Book of Proceedings II 2020 Proceedings II.pdf · 2020. 10. 6. · GEA (Geo Eco-Eco Agro) International Conference, 28-31 May 2020, Montenegro - Book of Proceedings II 5 Devraj Chalise,

GEA (Geo Eco-Eco Agro) International Conference, 28-31 May 2020, Montenegro - Book of Proceedings II

2

GEA (Geo Eco-Eco Agro) International Conference - Book of Proceedings

28-31 May 2020, Podgorica, Montenegro

BOOK OF PROCEEDINGS II GEA (Geo Eco-Eco Agro), Podgorica, Montenegro

University of Montenegro, Faculty of Philosophy, Geography, Niksic, Montenegro

University of Montenegro, Faculty of Architecture, Podgorica, Montenegro

University of Montenegro, Biotechnical Faculty, Podgorica, Bar, Bijelo Polje, Montenegro

And

The World Association of Soil and Water Conservation (WASWAC)

Balkan Environmental Association (B.EN.A.)

Balkan Scientific Association of Agricultural Economists (BSAAE)

Universidade Federal de Alfenas, ICN, Alfenas, Brazil; Università Politecnica delle Marche Home, Ancona, Italy; Faculty of sciences and technology, University of Sultan Moulay Slimane, Beni Mellal, Morocco; Lebanese University, Faculty of Agriculture, Lebanon; Yozgat Bozok University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, Turkey; Université de Montpellier, Institut des Sciences de l’Évolution Montpellier, France; Faculty of Civil and Water Resource Engineering, Bahir Dar Institute of Technology, Bahir Dar University: Bahir Dar, Ethiopia; Faculty of Horticulture, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Romania; University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Sofia, Bulgaria; Environment Research Institute, Agriculture Research Centre, MinAgri, Giza, Egypt; Gaziosmanpsa University, Agriculture Faculty, Department of Soil Science, Tokat, Turkey; University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Nugegoda, Colombo, Sri Lanka; Faculty of Constructions, Geodesy and Cadastre, Technical University of Moldova, Moldova; The Department of Physics and Earth Science of the University of Ferrara, Italy; Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Serbia; University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Zagreb, Croatia; Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia; Institute for Adriatic Crops and Karst Reclamation, Split, Croatia; Faculty of Agriculture, University of Novi Sad, Serbia; University of Osijek, Faculty of Agriculture, Osijek, Croatia; Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, North Macedonia; Agromediterranean Faculty, University Dzemal Bijedic of Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina; Comenius University in Bratislava, Faculty of Management, Bratislava, Slovakia; Institute of Field and Vegetable Crops, Novi Sad, Serbia; Faculty of Agriculture, University of East Sarajevo, Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina; Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, University of Banja Luka, Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina; University Business Academy, Novi Sad, Serbia; University Singidunum, Belgrade, Serbia; National parks of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro; Faculty of Economics in Subotica, University of Novi Sad, Serbia; Plant Breeding Research Centre, University of Trakya, Turkey; University Union, Faculty of Law, Belgrade, Serbia; International Technology & Management Academy; Engineering Academy of Serbia, Serbia; Institute of Hydrometeorology and Seismology, Podgorica, Montenegro; Faculty of Plant Production, Biotechnology and Ecology, University of Life and environmental Science of Ukraine, Ukraine.

Editor in Chief: Velibor Spalevic Publisher: GEA (Geo Eko-Eko Agro),

Faculty of Architecture - University of Montenegro, Faculty of Philosophy - University of

Montenegro, Biotecnical faculty - University of Montenegro

Printing house: Artgrafika, Circulation: 250

Website: www.gea.ucg.ac.me Photo front page: Zoran Ribo Raicevic

CIP - Kaталогизација у публикацији

Национална библиотека Црне Горе, Цетиње

ISBN 978-86-86625-30-4 Faulty of Architecture

ISBN 978-86-7015-073-7 Biotecnical faculty

ISBN 978-86-7798-119-8 Faculty of Philosophy

COBISS.CG-ID 14689796 (electronic)


3

Honorary Committee Prof. dr Danilo Nikolic, Rector, University of Montenegro

President of the Honorary Committee, Montenegro

Prof. dr Dusko Bjelica, President of the Governing Board, University of Montenegro

Co-President of the Honorary Committee, Montenegro Prof. dr Paolo Billi, International Platform for Dryland Research and Education, University of Tottori,

Japan

Prof. Miodrag D. Zlatic, Dr. Sc. Immediate Past President and Deputy President of World Association of

Soil and Water Conservation - WASWAC

CSI Dr. Mariana Golumbeanu, Vice President of the Balkan Environmental Association (B.EN.A.)

Editorial Board member of the Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology, Romania / Greece

Acad. Prof. em. dr Gordan S. Karaman, Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts, Podgorica,

Montenegro

Academician Prof. dr Slobodan Markovic, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Novi Sad, Serbia

Academician Prof. dr Novo Przulj, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Banjaluka, Republic of Srpska,

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Prof. Dr Sezai Ercisli, Vice Rector of Ataturk University; Chairman of the Workgroup Apricot Breeding and

Culture of the International Society for Horticultural Science, Turkey; Editor in chief Turkish Journal of

Agriculture and Forestry, Turkey

Prof. dr Emil Erjavec, dean of the Biotechnical Faculty of the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia

Prof. dr Marijana Dukic Mijatovic, Vice President of the National Council for Higher Education of Serbia

Prof. dr Drago Cvijanovic, Dean of the, Faculty of Hotel Management & Tourism, Vrnjačka Banja, Univ. of

Kragujevac, Serbia

Prof. Marko Caric, Ph.D., Rector, University Business Academy, Novi Sad, Serbia

Prof. dr. Paolo Ciavola, Coastal Dyn. & Geohazards, Dep. of Physics and Earth Sciences, University of

Ferrara, Italy

Prof. dr. S.H.R. Sadeghi, Watershed Management Society of Iran, Iran

Dr. Sc. Hasan Parsipour, Scientific Member of Kowsar University, North Khorasan Province, Iran

Prof. dr. Marx Leandro Naves Silva, Department of Soil Science, Federal University of Lavras, Brazil

Prof. dr. h.c. Radu E. Sestras, Faculty of Horticulture, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary

Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Prof. dr. Francisco Fuentes, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Chile

Prof dr Muhamed Brka, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Science, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and

Herzegovina

Prof. dr. Ahmed Boukdir, Faculty of sciences and technology, University of Sultan Moulay Slimane , Beni

Mellal, Morocco

Prof. dr Milan Medarevic, University of Belgrade, Faculty of Forestry, Serbia

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tugrul Yakupoglu, Yozgat Bozok University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Soil

Science and Plant Nutrition, Turkey

Prof. dr Radovan V. Pejanovic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Novi Sad, Serbia

Prof dr Hamid Custovic, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Science, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Prof dr Bogdan Kuzmanovic, Institute of Field and Vegetable Crops, Novi Sad, Serbia

Prof. dr Ivan Simunic, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Amelioration, Zagreb, Croatia

Prof. dr. sc. Mirjana Herak Custic, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Zagreb, Croatia

Prof. dr Ordan Chukaliev, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University

in Skopje, North Macedonia

Prof. dr Dusan Zivkovic, Dean of the Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Zemun, Serbia

Prof. Dr Dragi Dimitrievski, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University


Acad. Svetimir Dragovic, Engineering Academy of Serbia, Serbia

Emeritus Prof. dr Branka Lazic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Novi Sad, Serbia

Prof. dr. Ljubomir Pejovic, Podgorica, Montenegro

Prof. dr. Stanka Filipovic, Podgorica, Montenegro

Prof. dr. Budimir Fustic, Podgorica, Montenegro


4

Scientific Committee

Velibor Spalevic, President of the Scientific Committee University of Montenegro, Faculty of Philosophy, Geography, Montenegro

Goran Barovic, Co-president, Dean of the Faculty of Philosophy, Geography, University of

Montenegro, Montenegro

Environment protection and natural resources management

Svetislav G. Popovic, Co-president, Dean of the Faculty of Architecture

University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Rural environments and architecture

Goran Skataric, Co-president, National parks of Montenegro

Podgorica, Montenegro

Rural development

Bozidarka Markovic, Co-president, Dean of the Biotechnical Faculty


Animal Husbandry

Zoran Jovovic, Co-president, Biotechnical Faculty,


Plant production

Milic Curovic, Co-president, Editor in Chief, Journal Agriculture and Forestry,

Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Forestry

Snjezana Hrncic, Co-president, Biotechnical Faculty


In charge of the general agriculture topics

Paolo Billi, International Platform for Dryland Research and Education, University of Tottori, Japan

Amrakh Mamedov, International Platform for Dryland Research and Education, University of

Tottori, Japan

Duihu Ning, Deputy Director, International Research and Training Center on Erosion and

Sedimentation (IRTCES), President, World Association of Soil and Water Conservation (WASWAC),

Beijing, China.

Mariana Golumbeanu, National Institute for Marine Research and Development Grigore Antipa,

Constanţa, Romania

Carolina Constantin, University Politehnica of Bucharest, Romania

Zacharoula Andreopoulou, Aristotel University of Thessaloniki, Greece

Maria Popa, 1 December 1918, University of Alba Iulia, Romania

Vladimir Ciric, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Novi Sad, Serbia

Sezai Ercisli, Ataturk University; Editor in chief Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, Turkey

Tihomir Florijancic, University of Osijek, Faculty of Agriculture, Croatia

Francisco Fuentes, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Chile

Vera Popovic, Institute of Field and Vegetable Crops, Novi Sad, Serbia

Vesna Gantner, University of Osijek, Faculty of Agriculture, Osijek, Croatia

Abdulvahed Khaledi Darvishan, Department of Watershed Management Engineering, Fac. Natural

Resources, Tarbiat Modares, Iran

Leila Gholami, Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University, Sari, Iran

Hasan Parsipour, Scientific Member of Kowsar University, North Khorasan Province, Iran

Morteza Behzadfar, Planning and Management Organization of North Khorasan, Iran

Peter Dovc, Biotechnical Faculty of the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia


5

Devraj Chalise, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Australia

Paolo Ciavola, Coastal Dyn. & Geohazards, Dep. of Physics and Earth Sciences, University of Ferrara,

Italy

Clara Armaroli, Scuola Universitaria Superiore IUSS Pavia, Pavia 27100, Italy

Attia Ahmed Mansour El-Gayar, Soil, Water & Environment Research Institute, Agriculture

Research Centre, MinAgri, Giza, Egypt

Rocky Talchabhadel, Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University, Japan

Walter Finsinger, Université de Montpellier, Institut des Sciences de l’Évolution Montpellier, France

Vladan Bogdanovic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Zemun, Serbia

Luka Juvancic, Biotechnical Faculty of the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia

Carlo Urbinati, Università Politecnica delle Marche Home, Forest Ecosystems Unit, Ancona, Italy

Youssef Najib Sassine, Lebanese University, Faculty of Agriculture, Lebanon

Livia Nistor-Lopatenco, Faculty of Constructions, Geodesy and Cadastre, Technical University of

Moldova, Moldova

Vjekoslav Tanaskovik, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius

University in Skopje, North Macedonia

Ljiljana Keca, University of Belgrade, Faculty of Forestry, Serbia

Sabri El Mouatassime, Faculty of sciences and technology, University of Sultan Moulay Slimane,

Beni Mellal, Morocco

Abdessalam Ouallali, Abdelmalek Essaadi University. Faculty of Science. Tetouan. Morocco

Marx Leandro Naves Silva, Department of Soil Science, Federal University of Lavras, Brazil

Matija Klopcic, Biotechnical Faculty of the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia

Ronaldo Luiz Mincato, Universidade Federal de Alfenas, ICN, Alfenas, Brazil

Paul Sestras, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Department of Land

Measurements and Cadastre, Romania

Dragan Radanovic, European Commission, Brussels, EU

Marko Caric, Rector, University Business Academy, Novi Sad, Serbia

Tatjana Kosmerl, Biotechnical Faculty of the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia

Darko Vončina, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Croatia

Vanja Jurišić, Department of Agricultural Technology, Storage and Transport, University of Zagreb

Faculty of Agriculture, Croatia

Petra Pereković, Department of Ornamental Plants, Landscape Architecture and Garden Art,

University of Zagreb Faculty of Agriculture, Croatia

Zvonimir Prpić, Department of Animal Science and Technology, University of Zagreb Faculty of

Agriculture, Croatia

Darko Preiner, Department of Viticulture and Enology, University of Zagreb Faculty of Agriculture,

Croatia

Marijana Dukic Mijatovic, Faculty of Economics in Subotica, University of Novi Sad, Serbia

Branislav Dudic, Comenius University in Bratislava, Faculty of Management, Bratislava, Slovakia

Matija Zorn, Department of Physical Geography, Anton Melik Geographical Institute, Research

Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Slovenia

Ivan Simunic, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Amelioration, Zagreb, Croatia

Hana Fajkovic, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Science, Department of Geology, Croatia

Gokcen Yakupoglu, Yozgat Bozok University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Horticulture,

Turkey

Gulden Balci, Yozgat Bozok University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Horticulture, Turkey

Otilija Miseckaite, Water Resources Engineering Institute, Aleksandras Stulginskis University,

Lithuania

Sandun Senarath, Department of Botany, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Nugegoda, Colombo,

Sri Lanka

Noureddin Driouech, International Centre for Advanced Mediterranean Agronomic Studies

(CIHEAM Bari), Italy


6

Hamid El Bilali, International Centre for Advanced Mediterranean Agronomic Studies (CIHEAM-

Bari), Bari, Italy

Patrick Ken Kalonde, Youth for Environmental Development, Area 22 B, Lilongwe, Malawi Drago Perko, Anton Melik Geographical Institute, Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of

Sciences and Arts, Slovenia

Saniye Demir, Gaziosmanpsa University, Agriculture Faculty, Department of Soil Science, Turkey

Dragica Mijanovic, Faculty of Faculty of Philosophy, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Miroslav Doderovic, Faculty of Faculty of Philosophy, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Milan Markovic, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Biljana Lazovic, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Radmila Pajovic Sceanovic, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Mirjana Bojanic Rasovic, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Djina Bozovic, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Aleksandar Odalovic, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Aleksandar Grubor, Faculty of Economy in Subotica, University of Novi Sad, Serbia

Snezana Grbovic, University of Montenegro, Faculty of Philosophy, Geography, Montenegro

Dusko Vujacic, Faculty of Philosophy, Geography, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Alenka Fikfak, University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Architecture, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Myriel Milicevic, Design department, University of Applied Sciences Potsdam, Fachhochschule

Potsdam, Germany

Ahmed Boukdir, Faculty of sciences and technology, University of Sultan Moulay Slimane, Morocco

Sead Sabanadzovic, Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Entomology and Plant

Pathology, Mississippi State University, USA

Milena Moteva, Univ. ACG, Geodesy, Dep. of Land Management & Agric. Dev., Sofia, Bulgaria

Yalcin Kaya, the Director of the Plant Breeding Research Center, University of Trakya, Turkey

Mile Markoski, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in

Skopje, North Macedonia

Zeljko Dolijanovic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Koco Porchu, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in


Mirjana Jankulovska, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University


Marjan Kiprijanovski, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University


Marina Nacka, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in


Silvana Manasievska Simikj, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius


Dejana Stanic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Branislav Draskovic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Mirjana Jovovic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Aleksandra Govedarica Lucic, Faculty of Agriculture, Univ. East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Marko Gutalj, Faculty of Agriculture, University of East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Branislav Vlahovic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Novi Sad, Serbia

Otilija Sedlak, Faculty of Economics of the University of Novi Sad, Serbia

Ahmed Dzubur, Agromediterranean Faculty, Univ. Dz. Bijedic of Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Marija Kostic, Faculty of Hotel Management & Tourism, Vrnjačka Banja, Univ. of Kragujevac, Serbia

Aleksandar Valjarevic, University in Pristina, Kosovska Mitrovica, Faculty of Sciences, Department

of Geography, Kosovska Mitrovica, Serbia

Romina Kabranova, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in


Shkelqim Karaj, Univ. Hohenheim, Agricultural Engineering in Tropics and Subtropics, Germany


7

Ataollah Kavian, Sari Agricultural Science and Natural Resources University, Iran

Nevenka Djurovic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Bosko Gajic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Ruzica Stricevic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Milos Pajic, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Naser Sabaghnia, University of Maragheh, Iran

Mirjana Sladic, Dep of Architecture&Urbanism, Fac. of Technical Sc, University of Novi Sad, Serbia

Zeinab Hazbavi, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Member of Water Management

Research Center, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Iran

Andreja Mihailovic, University Union, Faculty of Law, Belgrade, Serbia

Darko Brajuskovic, Institute of Hidrometeorology and Seismology, Podgorica, Montenegro

Vojislav Mihailovic, Institute of field and vegetable crops, Novi Sad, Serbia

Ana Marjanovic Jeromela, Institute of Field and Vegetable Crops, Novi Sad, Serbia

Mladen Perazic, Mediteran University, Podgorica, Montenegro

Igor Zekanovic, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, University of Banja Luka, Republic of

Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Biljana Kuzmanovska, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius


Sonja Srbinovska, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in


Oksana Kliachenko, Faculty of Plant Production, Biotechnology and Ecology, University of Life and

environmental Science of Ukraine, Ukraine

Melisa Ljusa, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Science, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and

Herzegovina

Jasminka Zurovec, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Science, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and

Herzegovina

Enisa Omanovic-Miklicanin, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Science, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia

and Herzegovina

Sabrija Cadro, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Science, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and

Herzegovina

Salwa Cherni-Cadro, Hydro-Engineering Institute Sarajevo (HEIS), Bosnia and Herzegovina

Sanja Mikic, Institute of Field and Vegetable Crops, Novi Sad, Serbia

Ilija Djordjevic, Institute of Forestry, Belgrade, Serbia

Svetlana Stanisic, University Singidunum, Belgrade, Serbia

Maja Ignjatov, Institute of Field and Vegetable Crops, Novi Sad, Serbia

Gordana Radovic, Dnevnik-Poljoprivrednik AD, Novi Sad, Serbia

Jelena Jesic, EDUCONS University, School of Economics, Sremska Kamenica, Serbia

Vera Rajicic, University of Nis, Faculty of Agriculture, Krusevac, Serbia

Ksenija Mackic, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Agriculture, Novi Sad, Serbia

Dzenan Becirovic, University of Sarajevo, Faculty of Forestry, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Marko Kostic, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Agriculture, Novi Sad, Serbia

Gordana Tamindzic, Institute of Field and Vegetable Crops, Novi Sad, Serbia

Mesenbet Sebhat, Faculty of Civil and Water Resource Engineering, Bahir Dar Institute of

Technology, Bahir Dar University: Bahir Dar, Ethiopia

Md Shibly Sadik, Center for Environment and Geographic Information Services (CEGIS), a public

trust under Ministry of Water Resources, Bangladesh

Venkat Raman, Kamaraj College of Engineering and Technology, Madurai, India


8

Organizing Committee

Sanja Radonjic, President of the Organizing Committee,

Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro, Montenegro

Velibor Spalevic, Co-president of the Organizing Committee,

University of Montenegro, Faculty of Philosophy, Geography, Montenegro

Goran Barovic, Co-president of the Organizing Committee

Dean of the Faculty of Philosophy, Geography, University of Montenegro

Goran Skataric, Co-president of the Organizing Committee

National parks, Podgorica, Montenegro

Vera Popovic, Co-president of the Organizing Committee,

Institute of Field and Vegetable Crops, Novi Sad, Serbia

Svetislav G. Popovic, Co-president of the Organizing Committee

Dean of the Faculty of Architecture, University of Montenegro

Mariana Golumbeanu, Vice President of the Balkan Environmental Association (B.EN.A.),

Editorial Board member of the Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology, Romania /

Greece; Vjekoslav Tanaskovik, Dean of the Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Ss. Cyril

and Methodius University in Skopje, North Macedonia; Emil Erjavec, Dean of the Biotechnical

Faculty of the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia; Zoran Grgić, Dean of the University of Zagreb

Faculty of Agriculture, Croatia; Marijana Dukic Mijatovic, Vice President of the National

Council for Higher Education, Serbia; Francisco Fuentes, Editor in Chief of the International

Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Chile; Milic Curovic, Editor in Chief, the journal

Agriculture and Forestry, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro, Montenegro; Luka

Mitrovic, Director, Institute of Hidrometeorology and Seismology, Podgorica, Montenegro;

Danijela Bubanja, Institute of Hidrometeorology and Seismology, Podgorica, Montenegro;

Otilija Miseckaite, Water Resources Engineering Institute, Aleksandras Stulginskis University,

Lithuania; Livia Nistor-Lopatenco, Dean of the Faculty of Constructions, Geodesy and Cadastre,

Technical University of Moldova, Moldova; Sabrija Cadro, Faculty of Agriculture and Food

Science, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina; Vera Popovic, The Institute of field and

vegetable crops, Novi Sad, Serbia; Zeljko Kalezic, University of Montenegro, Faculty of

Architecture, Montenegro; Ahmed Dzubur, Dean of the Agromediterranean Faculty, University

Dzemal Bijedic of Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina; Elvir Klica, National Parks of Montenegro,

Podgorica, Montenegro; Enisa Omanovic-Miklicanin, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Science,

University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina; Larisa Prysiazhniuk, Head of Department,

Ukrainian Institute for Plant Variety Examination, Kiev, Ukraine; Dusan Zivkovic, Dean of the

Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Zemun, Serbia; Radovan Pejanovic, President of

the Balkan Scientific Association of Agricultural Economists, Serbia; Dejana Stanic, Dean of the

Faculty of Agriculture, University of East Sarajevo, Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina;

Goran Trbic, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, University of Banja Luka, Republic

of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina; Aleksandar Grubor, Dean of the Faculty of Economics in

Subotica, University of Novi Sad, Serbia; Miljan Lekovic, Faculty of Hotel Management &

Tourism, Vrnjačka Banja, Univ. of Kragujevac, Serbia; Jelena Zindovic, Biotechnical Faculty,

University of Montenegro, Montenegro; Jelena Lazarevic, Biotechnical Faculty, University of

Montenegro, Montenegro; Tatjana Perovic, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro,

Montenegro; Rocky Talchabhadel, Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University,

Japan; Zeljko Vidakovic, Director, Ekoplant, Podgorica, Montenegro


9

Foreword International GEA (Geo Eco-Eco Agro) Conference is envisaged as an event during

which researchers from the areas of Geosciences, Ecology-Economy and Agriculture,

as well as from areas of Eco-Architecture and Rural Architecture, but also Forestry,

are presenting their work to each other. The Conference aims to be a meeting point

for international scientific discussion on various subjects of these sciences. The team

of the International GEA (Geo Eco-Eco Agro) Conference is striving to bring together

research and practices. The main goal is establishing of new bridges between

researchers from the Region and wider; to meet each other and to stay connected.

At the end of May 2020 we presented the research results among colleagues on

formal sessions and in informal communication on the adaptation and resilience to

the impacts of climate change and on bringing closer natural resource management

with agriculture, forestry, economics and ecology.

The young researchers used this event to learn and to create networks and to

participate in discussions. We also offered them a possibility to present their student

papers in the special session for promising young researchers.

These international conferences to some extent promoted the participants to be a

known name in academic circles of our Region, confirming at the same time that

they are active members of the academic community. This was a chance of listening

to different points of view and learning new ideas and trends in selected field in a

different environment.

All submitted Abstracts and Full papers presented in the Book of Proceedings (I and

II, with CIP, ISBN, COBISS.CG-ID) are peer-reviewed. Both books are available

online at the Conference web page: www.gea.ucg.ac.me.

Furthermore, selected Full papers are published at the several international journals:

such as Sustainability, Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca,

International Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Agriculture and

Forestry<

We hope that most of us, who participated at the GEA International (Geo Eco-Eco

Agro) Conference, 28-31 May 2020, Montenegro, will come the next years to take the

part at the GEA International (Geo Eco-Eco Agro) Conference again, here in

Montenegro.

Velibor SPALEVIC

President of the Scientific Committee

Faculty of Philosophy, Geography

University of Montenegro


10

Predgovor Međunarodna GEA (Geo Eco-Eco Agro) konferencija je događaj na kom su

istraživači iz oblasti geonauka, ekologije, ekonomije i poljoprivrede, kao i područja

eko-arhitekture i ruralne arhitekture, predstavljali rezultate svojih istraživanja. Cilj

konferencije je bio da bude mjesto susreta jednog broja naučnika iz gotovo cijelog

svijeta koji su razmjenjivali iskustva, mišljenja i ideje o temama koje su bile predmet

rada konferencije. Tim Međunarodne GEA (Geo Eco-Eco Agro) konferencije nastojao

je objedniti istraživanja i prakse. Ideja je bila uspostavljanje novih mostova između

istraživača iz regiona i šire; da se upoznaju i ostanu dalje povezani.

Na kraju maja 2020. godine predstavili smo neke od rezultata istraživanja među

kolegama na formalnim sastancima i u neformalnoj komunikaciji, ali i baveći se

aktuealnim pitanjima prilagođavanja i otpornosti na uticaje klimatskih promjena i

približavanju upravljanja prirodnim resursima sa poljoprivredom, šumarstvom,

ekonomijom i ekologijom.

Mladi istraživači regije imali su mogućnost sticanja novih znanja, iskustva,

umrežavanja i učešća u diskusijama. Pružili smo im mogućnost prezentacije svojih

studentskih radova na posebnoj sesiji za mlade istraživače.

Ova međunarodna konferencija učinila je sve učesnike poznatijim imenom u

akademskim krugovima naše regije, potvrdivši istovremeno da su sami aktivni

članovi akademske zajednice. Pružena je prilika za upoznavanje sa različitim

gledištima i stavovima, kao i za upoznavanje sa novim idejama i praćnje aktuelnih

trendova u jednom drugačijem okruženju od onoga koje imamo svakodnevno.

Svi predani sažeci i radovi predstavljeni u Zbornicima (I i II, sa CIP, ISBN,

COBISS.CG-ID), recenzirani su. Obje su knjige dostupne putem Interneta na web

stranici konferencije: www.gea.ucg.ac.me. Nadalje, izabrani radovi objavljeni su u

nekoliko međunarodnih časopisa: Sustainability, Notulae Botanicae Horti

Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca, International Journal of Agriculture and Natural

Resources Agriculture and Forestry<

Nadamo se da će većina nas, koji smo učestvovali u pripremi, te izložili radove na

međunarodnoj GEA (Geo Eko-Eko Agro) konferenciji, 28. i 29. maja 2020. godine,

doći i narednih godina; učestvovati na nekoj novoj GEA (Geo Eko-Eko Agro)

međunarodnoj konferenciji, ponovo s kraja maja ovdje u Crnoj Gori.

Velibor SPALEVIC

Predsjednik Naučnog odbora Konferencije

Filozofski fakultet, Geografija

Univerzitet Crne Gore


11

Content

URBAN AND PHYSICAL PLANNING -

A Tool for Preserving and Creating Places

- Key Note Paper -

Nenad LIPOVAC, Renata ROŽEK ................................................................................................ 015

ANALYSIS OF LAND SURFACE TEMPERATURE AT SARAJEVO CANTON USING

LANDSAT 8 DATA

Branislav DRAŠKOVIĆ, Boban MILETIĆ and Marko GUTALJ ............................................... 024

GREEN ECONOMY IN THE FUNCTION OF CREATING GREEN JOBS

Jasmina MADŽGALJ, Vladan IVANOVIĆ,

Miodrag BRZAKOVIĆ and Pavle BRZAKOVIĆ ......................................................................... 036

IMPACT OF IRRIGATION FOR SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRODUCTION ON CLIMATE

CHANGE

Svetimir DRAGOVIC, Goran SKATARIC,

Vjekoslav TANASKOVIK, MILE MARKOSKI ............................................................................ 047


12


13

GEA (Geo Eco-Eco Agro)

International Conference 28-31 May 2020, Montenegro

Book of Proceedings


14


15

Article

URBAN AND PHYSICAL PLANNING -

A Tool for Preserving and Creating Places Nenad LIPOVAC1, Renata ROŽEK2

1 Tenure track Professor at the Department of Physical and Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture,

University of Zagreb Faculty of Architecture, Zagreb, CROATIA. 2 Ph.D. candidate at the University of Zagreb Faculty of Architecture; Counsellor for Spatial Planning and

Environment Protection along with the implementation of Physical Planning documents, City of Sveta

Nedelja, CROATIA.

* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +385 91 389 3794

Abstract: Effective physical and/or urban planning results from common sense and orderly approach

to finding out the community needs, setting goals and development priorities, taking actions to give

some special meaning to space (land) occupied by the existing urban areas or the land planned for

their spreading. Through that planning process, a planer has to comprehend what needs to be done

now and what later, but all these decisions should be made concerning the preservation of Place

Identity. To perform the appropriate planning methodology, the planer must understand the

meaning of the meaning - Identity of Place, Place. Being able to distinguish Space from Place and

understanding the attributes that help in distinguishing one Place from another, a planer will be able

to prepare a "sustainable" plan. Only through this kind of a planning process approach will help in

recognizing the local and regional values and need for changes, as well as the impact of proposed

changes on the appearance, social life, and the economy of the Place. Physical and urban planning

should be a process of finding out the needs, possibilities, and limits along with the proposal for the

future development of a particular region, town, or any settlement, as it will reshape the physical

appearance of the Place, but its curtilage, too. That is why a Study of natural and cultural identity

elements are needed, a Study that would emphasize the real and necessary guidelines for preserving

the existing values of the Place, but at the same enabling the economic progress and growth of the

Place, for the benefits of the Place residents. As a result of understanding the meaning of the term

Place, what attributes create the Place and Identity of Place, and the meanings of other related terms

is a must to perform the planning process.

Keywords: Identity of Place, Place curtilage, Place Attributes, Urban and Physical Planning.

Introduction

Observing today's professional practice in physical and urban planning, it is notable that not

many planners take the importance of Place into account when preparing plans. As a result

of that, we have omnipresent total ignorance of the significance of Place. This kind of

planning process, mostly forced by the demand for economic growth, cheap land, and

promising investment that would return the invested money "faster-than-ever,"

undoubtedly leads to a phenomenon that is described by a term – placelessness.1

The meaning of that term can be defined as a creation of standardized landscapes

and parts of the built environment (structures) that unavoidably results in neglecting the

values and significance of a particular Place and its surrounding. This kind of a "planning"

approach can be found almost everywhere around the World, described as the

homogenization in culture, economy, and way of life. Economic growth does not have to be

the only reason for the placelessness of Places. The natural disasters and post-war

1 Lipovac, N. 2000:2


16

reconstruction of destroyed settlements can serve as an example. The State usually finance

the reconstruction by offering unified projects for family houses that are built throughout

the state or a region, regardless of any existing natural or traditional attributes of the entire

environment. Most of today's plans, or their parts, consider the preservation of the Place's

natural and cultural heritage in a very declarative way. The result of that, unfortunately,

leads to the wasting of Space, following only the present needs, ignoring the real growth and

development needs of the Place or region. The "growth" can make some Places very static,

even though cities, towns, and villages are living, changeable forms that require proper

planning processes to guide them through Time.

Philosophers, sociologists, and geographers have tried unsuccessfully to reach a

universal description for a simple concept of Place. A search for the Identity of Place and

Identity with Place has become more intensive in the second half of the 20th century. One

would say that people became more aware of the Importance of Place and the processes of

maintaining the Identity of Place as much as possible. The knowledge necessary to organize

the experience of the surrounding world is mainly based on very explicit functions of the

places. Sociologists examine the importance of Place through the terms: Concept of Place and

Nature of Place Experience. Unfortunately, architects and planners in their process of "Place

creation" very often neglect the Place Experience as an essential element of the planning

process.

A Place concept is essential in geography. An excellent discussion about this subject

can be found in an article by Fred Lukerman, in which he had revealed the most significant

attributes of the Concept of Place:

a) the Idea of a location - the location as it relates to other things and places,

b) Place - an integration of elements from the natural and cultural environment that

undoubtedly implies that every Place is unique,

c) although the Places are unique, they are interconnected by a system of spatial interactions

and transfers,

d) Places are part of larger areas and represent focuses in a system of localization,

e) Places are emerging, becoming, and changing: with historical and cultural change new

elements are added, while some old disappear,

f) Places have meanings: they are characterized by the beliefs of individuals.2

The definition of Place is a complex integration of natural and cultural attributes

manifested in physical terms that have been developed and still are in particular locations.

Places are linked by flows of people and goods. A Place is not just the answer to where?

within something; it is a location, plus everything that surrounds that Place in time and

space as an integrated phenomenon. In geographical terms, space is not uniform and

homogeneous; it has its own name, sense, and experience. It can be experienced as

something substantial, comforting, or even menacing. It consists of soil and rock, water and

air, natural and built entities, expressing the nature complexity and human intentions. The

Place has very often been identified as the essential feature of the phenomenological basis of

geography. The place has to be recognized and considered as a phenomenon of direct

experience. It has to be concerned with the entire range of experiences that help planers in

knowing and making places.

2 Lukerman, E.F. 1964:169


17

For the human mind, the Place is everywhere, anywhere a person was, is, or even

dreams of being. A Place is the center of any physical or intellectual activity or even

intention. That is where we have experienced the meaning and events of our existence.

Because of our mobility and imagination, Place includes all the spaces that our minds can

reach. A Place can occur at any level of identity - subjective (mine or yours, ours or theirs) or

objective (here, there, inside the house, by the street, within a town, country, or a continent).

The aspects of the lived-in-world that someone can distinguish as places are differentiated

because they all involve a great deal of concentration of our intentions. In our living-in-the-

world, a Place cannot be experienced independently, clearly, as a defined entity, an entity

that could be described in terms of location and appearance. The Place has to be understood

in the context of other places, other features, and appearances, other settings, and

surroundings occupied by other living beings. All that, forms and creates a different Identity

of Place and Identity with Place. These two overlap one another, forming different identities

and different places, creating the opportunity for a variety of their interpretations.

If a planner wishes to observe the Place as a multifaceted phenomenon of experience

and try to examine various properties, he or she has to deal with the following essential

attributes of the Essence of Place: location, landscape, time, and personal involvement.

LOCATION

The first step in defining a Place is to describe its location. However, location alone is not

sufficient to identify the entire Place, its meaning, and experience. Its location can be

changed and, therefore, not influence the Sense or Experience of a particular Place. Location

cannot be understood adequately without dealing with one more physical factor that plays

an essential role in the creation of a Spirit of Place. It is called the Place Boundary. The

boundary represents a delineation of a particular Place from its curtilage. It maintains the

closing-in effect of physical features that help us in creating a unique Spirit of Place.

Boundaries can vary according to the size of the observed Place. They can be walls and

fences, buildings, streets and alleys, rivers, hills, or even mountains. The most important

requirement for generating a Spirit of Place identification is that the boundaries are clear.

Spirit of Place can be created by a single element: high entrance gate and visible name or

family coat of arms. Boundaries serve as a distinction between the "inside" and "outside"

space. They can be visible and invisible or symbolic. Boundaries help residents and visitors

make a clear distinction between the inside and the outside of Place. From the planners'

point of view, there are three different boundaries, and for the purpose of the planning

process, they can be named: the first, the second, and the third one.

The first boundary is a physical or administrative one. Within the architectural space,

it is the actual "frame" of the room floor: walls and ceiling; in urban planning space, it is an

administrative border of any political and spatial unit.

The second boundary includes everything that is just on the other side of the first

boundary. In architectural space, it can be understood as the walls of the room or the

foundation, roof, and facade curtain. In planning space, it is a Place curtilage!

The third boundary is hard to define precisely. It is very changeable. It is everything

outside the Place that we can see while moving through Place within the first boundary. It can

be several hundred feet far away from the observer, but it can also be several kilometers


18

away. This boundary, in landscape architecture, is also known as a term borrowed

landscape.3[3].

LANDSCAPE

No one can deny the connection between Place and the surrounding landscape. The

landscape is, somehow, a physical or visual frame of a portion of a Space, a boundary that

makes from that portion the Place. The landscape can be explained as everything that

surrounds the Place, natural and man-made (and/or urban) landscapes. The surrounding

landscape (the curtilage) helps in experiencing, remembering, and reading the Place. Places

are surrounded by landscapes that somehow help viewers be aware of different Places. Each

of us will experience every single.

Place with its surrounding landscape differently. We look at Places through our

lenses, created by our attitudes, experiences, and intentions, shaped through our personal

experiences. The appearance of Place, particularly of a town or a village on a hilltop or by

the river confluence, is the most prominent attribute of a Place and its Identity. The

surrounding natural environment of a particular Place plays an essential role in its

appearance throughout its history. A Planner has to consider that the range of the viewed

landscape of a particular Place can produce different images and appearances of that Place.

That is why the natural environment is considered to be the major source of identity

elements in regional and urban planning4. These variations can be compared to changes in

the appearances being monitored through different sets of lenses on a strong microscope. To

be aware of these changes, we need Time.

TIME

To preserve our Place images for the future, We need to preserve present signals of the Past and

control and manage the Present ones. All these images are continuously changing. A Place is the

present expression of past experiences and events, as well as the expression of future hopes.

When changing the character of Places in Time, a planner must have in mind the changes in

surrounding landscapes, but at the same time be aware that Sense of Time for the Insiders is

different than for the Outsiders.

ECONOMIC AND "ECONOMIC" PROGRESS DEMANDS

The phenomenon of Physical (Urban) and Architectural Space speaks directly to the

relationship between natural and artificial forms and appearances. Architectural Space can be

described as a part of an Abstract Space that has become Cognitive Space as a result of a

human attempt to create the Space. To create an Architectural Space, we need a larger area (a

building area and a building lot) on which to build, the area with natural and architectural

attribute appearances that surround it. But when creating a Physical (Urban) Space, the

planner has to comprehend the needs and wishes of many users, more than for the

architectural space, consider the Place Appearance, but also demands of investors who do

not wish to spend too much money for the land. Here, a planner has to think twice: enable

3 Lipovac, N. 2018:287 4 Popović, S. Lipovac, N. Vlahović, S. 2016:64


19

the "economic progress" and opening new work-places or preserve the natural values for

generations to come.

The ever-growing demands of the industrialized world, following the logic of

economic progress, introduced the problem of placeless settings and places, places without

personality, and distinguishing spirit, plus the destruction and loss of natural and even

cultural values. Towns and cities have begun to lose their old character and gained a new

one: street after street, uniform "home sweet homes". That is how we come to the term

Yellowfield5, a term as an unavoidable result of the planning process fulfilling the residential

area needs: vast, once to be, open farmland next to the existing buildable area borderline

turned into the new buildable land for housing. Today we have a name for that - Sprawl.

The same can be said for the Business and Industrial zones: they are "the best to be planned

on the outskirts of existing cities - using the farmland nearby. And no one thinks where the

food to feed the workers and residents will come from now. Or they do? The answer could

be: "We shall import it!" But, today, the industrial and commercial demand is changing their

needs every five to eight years. As a result, we have a new term - Brownfields6. The term

describes deserted industrial and commercial areas, with hundreds of tons of reinforced

concrete or steel that is covering once to be a farmland. This land cannot be used for farming

any more - it will take decades to clear the land, let it still, and start farming. Or even worth:

they will knock down the old structures and build some new ones that are going to be

"nicer, more useful, more functional"! The process goes on and on, taking more and more

farmland for "new ideas and architectural/urban proposals).

To understand the meaning of the experience of Place, it is not enough just to create a

New Place, a Place that has not been seen anywhere, and that would be experienced as none

of them before (through the building design or Place urban layouts). If a planner wishes to

preserve the existing Experience of the Place or tries to create a new Place that will be nice to

experience, the following terms: Feel for Place Experience, Sense of Place, and Sense of Time,

Spirit of Place7 must be observed, along with their impact over the curtilage. In

understanding the meaning of Place Experience, the Perception and Awareness of Place play an

essential role. All these topics should be an unavoidable part of environmental or urban

psychology/sociology research. The understanding of these concepts is crucial for a planner

who wishes to create a livable Place or a settlement. He, or she, must learn how to discover,

to understand and evaluate all the senses and spirits of a particular Place to catch the Sense of

Place. Still, there is another task that must be implemented in the planning process: a task

that will teach the people how to understand the existing Uniqueness of Place, how to accept

the importance of the planning process that will help preserve the existing Sense of Place

through settings, goals and Place management; a process that would do the proper

evaluation of cultural and natural values and preserve the most important ones for the

future generations.

Following the previous statement, a planner has to learn how to read and implement

the values of the elements from a cultivated and cultural environment. These two groups of

elements, or attributes, are hardly recognized separately. It is challenging to determine a

strong borderline between nature and the man-made world. Therefore, many of the

elements originating from the natural environment (representing sources of place-identity)

5 Lipovac, N. 2014:206 6 Lipovac, N. 2014:23 7 Lipovac, N. 2000:21


20

can be observed through the glasses of human culture spread through the history of

mankind. According to Ken Yeang, ecologist and environmentalist, the planner who wishes

to protect and preserve nature (the natural and ecological identity of a place) must not see

the built environment (settlements) as a separate "file" from the natural environment and the

ecosystems that surround it. Ecologically, people, together with the built environment, must be

perceived to be part of the (biotic) components and functioning of the ecosystems within the biosphere,

even though we may find that their presence may cause conflicts with the ecosystems.8 The

inventory of natural elements (attributes) that create the Identity of a Place represents an

enormous range of different types of natural attributes. They are related to Earth activity,

geodiversity, and biodiversity (plant and wildlife), as well as climate.9 All of these elements create

what is known and usually described with a short word: landscape. To do the proper

evaluation of our landscape, it has to be well perceived to see what nature is offering us. It

can be achieved almost from anywhere, but still, there are certain points from which we can

get the best of it. These points are known as scenic points from which there are "the best"

scenic views. Therefore, the existing land use analysis should be a part of this inventory, too.

Natural and cultural elements of the identity are always followed and combined

with social factors, like social contacts, that are part of the Place Spirit. In the book ‚The

Sense of Place,‛ Fritz Steel discusses the long-term Impact of Spirit of Place and concludes

the whole chapter upon this topic with this simple sentence: "The spirit of place and its impact

are functions of both: setting and person.10 The setting, in this case, can be considered as the

landscape from the curtilage - borrowed landscape, which is most of the time either forested

land or the farmland (used for the production of the food for residents of a settlement within

the landscape).

A planner must work towards setting up situations that could provoke the people

he/she is working with and for, to reflect the possibilities of ecological identity. The

knowledge and experiences that constitute an ecological worldview can be used reflectively to

reinterpret the memories, events, and circumstances of personal development.11 The collection of

reflective processes we use to explore nature and the environment can be named Ecological

identity work. It is very personal introspection and drives the authors' commitment to

environmentalism - planning and preserving the existing natural values but at the same time

enabling the economic progress. On the contrary, we all could face a scenario that was given

in the book by Al Gore - Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit. The first chapter of

the book is titled Ships in the Desert, which is not a metaphor. Al Gore writes about real ships

in the desert, the desert that not long ago has been the Aral Sea, some 300 miles east from the

Caspian Sea.12 It is up to all of us: planners and space users to try hard to avoid similar

natural disasters through an appropriate planning process.

8 Yeang, K. 1995:45 9 Lipovac, N; Gradečki, N. 2019:131 10 Steel, F. 1981:101 11 Thomashow, M. 1995:5 12 Gore, A. 1992:19-20. (The sea has disappeared owing to human cruelty towards the nature: because

the water that used to feed the whole population of the area has been diverted in ill-considered irrigation

scheme to grow cotton in the desert. The irrigation was put up, but without prior evaluation and

assessment what would happen when …, and what kind of soil is around. The soil was too porous, and

water has disappeared. In no time, the new shoreline was almost forty kilometers across the sand from

where the fishing fleet was now permanently docked.)


21

The purpose of working on ecological identity is to provide some kind of a language

and context that would connect a person's living with its surroundings and keep it in

balance. This work would provide some kind of moral anchor lodged in reflective learning -

means for interpreting the experience of nature through the planning process of any kind.

The inventory of natural and/or cultural elements that create new or preserve the

existing Identity of a Place represents an enormous range of different types of these

attributes. To describe them and evaluate, we must follow some of the existing scientifically

defined divisions. The elements to start with are the ones mentioned previously and related

to geology, pedology (quality of land for different farming purposes), and topography

(landform). To do the proper evaluation of our landscape, it has to be perceptualized, the

process that can be achieved almost from anywhere, but still, there are certain points from

which we can get the best of it. These points are known as scenic points and are producing

scenic views.

From the very beginning of the Industrial Revolution until the second half of the 20th

century, the industry was one of the most important economic activities and factors for the

economic development of cities. Along with the rapid growth of the industry, the creation of

industrial and commercial areas at the cities fringe begins, along with locations nearby the

railways, waterways, and roadways.13 All these processes changed the Place in a

demographic, social, economic, functional, and physiognomic way.

Today we are aware of two different levels of planning: Physical planning and Urban

planning. For both, we need space to "spread" our planning ideas. But as we have seen, the

space that surrounds us is very vulnerable. That is something the planners have to be aware

of. Especially when making plans for, so-called, planned spread of residential areas or more

important - industrial and business (commercial) landuse areas. Why? For both planning

landuses, the flat land (read it as farmland) is the most convenient: easy for developing of

any kind. But this is the point where all danger comes from. We waste the fertile farmland or

forestland for the development that might last just for a short time. Returning these areas to

something they used to be, is a costly and time-consuming process that never brings the

land to the starting point.

The term industrial or commercial area combines the overall appearance of industrial

production, commercial buildings, communal services, and utilities that are often placed at

the city fringe. This area usually served as farmland or forestland. The transportation of raw

materials and semi-finished products, their further dissemination, and the removal of large

quantities of waste make these areas a great source of environmental pollution. Therefore, at

the very beginning of the planning process, it is essential to do the proper evaluation of

existing values from the natural and cultural environment to protect the settlement from

noise, odor, and air pollution; ground- and surface water pollution; soil pollution). When

deciding which areas would be the most suitable (thinking of economic but also of

protection issues), a professionally performed Study of all these attributes and their

evaluation should be done, followed by checking the possible scenarios of environment

conditions during and after the development is finished. One of the possible criteria for

environment protection, within the industrial and commercial areas, is proper landscaping

of the area and the immediate surroundings. It should not be based only on aesthetic

appearances, but also for enhancing the ecological values of the area and the surroundings.

That is how we come to a new planning concept and criteria: ecological criteria.

13 Rožek, R. 2020:


22

Contemporary starting points on landscape diversity preservation are based upon

the Convention on European Landscapes: the landscape identity and recognition is a basic

element of an area - qualities that are linked to the quality of life of people. In most cases, decisions

on the physical and urban transformation of an area, along with development planning, do

not take these aspects into account. The loss of the existing attributes, biodiversity (diversity

of landscapes) is linked to the loss of Place Identity and the Sense of Place. Today it is clear

that inadequate management of space and landscapes often causes its depletion, which also

leads to the loss of its values. Protecting the landscape character implies, not only the

retention and conservation of the existing conditions but also the management of its future

development, as a critical element for sustainable development strategies. That is why it is

crucial to perform the right field trips, collect and evaluate the collected data over the

observed territory, which is planned for new landuse. The achieved results should be

represented in a professional and scientific Study, containing guidelines for the preservation

of the existing values that would be incorporated into future planning ordinances. An

integrated approach is critical, as it should enable the development of the landscape as a

complex system, where environmental and natural elements are linked to urban, cultural,

economic, and social attributes. Within this process, it has to be clear that local stakeholders

(local government, residents, and all other insiders and outsiders) from a particular area also

play a vital role in the planning process and its possible changes and improvements.

The following eight planning steps should be taken within the planning process to

achieve the major goal: preservation of the Identity of Place and Place curtilage:

1. Identification of planning problems and opportunities;

2. Identification of borderlines and conducting of an appropriate inventory and

evaluation of collected knowledge on source identity attributes (landscape and cultural

environment analysis at the regional and local level);

3. Evaluation of collected data through their uniqueness, appearance, and integration

into the planning goals;

4. Establishment of planning goals in collaboration with insiders and outsiders;

5. Setting up planning concepts and options; choosing the proper planning

methodology;

6. Preparation and carrying out a public presentation, discussion, and hearing

7. Completing the plan, with continued studies and constant citizen involvement and

community education;

8. Checking the adopted plan implementation and preparing further correction and

its amendments.14

References

Gore, A. (1992): Earth in balance - Ecology and the Human Spirit, Houghton Mifflin, Boston MA, USA

Lipovac, N. (2000): Planning as a Function of Preserving the Identity of Place (Ph.D. Dissertation),

College of Environmental Design, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley CA, USA

Lipovac, N. (2014): English-Croatian Professional Glossary for Urban and Physical Planners,

Architects and Landscape Architects, University of Zagreb Faculty of Architecture, Zagreb

Lipovac, N. Gradečki, N. (2018): Mayan Cities of Yucatan - Settlement Patterns and Structure Types

in: Prostor 26(56): 282-295, University of Zagreb Faculty of Architecture, Zagreb

14 Lipovac, N; Gradečki, N. 2019:138


23

Lipovac, N. (2018a): English-Croatian Cultural Heritage Professional Glossary, University of Zagreb

Faculty of Architecture, Zagreb

Lipovac, N. Nikolić, G. Popović, S. Gradečki, N. (2019): Planning as a Function of Preserving the

Identity of Place in: Cultural Urban Heritage - Developments, Learning and Landscape Strategies,

Springer Nature Switzerland AD: 127-139

Lukerman, E.F. (1964): Geography as a Formal Intellectual Discipline and the Way in which It

Contributes to Human Knowledge in: Canadian Geographer, 8(4): 167-172

Popović, S. Lipovac, N. Vlahović, S. (2016): Planning and Creating Place Identity for Podgorica as

Observed through Historic Urban Planning, in: Prostor 24(51): 62-73, University of Zagreb


Rožek, R. Jukić, T. (2020): Kriteriji i modeli planiranja gospodarskih područja unutar generalnih

urbanističkih planova Zagreba (1945-1990) to be printed in Prostor, University of Zagreb


Steel, F. (1981): The Sense of Place. CBI Publishing Co. Boston MA, USA

Thomashow, M. (1995): Ecological identity: Becoming a Reflective Environmentalist, MIT Press.

Cambridge MA, USA

Yeang, K. (1995): Designing with Nature - The Ecological Basis for Architectural Design, McGraw Hill.

New York NY, USA


24

Article

Analysis of Land Surface Temperature at Sarajevo

Canton using Landsat 8 data

Branislav DRAŠKOVIĆ1,*, Boban MILETIĆ 2 and Marko GUTALJ3

1 University of East Sarajevo, Faculty of Agriculture, East Sarajevo, BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA;

[email protected]; 2 University of East Sarajevo, Faculty of Agriculture, East Sarajevo, BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA;

[email protected]; 3 University of East Sarajevo, Faculty of Agriculture, East Sarajevo, BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA;

[email protected];

* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +387-65-645-108

Abstract: Land Surface Temperature (LST) varies depending on geographical location, season, time

of day, etc. However, even local microclimatic conditions can cause significant temperature changes

over relatively small distances. The study analyses the LST by seasons at the Sarajevo Canton, which

is specific as an urbanized basin surrounded by high mountains. The aim of this study is to

determine the minimum and maximum temperature variations during different seasons, depending

on altitude, aspect, land cover types, land use and other local factors.

Landsat 8 satellite imagery for the period 2015-2020 was used for calculation of LST data. One of the

conditions was to have the images with less than 10% cloud coverage in order to avoid inaccuracies

that cloudy weather can cause. The method used to obtain a raster maps is based on an automated

six-step image-processing algorithm. Bands 4, 5 and 10 were used as main input parameters for

calculating LST. Band 10 was the most important for obtaining thermal data, while bands 4 and 5

were necessary for the calculation of the Normal Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI). Using two-

way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD test, variations of surface temperature

depending on local geographic factors and land cover types will be explored.

Comparing temperatures in urban areas and mountain environments, the results show that, during

the summer, temperature amplitudes are significantly higher than in the winter season. At 1000m

altitude differences in amplitude are generally above 10 oC in summer and below 10 oC in winter

season. Beside the altitude, the most influenced factors are urban heat islands, vegetation (especially

in areas with dense coniferous forests) and aspect.

Keywords: LST; Sarajevo; mountains; correlation, seasons

1. Introduction

LST is an important factor in many areas of studies, such as global climate change,

hydrological and agricultural processes, and urban land use/land cover. Calculating LST

from remote sensed images is needed since it is an important factor controlling most

physical, chemical, and biological processes of the Earth (Ugur and Jovanovska, 2016). The

estimated LST depends on the albedo, ground cover plants and soil humidity. Most objects

in urban areas are buildings with high surface albedo, where reflection depends on

construction materials. In addition, urban activity uses much more energy than rural

activities, including transportation and building energy consumption, driving higher

temperatures in urban environments (Chotchaiwong and Wijitkosum, 2019).

To obtain LST we used Landsat 8 data cover Sarajevo Canton, from period 2015-2020,

available at the Earth Explorer website free of charge. Four satellite images for each season,


25

sixteen in total, were taken for observation of temperature data throughout the year.15 The

aim of the study is to determine the effect of local factors on the LST.

2. Materials and Methods

Study area

Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H) is located at the contact zone of three major natural and

geographic regions: the Pannonian Plain, the Adriatic Sea, and the Dinarides Mountains.

The relief of B&H is mainly hilly and mountainous with only 8% of the land beneath 150 m

above sea level (Draskovic et al. 2020). Sarajevo Canton is located in the central part of B&H

with an area of 1268.5 km2 (Figure 1). According to the 2013 statistics, it had 413.593

inhabitants (Agency for Statistics of B&H, 2016). The Canton relief has two main parts:

Sarajevo Basin where the capital of the state is located and the mountainous surroundings.

About 78% of the Canton's area is in the area above 700 m, 13% is between 550-700 m and

only 9% of the territory belongs to the lowlands (Institute for Spatial Planning of Sarajevo

Canton, 2006).

Figure 1: Geographical position of Sarajevo Canton

The Canton has mountain and mountain-basin climate. This area is under the

influence of the North-European continental climate coming from the North and the

Mediterranean climate coming from the South. Since these climates are interwoven and

relief is rather diverse, this area is left with the feature of a tempered mountainous climate.

Spatial distribution of air temperature shows major differences between relatively close

locations of as high as 11 oC. Mean annual air temperature ranges between 1,2 oC to 11,6 oC.16

Average value of annual temperature fluctuation is about 20 oC. In winter months, rather

complex relief causes some minor changes in the temperature due to the differences in

altitude. In fact, air deposits in basins form ‘’lakes’’ of cool air causing inversion – an

increase in temperature with altitude – so lower altitudes often record lower temperatures.

Spatial distribution of the annual precipitation is uneven due to complex relief. Windy sides

15 It should be taken into consideration that the resolution of the LANDSAT 8 TIRS data is 100m for the thermal

band (10) and 30m for the red and near infrared (NIR) bands (4 and 5). 16 MS Bjelašnica (2067 m) 1,5 oC, MS Sarajevo (630 m) 10 oC.


26

of high mountains have high annual level precipitation while in sheltered Sarajevo basin it is

much lower.17 Snow has a significant share in the annual precipitation, since it is a regular

phenomenon in the cold six months: the share of snowfall in annual precipitation volumes is

40-50%. Spatial distribution of cloudiness shows major differences. Due to common fogs in

basins and valleys, mountainous areas feature less cloudiness then the lowlands. Since

sunshine duration is closely related to cloudiness, it lasts longer in areas of low cloud cover.

During winter, mountains receive more sunshine then valleys and basins; therefore, they

record significantly higher insolation values. A good example is to compare Bjelašnica and

Sarajevo data. In December, Bjelašnica has 82.9 hours of insolation, while Sarajevo merely

40.8 hours. However, the annual sum of sunshine duration shows that Sarajevo has 70 hours

more, indicating that Sarajevo is much less cloudy during summer compared to Bjelašnica.

Indicated characteristic of climatological elements and their parameters, in both the annual

and the spatial distribution, clearly show that this area is affected by numerous mezzo-

climatic types, making this a transition zone between the continental and mountain climate

(Federal Hydrometeorological Institute of B&H).

According to CLC 2018 data18, forest and semi-natural areas represent the biggest

land coverage at 56.48%. The broad-leaved forest vegetation dominates covering at 36.44%,

coniferous forest vegetation at 12.66% and mixed forest at 7.39%. Urban area covering at

5.37%.

Methods

The method of obtaining raster-mapped LST is based on an algorithm developed by Avdan

and Jovanovska (2016), which consists of 6 steps. Based on the algorithm, Landsat 8 images

were processed with the GIS tool 'Raster Calculator' and the LST of the study area

obtained.19

Figure 2: LST of Sarajevo Canton a) 01. 01. 2015. b) 30. 06. 2019.

17 MS Bjelašnica 1260 mm, MS Sarajevo 938 mm, Airport Sarajevo (MS Butmir, 518 m) 840 mm. Reference period 1980-2010.

(Source: Federal Hydrometeorological Institute of B&H)

18 CORINE Land Cover (CLC) is a land use/land cover database for 39 European countries including B&H.

19 LST is temperature of Earth’s surface and it is not the same as air temperature measured at 2 m above the ground. The

difference between the near surface temperature and the LST can be drastic since we are comparing two different temperatures

in different places.


27

Figure 2. (a) and (b) shows the LST in Sarajevo Canton, with one winter and one

summer day as examples. As it can be observed, temperatures range from a minimum of -30 oC , in winter to a maximum of +40 oC in summer. At small distances the temperature can

vary significantly, especially during summer. The factors that affect it most are altitude, land

cover type (vegetation, artificial surface) and aspect. Urban heat islands are created in

densely populated areas, with significantly higher temperatures than the surrounding

environment. For example, control points from Figure 2. (b), at only 7-10 km distance and

600-700 m altitude differences were recorded temperature differences of 20 oC (Stup, part of

the Sarajevo city, 500 m, 37 oC; Trebević mountain, 1200 m, 17 oC; Igman mountain 1100 m,

17 oC). At the same points in winter, the temperature difference is only 3-4 oC (Figure 2. a).

Other examples of LST shows that in winter the temperature differences are much milder.

Temperature inversions are common.

In order to analyze the influence of the selected factors on LST, we used European

Digital Elevation Model (EU-DEM) version 1.1. and CLC 2018 data from European

Environment Agency (EEA) website as a basis for data extraction for independent variables

(elevation, aspect and land cover/land use). Aspect raster map is derived using the GIS tool

''Aspect'' (Spatial Analyst), after which is reclassified into three classes, according to Ma et.

al. (2010), where 0°-67.5° and 292.5°-360° is the shady slope (1), 112.5°-247.5° is the sunny

slope (2), and the remaining slopes are the semi-shady and semi-sunny slope (3). The

following third-level CLC categories were selected as essential for our analysis: 111 -

Continuous urban fabric, 112 - Discontinuous urban fabric, 121 - Industrial or commercial

units, 311 - Broad-leaved forest, 312 - Coniferous forest, 313 - Mixed forest. To avoid any

complicated statistical analysis and wrong conclusions, we grouped land cover/land use and

aspect into one categorical variable named CLC. Aspect. For a complete understanding, the

newly formed variable consists of two numbers separated by a dot (e.g. 313.2). First number

represents CLC type and the second one the aspect.

Using GIS tool ''Project raster'' (Data management) and its ''bilinear'' method, all

raster data (with the exception of CLC2018 data where the ''nearest neighbour'' method was

used) are re-projected in WGS 84 UTM zone 33N spatial reference system and resampled

into 30 m resolution to match the LST raster. Considering every third pixel for analysis we

set up a 90 m x 90 m grid of points on the polygon of the Sarajevo Canton and extracted

values of LST, elevation, aspect and land cover/land use from the positions of the points

using ''Extract multi values to points'' tool (Spatial Analyst). Dependent variable values were

obtained by averaging LST values from 4 different raster images for each season (winter,

spring, and summer, autumn). Thereafter, all grids were exported into ESRI shape file.

Data processing and statistical analysis of data stored in exported shape files were

performed with a help of the R statistical environment (R Core Team, 2019). In particular,

packages: ''rgdal'' (Bivand et. al. 2019) and ''dplyr'' (Wickham et. al. 2020) are used for

importing and data processing. Packages ''stats'' (R Core Team, 2019), ''ggplot2'' (Wickham,

2016), ''agricolae'' (Mendiburu, 2019) and ''car'' (Fox et. al. 2019) are used for visualization

and statistical examination with Two-way ANOVA (Type III sums of squares) and Tukey

HSD test. Considering that large sample sizes should use much lower level of significance

than 0.05 (Kim and Choi, 2019), we used 0.001 considering our sample size (n=96634). Due to

the presence of a huge amount of unique elevation values, the interaction of elevation and

CLC.Aspect could not be statistically investigated by appropriate multiple pairwise

comparison test. In order to eliminate this problem, using ''dplyr'' package (Wickham et. al.

2020) we reclassified elevation variable into several 100 m long classes, each labelled after its


28

upper limit (e.g. 300 m - 400 m = 400 m). However, the elevation variable in this form could

not be used in ANOVA due to the presence of multicollinearity. Consequently, with a help

of interaction plot function from the ''stats'' package (R Core Team, 2019) and reclassified

elevation variable we gave only interpretations of the interaction based on descriptive

statistics.

3. Results

Two-way ANOVA indicated a statistically significant difference between CLC.Aspect types

across all 4 seasons (Table 1 and 2). However, no statistically significant differences between

elevations were found. This result showed that the temperature amplitudes with increasing

elevation are not so strong (although present) to be statistically demonstrable. The only

exception to this is the summer (Table 2). The Tukey HSD test found that in most cases there

were no statistically significant differences between different aspect types in each CLC

classification level, which is especially pronounced in summer for artificial surfaces trough

all three aspect types, more often between sunny and semi sunny aspects in natural surfaces

(Figure 3. a, Figure 4. a, Figure 5. a, Figure 6. a). In some cases, no statistically significant

differences were found between related CLC classification levels (usually in artificial ones),

especially in the autumn (Figure 6. a). The interaction between elevation and CLC.Aspect

proved to be statistically significant (Table 1 and 2) and provide a more complex explanation

of the facts above.

Table 1. ANOVA table for winter and spring

Source of variation Df winter spring

SS F-value Pr(>F) SS F-value Pr(>F)

(Intercept) 1 3.372 1.839 0.175 7.286 2.919 0.088

Elevation 1 4.276 2.331 0.127 2.231 0.894 0.344

CLC.Aspect 17 11632.593 373.081 0.000*** 2443.736 57.586 0.000***

Elevation : CLC.Aspect 17 4599.644 147.520 0.000*** 6865.308 161.780 0.000***

Residuals 96633 177235.263 / / 240408.097 / /

Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1

Table 2. ANOVA table for summer and autumn

Source of variation Df summer autumn

SS F-value Pr(>F) SS F-value Pr(>F)

(Intercept) 1 14.766 16.869 0.000*** 5.887 3.072 0.080.

Elevation 1 4.532 5.178 0.023* 3.332 1.739 0.187

CLC.Aspect 17 9833.846 660.849 0.000*** 6045.783 185.608 0.000***

Elevation : CLC.Aspect 17 2077.346 139.601 0.000*** 8421.567 258.545 0.000***

Residuals 96633 84993.749 / / 185021.954 / /

Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1


29

According to winter data, at the shady slopes (Figure 3. b), as expected, the

temperature decreases as the altitude increases. This is especially noticeable in the case of a

discontinuous urban surface (112) of 500-900 m, and it is related to the reduced density of

urban fragments at higher altitudes and less heat energy production per unit area. At about

1000-1100 m there is a slight increase in temperature in broad-leaved and coniferous forests

which apparently keep the temperature well up to 1500 m. Amplitudes of temperature are

not high, from 500-1500 m are 4 oC (max -4 oC, min -8 oC), and from 500-2000 m about 8 oC

(max -4 oC, min -12 oC).

On the sunny slopes, temperature (Figure 3. c) increases with elevation in most types

of land cover. It is warmer about 2-3 oC relative to the shady slopes, at least in case of forest.

Air deposits in Sarajevo basin form ‘’lake’’ of cool air causing inversion between 500-900 m.20

The amplitude of the temperature is small, about 5 oC (max -3 oC, min -8 oC, from 500-1500 m

the amplitude is even smaller, about 3 oC).

At the semi sunny slopes (Figure 3. d) land cover types have different impact on LST.

The temperature in the discontinuous urban fabric (112) and industrial and commercial

units (121) decreases with altitude increasing, while in broad-leaved forest (311) the

temperature increases at the same interval, up to 1100 m. The temperature amplitude is

about 6 oC (min -9 oC, max -3 oC).

Generally, winter temperature amplitudes are small, so there is no major difference

between urban areas at lower and forests at higher altitudes. The broad-leaved forest is

warmer in winter, especially on the sunny slopes, relative to coniferous and mixed forests.

Continuous urban fabric is warmer than discontinuous and industrial units because of

density of urban structures and production more heat energy per unit area. The temperature

amplitudes are small, about 5 oC (Figure 3. a).

20

An inversion traps air pollution, such as smog, close to the ground. That is why Sarajevo is one of the most

polluted cities in the world, according to the website www.airvisual.com


30

Figure 3. Winter main effect (CLC-Aspect) a) and interaction effect (Elevation : CLC.Aspect)

b) Shady, c) Sunny, d) Semi sunny

In the spring, in the shady slopes (Figure 4. b), there is a noticeable decrease in

temperature for all land cover types (except for a small altitude interval of 500 to 800 m in

mixed forests). This is logical because there are no more frosts in the morning and

temperatures in the lower regions rise above 20 oC. In this period amplitude of the

temperatures is significantly higher than in winter: At altitudes from 500 to 1000 m it is

about 5-6 oC, and from 500-2000 m it is about 15 oC (min 8 oC, max 23 oC). A similar situation

was observed at the sunny and transitional slopes (Figures 4. c and d): temperatures

decreasing, therewith the broad-

Documents

Book of Proceedings II 2020 Proceedings II.pdf · 2020. 10. 6. · GEA (Geo Eco-Eco Agro) International Conference, 28-31 May 2020, Montenegro - Book of Proceedings II 5 Devraj Chalise,