and securing
access to it. May I draw your attention specifically to the issue: easier
access to telecommunications facilities". You could hold a proper
conference just about these new media. Then we would probably go home
after two days and still not know what this really signifies for rural
areas. This is easier said than done. Key prerequisites must be created
beforehand.
7th issue: securing an efficient, multifunctional agriculture and
forestry. No further comment is necessary.
And the 8th issue: ensuring good governance and participation.
This strongly reminds me of the international principle of good
governance. These principles are being observed more and more. And if we
talk and write about transparent and responsible governance, we also
subsume administrations and other institutions under it.
The emerging civil society requires space for involvement and
assumption of responsibility for the shaping of local policies. I find
this very enriching myself to hear that Director-General Diouf regards
this statement as universally valid for the whole world. This was quite
impressive.
Yes, and then the final point in the Declaration: What do we have to do? I
will only go into one point because it came in for criticism today. We
expressly wrote in this concluding chapter that this also encompasses
academic institutions, thus also universities, research and science. It
would have been a bit strange if I had not thought of science as a
participant in this Congress.
The priorities are set out. In my view they represent a nice cross-section
of the need for action and also a signal, a message going outwards. This
message is to go out into the world in the sense of multiplication as the
Federal Agriculture Ministry (BML) is asked, of course: "Why on earth
did you hold this meeting. This must have cost a bit". This is our
German contribution especially in the year of EXPO! The organizer BML was
generous and thus provided a wonderful atmosphere.
Now BML can tell all those inquiring to just look at this declaration
endorsed by all participants.
This is a result you can invoke.
I witnessed how the FIG issued a declaration with the United Nations in
Bathurst - this declaration is on everyone's lips. This is precisely why
our Potsdam Declaration rural21 carries that much weight.
What do we stress: combating poverty and food insecurity, promoting
employment in rural areas and not just merely jobs in agriculture. The
Declaration states emphatically: as well as in other economic areas".
And "ensuring legal access to resources, land use, property. Stepping
up efforts for sustainability.
This is certainly of interest to Federal President Rau that this
declaration fully reflects his appeal.
Or: striking a balance in the economic, social and ecological developments
of rural and urban areas. We expressly avoided confining ourselves to the
rural corner. We also integrated urban areas - masterfully, I believe. The
highest-ranking representative of regional planning and the building
industry in Germany, Professor Krautzberger, was present at our congress
in his capacity as ambassador of urban21. We would lay ourselves open to
criticism if we fail to address urban areas as well. Yet, you could also
demand in reverse: it would not be bad if urban areas would also address
issues relating to rural areas.
Keyword: establishing and maintaining an efficient, ecologically
compatible infrastructure.
This has also been discussed today, the soft locational factors. Mr.
Stolpe even said that these soft factors will eventually become hard
factors, we also require hard infrastructure. It would be absurd to rave
about soft locational factors in Ghana, for example. Then the people would
be justified in asking:"Yes and what are we supposed to live
on?" It is clear that both must be there and we therefore included
the point " establishing and maintaining the infrastructure" in
our set of actions.
Or the observance of a multifunctional role of agriculture and forestry
and its contribution to a sustainable development prospect - agriculture
also in the sense of sustainable action.
And finally, this is also a concrete suggestion from a workshop we took
up, the initiation, monitoring and coordination of local and regional
development processes. As I see it this satisfies all planners present
here because this aspect has been clearly underlined now. And it goes
without saying that the rural population should take centre stage. Yet, we
expressly incorporated the aspect mentioned by Minister Morales again:
respect for ethnic groups and respect for different cultures.
Rural areas require a specific policy for their conservation and
further development.
My request to you is to really support this "final
apotheosis" with all your heart and that we agree in championing this
declaration and sending it out into the world and taking pride in saying,
whether in Zagreb, Santiago or Manila or elsewhere: this is the result we
achieved in Potsdam.
We want a continuation and deepening of the international exchange of
views and experience.
Mr. Kroll-Schlüter already suggested a resumption at a different place.
This is our final apotheosis.
Allow me a brief concluding remark, Ladies and Gentlemen:
"combine the pleasant with the useful" I mentioned this earlier
as the philosophy of 200 years of land embellishment here in Potsdam. For
aesthetic and cultural reasons a landscape is currently being restored
here in the city of Potsdam with the help of rural development. This
re-establishment is seen as an economic contribution to sustainable urban
development. Just let this melt in your mouth. I believe that this is a
wonderful bridging between town and country, between urban and rural
development, also in the spirit of the opening address by Director-General
Diouf.
Is the bridging between town and country a new insight? If we just
return to land embellishment again whose sustainable attributes we still
admire today in Potsdam. A spearhead of land embellishment from Bavaria,
Gustav Vorherr, said in 1807:"farmers and urban dwellers may gain the
deep insight and understanding that they cannot exist without each
other." Town and country depend on each other! I believe that this is
a wonderful message of our international congress rural21, also as a
bridging to the international congress urban21 in three weeks that we as
champions of urban areas know and signalize that we need vibrant cities,
but that the cities also should know that they have no future without
vibrant rural areas.
I should like to wind up by expressing my warmest thanks again to my
efficient team from the university and especially to Mr. Rupert Linder.
Special thanks also go to you, Professor Schlagheck, as the BML
representative for allowing us to organize and have a share in shaping
this excellent congress. I would also like to thank the BML team, Mr. Lenk
and Mr. Schulz, for your support and cooperation.
Contact
Univ. Prof. Dr-Ing. Holger Magel
Vice President of FIG
Chair of Land Readjustment and Land Development
Technische Universität München
Institute of Geodesy, GIS and Land Management
Arcisstrasse 21
D-80290 München
GERMANY
Tel. + 49 89 289 22535
Fax + 49 89 289 23933
E-mail: magel@landentwicklung-muenchen.de
|
