Palermo - Pp2 grid1-slide_giuliano

ARSIAL
Mr. Federico Sòrgoni

« Common lands for sustainable management »
2nd Scientific Committee
Palermo (Sicily - Italy) November 2nd and 3rd , 2009.

Project co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund

I / Applicable law
• a) Law n. 1766 - 16/06/1927 – • Biodiversity:
Definitive assessment of Common - Local: Regional Law Act n.15/2000
Land in Italy - National: Law n. 46/2007
• b) Royal Decree n. 322 - 26/11/1928 - European: Directive 62/2008/CEE
- Application of the above Law
• Landscapes:
- Local: Regional Law Act n. 39/2002
- National: Law n. 490/99
- European: CEE Directive 92/43
Habitat
• Species:
- Local: Regional Law Act n. 17/95
- National: Law n. 157/92
- European: CEE Directives 92/43
Habitat, n. 79/409 Birds

2

Owner - Users
• The community in the Municipality of Giuliano di
Roma are both users and owners.
• Public ownership, the citizens of Giuliano di Roma,
therefore a group of people. The common lands are
managed by the Municipality that is the
administrative public body. Even if the land parcels
are inscribed in the cadastre under its properties it is
not the owner but only an administrative -
management body.

3

Relations Land/Management Body
• Attribution of the pasture and
wood parcels to users;
• Conservation of the landscape
and resources;
• Municipality
• Protection of endangered species

4

Relations: Management body / User

• User and Owner coincide. • Take cows, horses and
donkeys to pastures;
• Collect woods for
• Users have the rights to:
heating;
• The management body • Collect underbrush
attributes the land parcels for fruits (mushrooms,
pasture and wood cutting chestnuts, berries);
based on resource impact
• Free access to the lands
evaluation.
for leisure;

5

SWOT analysis
• STRENGHTS: • OPPORTUNITIES:
• Forest Management Plans allow the use of • Inclusion of the requirements present in
pasture and wood parcels of common SIC ZPS and Habitat and Birds directive in
lands with imposed limits to avoid Forest Management Plan;
exploitation of resources and • Attribution of pasture parcels for 5 years
preservation of the landscape and all the or more to allow breeders to access PSR
related structures such as rural roads, funds;
trails, land asset.

• WEAKNESSES: • THREATS:
• Forest Management Plan, mandatory • Risk of block of activities due to the
according to R.L.A. n. 39/02, do not conflict between CEE Natura 2000 norms
include the limits imposed by SIC - ZPS and Local norms.
and the Habitat and Birds CEE directives
therefore creating a confusion in
procedures and permissions to possible
activities in the common lands.

6

II/ Model area
• Total District land 3.398 ha;
Popul. 2.228
• Common lands ha 1.200
- Agricultural soils 1.519 ha
- Forest and semi natural
areas 1.867 ha
- Urban areas 12 ha
- SIC 84 ha - ZPS 2.383 ha.
• With the taken of Rome of
1870, Giuliano entered in
the Reign of Italy and took
the denomination of
Giuliano of Rome
7

Evolution of the situation in the area and actions taken

• The common lands of this area are mostly completely overlapped with the Natura
2000 area (SIC – ZPS). The norms stated in Natura 2000 are different to those in
the Forest Management Plan stated in the Regional Act n. 39/2002. Natura 2000
and the two Habitat Directive 92/43/CEE and Birds Directive 79/409/CEE set
strong limits to the grazing and woodcutting activities severely limiting the
exercise of the commoner rights which are instead costitutionally granted. The
fact that the commoners, that have exercised centuries old rights, could have
limited or null access to the resources and to the area determines a loss of
traditional activities, loss of cure of the territory generating fires, weak woods,
crumblings. But the territory has been preserved by the presence of commoners
taking care of the lands for their necessity, a sort of mutual relationship.
• To allow the use of the common lands in a sustainable way the Municipality has
adopted a Forest Management Plan that analizes the possible number of animal per
ha allowed and the wood cutting periods and methods. The common lands divided
in parcels are assigned to local animal breeders. Regarding the woodlands The
municipality has not set rules on woodcollecting for the commoners since the
request is so little. This determines that the commoner that wants to go
woodcollecting do so but without a written and ruled norm therefore exercising
his right without formally being authorized to do so.

8

III/ Conclusions
• In the case of a Municipality managing and administering a common land there is a
connection between the political arrangement and the common pool resources
institutions, because the municipality board of director is elective and politic. Still
the Municipality can only produce Regulations on local base, while the main
policies are either made by Regional or Statal bodies. Moreover often the common
lands are seen more as an annoyance then as an opportunity. Then we can affirm
that there is no integration between the two "worlds".

• Even if a Municipality is a political - administrative institution, and in this case is
also the management body of the common lands, there is no real advantage in this,
since it cannot legislate. This "privilege" is only on Regional and State body base.
Laws on common land were set, implemented in the years with Laws and norms
that apply on the entire national (or regional) territory and that comprise also
common lands. Exemplificative examples can be the Regional Law Act on
biodiversity, or the Regional Law Act 39/02 regarding wood and forest
preservation and management. The latter is fundamental for planning wood cutting
and the methodologies but it is not specific for common forest lands.

9

Palermo - Pp2 grid1-slide_giuliano

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Similar to Palermo - Pp2 grid1-slide_giuliano

Recently uploaded

Palermo - Pp2 grid1-slide_giuliano