• / 15
  • 下载费用:29.9 金币  

【精品文档】91中英文双语毕业设计关于古建筑改造建设设计的外文文献翻译成品:前德意志民主共和国的村庄改造更新及农村发展

关 键 词:
毕业设计外文文献翻译成品 【精品文档】 毕业设计外文 的外文文献翻译成品 【精品文档】关于 中英文双语毕业设计外文文献翻译成品 中英文双语毕业设计 外文文献翻译成品 中英文双语外文文献翻译成品
资源描述:
此文档是毕业设计外文翻译成品( 含英文原文+中文翻译),无需调整复杂的格式!下载之后直接可用,方便快捷!本文价格不贵,也就几十块钱!一辈子一次的事!外文标题:Village renewal and rural development in the former German Democratic Republic外文作者:Olivia J. Wilson文献出处:Geo Journal,2018, 46(3) :247–255(如觉得年份太老,可改为近2年,毕竟很多毕业生都这样做)英文2618单词,14802字符(字符就是印刷符),中文4689汉字。Village renewal and rural development in the former German Democratic RepublicOlivia J. WilsonKey words: built environment, cooperatives, depopulation, East Germany, employment, infrastructure, rural development, villagesAbstract:This paper analyses the “Dorferneuerung” or village renewal scheme – a key policy for rural development in the new “Länder” of Germany which has been transferred from the old Länder. The contribution that Dorferneuerung can make to rural development is considered, with particular reference to the experience of participating villages in Sachsen-Anhalt. It concludes that Dorferneuerung has contributed much to improving the built environment but little to new job creation. It is indicative of the advantages and disadvantages of reunification for rural development in the new Länder.IntroductionThe dramatic and fundamental changes in the rural econ- omy and society of the former German Democratic Republic (GDR) since reunification have received widespread interest and attention, particularly concerning restructuring of the agricultural sector (e.g. Bergmann, 1992; Gross, 1996; Vo- geler, 1996; Wilson, 1996; Hagedorn et al., 1997). The aim of this article is to analyse a key policy for rural development in the new ‘Länder’; namely the ‘Dorferneuerung’ or vil- lage renewal scheme. This scheme has been transferred from the ‘old Länder’ where it has been in operation for some forty years. The scheme has attracted interest from other European countries. Indeed, it has been claimed that ‘Dor- ferneuerung will become a trans-national export in the West and East’ (translated from Magel, 1996, p. 4). However, the scheme has not been without its critics (Paas et al., 1994; Grube and Rost, 1995; Herrenknecht, 1995; Zierold, 1997).In order to evaluate the contribution that Dorferneuerung can make to rural development in the new Länder, the ar- ticle will first briefly identify the development challenges facing the East German countryside. It will then outline the Dorferneuerung scheme and analyse it in terms of its appropriateness for tackling the problems facing rural areas of the new Länder. The evaluation will focus on examples of Dorferneuerung in villages in Sachsen-Anhalt, one of the new Länder.Dorferneuerung and agricultural restructuringThe federal ministry of agriculture justifies the inclusion of Dorferneuerung in the GAK because (a) it does give priority to the restoration/renovation of farm buildings in villages over non-farm buildings; (b) it can improve the road lay-out in villages and therefore help access for farm traffic and (c) by raising rural living standards generally it may encourage young people to stay on the land (BML, 1995). This argument illustrates the close association be- tween farming and rural settlements that still exists in the old Länder. However, its contribution to agricultural restruc- turing in the new Länder is marginal because of the problems involved in (re)establishing farm businesses within villages, as illustrated by Ditfurt.Ditfurt contained 135 farms of about 40 ha in size in the pre-GDR era, but following collectivisation in the 1950s a single cooperative farm was formed with 2500 ha. New farm buildings were built on the outskirts of the village in the 1970s and many of the village farmyards fell into disuse, but because of lack of redevelopment during the GDR era these farmyards have survived (albeit often in a dilapidated condition). Since reunification the socialist cooperative has been restructured into a registered cooperative of 1400 ha. In addition, there are three full-time family farmers and several part-time farmers (Tecklenberg, pers. comm.). Only one of the full-time farms is located in the village, and this farmer has built a new barn on the outskirts of the village. It is unlikely that any other full-time farms will be established within the village. In addition to the economic uncertain- ties facing all farmers in the new Länder, two barriers can be identified to the re-establishment of farms within vil- lages. First, the costs of renovating run-down farmyards are enormous and even with Dorferneuerung subsidies may be prohibitive, and second, the enclosed courtyard farms typ- ical of villages in the new Länder may be too small to be suitable for full-time farmers (Grube and Rost, 1995). These farmyards are, therefore, most suited to part-time farmers.Dorferneuerung and rural developmentThe extent to which Dorferneuerung can contribute to socio- economic development depends much on individual actors in the process, and in particular on the village mayor, whose role is vital in networking with key officials and in ‘animat- ing’ the village community to participate. This is particularly important in the new Länder where village residents were initially sceptical about the government’s commitment to public participation and were unsure if subsidies would ma- terialise (Stert, pers. comm.). They were also too busy with private problems such as employment and property rights to have time to devote to village matters (Paas et al., 1994).Ditfurt, Biere and Kläden all entered the Dorferneuerung scheme in its first year (1991) due to the pro-activeness of their mayors. The mayor of Ditfurt made contact with a Gemeinde in Niedersachsen straight after reunification to find out about Dorferneuerung. She was then put in touch with a professor of planning at Hannover University. He brought a group of students to the village to do a field- work project, and through him the mayor was put in touch with an official in charge of Dorferneuerung in the Sachsen- Anhalt ministry of agriculture (Tecklenberg, pers. comm.). In many cases neighbouring villages help each other with the Dorferneuerung scheme, especially if they are part of the same ‘Verwaltungsgemeinschaft’ (administrative commu- nity – VWG) which in Sachsen-Anhalt is the lowest formal level of local government. For instance, Kläden belongs to a VWG with 12 other Gemeinde and 24 villages. Kläden and another village have now completed Dorferneuerung, but ten other villages are currently in the scheme, so they can benefit by sharing advice, contacts and experience (Schlusselburg, pers. comm.).Frose joined the scheme in 1994, and its village council has appointed a Dorfberater (village advisor) to work full- time on maximising the development possibilities of Dorfer- neuerung. This is a pilot scheme initiated by an east German NGO representing farm and forestry workers (Mühlknickel, 1997). The village advisors work alongside the village coun- cil and working group, and have access to regional advice and information about the plethora of other federal and Län- der grants that can be ‘tied in’ to Dorferneuerung projects. They fulfil a particularly important role in villages like Frose that have a voluntary mayor with little time to devote to Dor- ferneuerung. The Frose village advisor informs the villagers about the scheme, answers inquiries and generally raises public awareness. In addition, she is well networked with key gatekeepers of Dorferneuerung funding (in the Land and District agricultural offices). As well as her involvement in Dorferneuerung, she has set up social activities for old and young people in the village, and has managed to bring in other funding for converting the inside of the village council building (Stert, pers. comm.). While the benefits of the vil- lage advisor scheme have been recognised there is at present no long-term funding support available (Mühlnickel, 1997; Rakow, pers. comm.).The construction work resulting from Dorferneuerung schemes has given a boost to rural building firms, but its con- tribution to longer term job-creation is more questionable. One policy that is closely coordinated with Dorferneuerung is a key federal job creation scheme (Arbeitsbeschaffungs- maßnahmen or ABM), which subsidises unemployed work- ers to work on short term projects of public benefit (BMBau, 1993). All four villages have employed ABM workers on communal projects, in particular environmental improve- ment projects, as cheap labour. For instance, Frose employed 41 ABM workers from 1994 to 1996 to clear undergrowth,build stone walls, lay footpaths and plant trees (Stert, pers. comm.). While this provides training opportunities for the workers and is of enormous benefit to the villages, it does not lead to long-term job creation, and indeed undermines the job market (Schlusselburg, pers. comm.).Suitability of Dorferneuerung for the new LänderOn the surface it would appear that villages in the two parts of Germany have little in common. While Dorferneuerung has been implemented gradually in the old Länder over a period of forty years, in the new Länder it has been imple- mented intensively, with high funding levels, over a period of only seven years. The expectations of Dorferneuerung are much higher in the new Länder than in the old Länder because of the greater development needs.There are both positive and negative evaluations of the scheme’s transfer to the new Länder that can be made. Look- ing at the positive side first, the fact that the scheme was already established in the old Länder may have helped to legitimise it in the new Länder, and indeed following reuni- fication each of the new Länder was given help to establish the scheme from an old Land. For instance, Sachsen-Anhalt was partnered with neighbouring Niedersachsen, and many villages in Sachsen-Anhalt have benefited from contact with villages in Niedersachsen (as is the case with Ditfurt). Sec- ond, every village can draw up its own plan with public participation based on local needs and aspirations. The scheme, although ‘top down’, is flexible and can be tailored to local situations. Third, Dorferneuerung is popular ‘on the ground’ and has already had a dramatic visual impact on villages in the new Länder. The impact can be seen in new (or restored) village streets and street furniture, restored village squares and cemeteries, newly planted trees, restored building façades and new roofs. Overall, the Dorferneuerung scheme meets the desire of villagers to improve their living environment and take pride again in their rural heritage (Paas et al., 1994; Grube and Rost, 1995).However, the localness of the Dorferneuerung scheme is a problem as well as a strength. The scheme lacks inte- gration with other socio-economic policies, and there have been calls for regional and Land level rural policies to stim- ulate broader socio-economic development initiatives (Paas et al., 1994; Behrens, 1995; Grube and Rost, 1995; Wirth, 1996). Much more could be done to provide back-up advice and information for participating villages and to encourage villages to cooperate with each other. It has even been ques- tioned whether such high public expenditure can be justified on what in some cases can be seen as gentrification, when it could be spent on job creation and training (Herrenknecht, 1995; Zierold, 1997). There is inevitably some tension be- tween Wessis and Ossis over not just Dorferneuerung but rural development policy generally. Many of the planners appointed to oversee Dorferneuerung schemes and officials in the Sachsen-Anhalt ministry of agriculture are Wessis and may have differing views about rural development opportunities than the villagers themselves (Paas et al., 1994; Schlusselburg, pers. comm.).ConclusionThis article has provided an overview and analysis of the Dorferneuerung scheme – one of the key rural development initiatives in the new Länder of Germany. Analysis of the scheme has revealed that it has both strengths and weaknesses. It is essentially a ‘bricks and mortar’ policy which has contributed significantly in the years since 1990 to improvements in village infrastructure and the appearance of villages. The success of Dorferneuerung is clearly visible in the built environment which may account for the scheme’s popularity with policy-makers and the public.The contribution of Dorferneuerung to wider rural development, and particularly to job creation, is more question- able. While it has provided short-term work for builders and ABM-workers, its contribution to longer-term job creation can only be indirect, and much depends upon the role of key village actors in the process, as well as upon the ge- ographical location of villages and their attractiveness for investment. For Dorferneuerung to fulfil its potential it will be necessary to make the scheme more flexible so that Län- der governments can tailor the scheme to their particular priorities. In addition, it must be seen as part of a wider integrated rural development policy. This latter goal may be difficult to achieve while Dorferneuerung remains in the GAK, although if it was taken out of the GAK its funding might be less secure. The future of Dorferneuerung is also dependent on the continuation of European structural fund- ing after 1999. It is unlikely that as much money will be available for Dorferneuerung, especially if the EU expands to include new member states from Central and Eastern Europe.Reunification of the two Germanies can, therefore, be seen as both a blessing and a curse for rural development in the former GDR. It is a blessing in that the new Länder have benefited from institutional and financial support from the old Länder and from the EU, with schemes like Dor- ferneuerung. It is a curse, however, in that the new Länder have adopted old Länder schemes which are not necessarily suited to their needs. The gap in living standards between Western and Eastern Germany that existed at reunification pressured the federal and Länder governments into taking fast action to achieve rapid development. Now that so much has been achieved to improve the built environment of rural areas, it is to be hoped that the successes of Dorferneuerung will provide a basis for new schemes focusing on training and job creation.ReferencesAgra Europe Bonn, 1991: Auswirkungen der Integration in den EG-Agrarmarkt, 7.Behrens H., (ed.), 1995: Intermediäre Akteure in der Dorf- und Regionalen- twicklung. Dorf- und Regionalentwicklung in den neuen Bundesländern: Beiträge aus der Praxis, Göttingen, Agrarsoziale Gesellschaft e.V. Kleine Reihe, Vol. 54, pp. 109–331.Bergmann T., 1992: The re-privatisation of farming in Eastern Germany.Sociologia Ruralis, 32: 305–316.BMBau (Bundesministerium für Raumordnung, Bauwesen und Städtebau),1993: Raumordnungsbericht. BMBau, Bonn.BML, 1991–1997: Agrarbericht der Bundesregierung. BML, Bonn.BML (Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten),1995: Für unsere l
展开阅读全文
  麦档网所有资源均是用户自行上传分享,仅供网友学习交流,未经上传用户书面授权,请勿作他用。
0条评论

还可以输入200字符

暂无评论,赶快抢占沙发吧。

关于本文
本文标题:【精品文档】91中英文双语毕业设计关于古建筑改造建设设计的外文文献翻译成品:前德意志民主共和国的村庄改造更新及农村发展
链接地址:https://www.maidoc.com/p-15770063.html
关于我们 - 网站声明 - 网站地图 - 资源地图 - 友情链接 - 网站客服 - 联系我们

[email protected] 2018-2020 maidoc.com版权所有  文库上传用户QQ群:3303921 

麦档网为“文档C2C模式”,即用户上传的文档所得金币直接给(下载)用户,本站只是中间服务平台,本站所有文档下载所得的金币归上传人(含作者)所有。
备案号:蜀ICP备17040478号-3  
川公网安备:51019002001290号 

本站提供办公文档学习资料考试资料文档下载


收起
展开