Presentations of Professor Holger Magel as FIG Vice President

Speech by Prof. Dr. Holger Magel on 7 June 2000, Rural 21, original

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Conference is drawing to a close now with a "summary and presentation of the Potsdam declaration" being on the agenda. I will just briefly try to summarize the highlights again. Don't be afraid, I am not going to repeat the statements made by the workshop chairmen. There has been a great deal of discussion on that outside in the corridors. I will simply try to give you my personal impressions as a participant in this excellent congress. May I therefore congratulate you first of all, Professor Schlagheck, as the representative of the Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture. I am also congratulating you as Vice-President of the International Federation of Surveyors. This Federation is in contact with several United Nations agencies and addresses many issues discussed at this Congress. Also from this perspective I would like to pay my compliments to you. I am doing this also as President of the Academy on Rural Areas, fully aware of the backing by many colleagues here in the region. The President of the Academy for Rural Areas of Lower Saxony is also present here today, for example. This is the clientele you also require and about whom there was so much talk in the implementation of your policy, Mr. Schlagheck. And finally I should also like to extend my thanks as a representative of science and research.

I am very pleased with the presence of so many university professors here. I sometimes find it hard to understand why practitioners are always so stubborn and why they have a hard time with theory and science. They all know that a sound theory is the key to practice tomorrow. Nobody knows this better than you yourself, Prof. Schlagheck, as you cross this bridge everyday.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we experienced many exciting moments and splendid highlights. If I try to bring out a few, I would not please the others too much, I guess. Just think back to the first day, in the afternoon, when imbued with this exciting and international atmosphere we left the European stage and Minister Morales guided us into a completely different world. Or think back to this morning when Mayor Gira from Beckerich casually mentioned that his village makes a contribution to the partnership with the Third World, a statement he later qualified to some extent. This evoked the atmosphere again, the main issue of this Congress that we want to talk at a truly global level here and strive for solutions together.

We had some excellent workshops. I took the liberty of switching from one to the other, I therefore participated in all five workshops and I must say this was a highly stimulating affair and you had an opportunity to judge the practical examples in the municipalities first hand this
morning.

First, a very important realization for many of my German colleagues: We are not alone in this world. You sometimes tend to get this impression in your everyday work and there are certainly some bosses here and there saying:" this person must have plenty of time if he can attend such a Congress. What's the use for our everyday work?
I would like to expressly encourage you to continue to attend these congresses. We must simply try to understand and familiarize ourselves with the major differences in the world: in the initial situation, in the framework conditions, in politics, culture and history and we must broaden our own understanding.

Apart from these many highlights we even had a formula presented to us today, this bit is for brain workers needing formulas for something to become serious and tangible. I also say this with a view to my own department as I occasionally also espouse soft aspects; if there are no formulas in dissertations and doctoral theses, then they can be "nothing good". Now Mr. Zimmermann presented us a nice formula from the Philippines.
We heard many very thoughtful, virtually philosophical remarks: "What kind of world do we want for our children?" This is something which concerns us all and must move us all. And we also heard that other people's problems are increasingly becoming our own". Professor von Braun put it differently: "global problems in rural areas are also our concern." In spite of all this reflectiveness, you also sensed a lot of optimism like: "we will manage in the end. We are going to tackle the problems!
A central issue was, of course, but this was not the proper disposition of this international conference, this would be other people's "business", e.g. that of development cooperation agencies: how can we transfer to third countries what we practice here in Europe, in Eastern Europe? But this was not the central issue of this congress and would take up own seminars lasting for days. But it is quite understandable that this question came up again and again and I am also thankful to our guests from abroad for raising this question. Our colleague, Mr. Hirsch, for example, had a concrete reason for doing so as he is very anxious to establish contact with Europe as a Chilean of German origin. And he is always distraught about the fact that there are German governments and German enterprises displaying no interest at all in moving into this country or asking what they can benefit or only intent on getting a good return as fast as possible. Professor Hirschs-Reinhagen's statement today as workshop chairman must be seen against this backdrop.

We recorded a further enormous success in a different respect if I may judge this from my own perspective requesting you to acknowledge what is not self-evident: two UN authorities were represented here, two top-level representatives of FAO and UNCHS from Nairobi. Several federal ministries were represented here and may I point out our Federal President, our head of state, in particular. The EU Commission and World Bank were represented here. This was indeed a tribute to our Congress and I would like to thank these representatives again in particular, we gained a lot from their presence! But maybe they also picked up a little of what we have to offer. And I am quite confident, Mr. Hundsalz, Mr. Feder, what you heard from these superb representatives of the rural communities will inform your future ideas.
You master the theoretical and abstract levels like hardly any other. But that this lived optimism, this confidence in one's own strength can get so much moving in practice as we have witnessed today this must have immensely impressed and enriched you, too. I take your nodding as approval. Many ministers from abroad were there - this, too, is a great tribute to us. And thanks God, and I emphasize this, the NGOs were also present, German Agro-Action, WWF and this is a new quality and will be common practice tomorrow that we will confer more frequently with the NGOs and struggle for solutions together.
What I find regrettable is that there were too few planners and architects here: the old syndrome.
They are absent when major issues are at stake. But politics also concerns planners!

Some overriding messages were also driven home to us all.

1. The developing countries themselves must give more priority to strengthening their regions. Mr. Diouf made this very clear indeed.
   
2. It has been said and claimed: the industrialized countries must provide more assistance to the developing countries. Why? We just heard that their problems increasingly affect us too.

Add to this the "gentle" criticism made by the German President regarding the European agricultural policy, which subsidizes exports. Mr. Fischler replied to this supremely well. But I find it noteworthy that a German President says this at such a congress. He even added that we should not only apply minimum environmental standards. I hope that he did not only say this because our opening day on Monday coincided with the day of the environment.

3. Something else clearly transpired from the general messages: We need a broader conception of agriculture. We must create more non-farm jobs. We heard often enough that this is still a problem in everyday life.

Ladies and Gentlemen, maybe you occasionally wonder: "Why are we in Potsdam?" You could say: "Well, of course, we are here in a new Land where the problems of restructuring and development can be seen directly on the spot." And this was certainly remarkable for our guests from the Central and Eastern European countries, also for us from the West, that we learn to understand again and again why this process is so difficult and why we must continue to make transfer payments in the future.
Ladies and Gentlemen, we are also in Potsdam because Potsdam offers the genius loci for what kept us busy for three days now. Just recall what Lord Mayor Platzeck said. He pointed out on Monday that Potsdam boasts world cultural heritage, that is to say its marvellous château, parks and cultural landscapes. They are part of the treasures of this "one world". I only hope that you already had or will have an opportunity to see some of this. Mr. Platzeck mentioned land embellishment, a great intellectual idea and movement at the beginning of the 19th century under whose influence Johann Wolfgang von Goethe wrote his famous novel "The Elective Affinities".

Lenné, a great man and exponent of this land embellishment and shaper of these landscapes never hoped to achieve anything else in his aims and philosophy than what we are constantly talking about today. He sought the trinity, the entirety of horticulture, architecture and agriculture, in today's words: the "interrelations between ecology, social affairs and economy". If we were to phrase this today, we would arrive at the sustainability principle. Land embellishment wanted to foster work and agriculture, whilst making allowances for landscapes, aestheticism and people.
And if you look at the newly reorganized Bornimer Feldflur, one of our tour destinations, you will discover these traces and efforts.

This is an age-old concern of human sentiment, it is not by chance that we heard the Netzeband representative say some words about landscape aesthetics and the idea to combine the pleasant with the useful this morning. This should be the timeless motto without being dismissed as a visionary right away: to combine the pleasant with the useful. It stands for what the concern over sustainability represents today. This is why we are in Potsdam, Ladies and Gentlemen! I can only congratulate this city for having provided this magnificent ambience.

II.

This brings me to the seven keywords or topics in my summary:
1st keyword: Sustainability

We learnt that we are unfortunately still far away from sustainable action. On the contrary, we must fear a step backwards, at least at a global level. I would like to convey some of the zest and enthusiasm earlier mentioned by Federal President Rau to our guests from abroad: in Germany, in Europe, the sustainability debate is in full swing and taken seriously. We believe in the precept of sustainability and try to make our contribution, with every country setting its own priorities, of course. "Global sustainability, says Rau, "only works if justice prevails." if justice prevails and if we make our contribution. Fischler pledged to withdraw export promotion if others do it too.

Sustainability also contains an ethical aspect which always comes off badly in the trinity of the economic, ecological and socio-cultural aspects. What counts is also a spiritual and emotional sustainability! How can we achieve sustainability if our set of values is not right? Therefore: ethics is a crucial point.

Also think of the following aspect if you contemplate the issue of sustainability: we heard of a Chinese example today where with great commitment nature was regained so to speak and the pleasant combined with the useful. In China and elsewhere devastation is progressing. Yesterday, a newspaper reported that one fifth of China's territory is already desertified today. You see that this is a major issue and despite that we still lack technologies for resource conservation. We heard that we should actually be able to copy our success in achieving productivity gains in industry, for example, in this field, too. We were so successful there that we are virtually running out of work. Now we would have to make headway and find new work in the growth sectors of resource conservation, resource management and land use.

A point preoccupying us, especially the practitioners again and again: sustainable action is integral and cross-sectoral per se. Such an integral, cross-sectoral action is hard to implement in administrative terms. It goes beyond the scope of normal sectoral departmental thinking. And it is therefore still difficult to act sustainably and quite a challenge. And this is not just meant as a warning sign to all other countries, to eastern Europe or to the countries of the so-called Third World, but to our own country. That's where we still get stuck.

Today, the Mayoress Petra Köpping coined the best term for sustainability (we already know that of Brundtland etc. by heart): sustainability means for her and the inhabitants of her village "give back more than you have consumed". If you take this quotation home with you, you will have benefited enormously from this Congress, you will have a vision at any rate.

2nd major keyword: Property

Mr. Zimmermann professionally reported what was discussed in his workshop, but what we also already heard in the speech by Minister Funke: issues of land management, land use, land reform, access to land are extremely important at a global level, to be precise, and to clarify them is a necessary prerequisite for economic development - so says the 1999 UN-FIG Declaration of Bathurst, also signed by the World Bank, Mr. Feder, you were there personally. Rural development does not succeed without intensive discussions on this issue. Related to this are, of course, all the issues we also addressed. Are there administrations specifically for this purpose? In Germany we even have special administrative agencies for this purpose because property is a particularly sensitive good for which you should have neutral institutions at disposal, if possible. I am saying this deliberately to our friends from abroad that we should try to maintain real neutrality.

We also addressed in some detail the issues of Public Private Partnership (PPP) and of university education in these fields. We still have some deficits in this area in Germany, I am saying this emphatically, in Austria and elsewhere too. There is still too little training in this field in many European countries. This is why the English, Americans and Australians rule the market. The topic PPP is, of course, also an issue concerning civil society. How seriously does the civil society treat the division of responsibility and its delegation to citizens and the market?

3 rd issue: structural measures

We emphasized this particularly when planning the Congress: we are doing to deal with this part in European terms because it is highly topical. Our friends from abroad and especially from Africa and Asia may have thought when they heard the reports and complaints that they wouldn't mind having this kind of problems! This is what they are talking about...." I can even understand their point of view. But: we live here and have these problems. This is why we have to deal with them. But I have to concede that some of this might be hard to understand from a non-European perspective.

So what remains as the key statement? Laying greater stress on investment measures and on village renewal which seems to be very promising, this is particularly pleasing for me as a representative of this discipline. This became very clear again today so that I would like to impart it as a message to other countries all over the world: village renewal is a paradigm of a combination of democratic civil involvement, of interdisciplinary and integral cooperation with government organizations and NGOs as well as local policy in the sense of a civil society. Here, too, we heard: if there is money and there must be money, we are not that starry-eyed - then in the right order, please. First the fascinating idea or catching vision and then the money. If we invest money in people enjoying life and in the future, every state and every ministry can be happy.

4th issue: Civil society

This sounds so English or American, but we will have to deal with this issue here in Germany, here in Central Europe to a far greater extent. This is a topic cutting across all parties, be it Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, Gerhard Schröder from the social democrat side with their third way or the conservatives with their pro-active civil society or the greens or liberals etc. This is set to become an issue for our society (must). We would be well advised to integrate our structural measures, our rural development policy in this movement, illustrating that our ideas and concepts are the ideal embodiment, the ideal implementation of this new movement especially. I don't see any problems in presenting this. With rural development we ideally meet the principles of participation, civil involvement and civil responsibility.

Access to land and resources, property and safe ownership, observance of social capital, these are the major new issues at stake worldwide, plus the activation of the honorary office. Rural development wonderfully complies with these aspects all over the globe.

5th keyword: Education is the key factor

This is no surprise to us anymore, but we must point it out again and again. What matters is vocational training and further training, but also the empowerment of citizens for honorary commitment. The EU calls this capacity building, those wanting to get involved, must be empowered in the first place so that they can get involved. There are quite a few who dread public speeches or disputes, who cannot understand planning procedures right away because of their great complexity. We must therefore train and encourage these citizens. And we heard today that there is already much underway in rural communities in this respect. This capacity- building includes besides technical equipment public awareness first of all, of course. And it also encompasses the conveying of values as a key point. Those wanting to cooperate must first agree on values. Those intending to get married should first be clear about values and as much common ground as possible or else the marriage won't work. This is an age-old experience.

6th issue: We need engines, locomotives, key players etc.

There are various nice expressions for this. This is also an important experience for all those engaged in development projects. Plenty of money, ideas and administrative experts are only of little use. We need people on the spot acting as engines, never grow weary, go on and on and who are not aiming at short-term success above all.

Village renewal starts in the mind and must be driven and moved by the heart. This emotional part of participation is a key factor in our experience in the European area. We heard a very satisfying solution for fearful politicians: do not be afraid of participation! Participation provides satisfaction and ultimately reduces conflicts - even if there are a few clashes from time to time - ensures identification and attachment to the native soil we simply cannot do without.

7th keyword: Methodology of planning

The issue "How should our planning unfold - top down or bottom up? was a key aspect today.
But how could it be otherwise.
Ten years ago the concepts of top down or bottom up were not in everyday use, but we knew even then what it meant for village renewal, that we actually need both! We need strong, guiding, steering, enabling administrations and experts on the one hand. But we also need citizens and partners on the spot ready to take charge of their own destiny. I believe that this approach is transferable by all means. Some countries might attach more importance to the first aspect than others. Depending on the situation, progress and previous experience, the participatory bottom up approach already carries more weight.

But let me stress this again: both are necessary. I myself had some painful experience in Croatia, for example. We have guests from Croatia among us. We have not been very successful in Croatia so far because we miss the accompanying firm hand and backing from the administration. The administration obviously had some difficulty in accepting the type of direct participation we and the rural communities opted for and desired. We can gather from this that rural development always has an impact on politics and on sociopolitics, of course. We cannot act as in a political vacuum, we must realize this. If we were to start modern village development in China, the village inhabitants would grasp very soon that this calls for their involvement. And the old mechanisms that nobody lifts a finger or tongue unless the mayor has acted or said something first are all in the past. You are thus very close to the interface with politics, all our colleagues from development cooperation know this.... There is nothing better really than believing in people and their own strengths and development potential.

III

This brings me to our final statement already you all have available.

We can have some nice discussions about the following: here a comma is missing, there an important reference, we could do this or that different, there is a topic missing maybe and, and, and...

We are all aware of this. Anybody knows this who summarizes things in a synopsis and is then spoilt for choice to find a common denominator. I saw this only a moment ago: there has been a lot of mumbling in the break as a response to the workshop reports saying for example, that the workshop chairman failed to render all facets precisely or did not mention some important aspects addressed in the working group etc.

I thank you on behalf of BML and also personally for your key proposals and also for your other responses. There has been isolated criticism, but also a lot of praise. You can imagine that it is not easy to take everything into account in so short a time and without jeopardizing the framework. We tried to include those things we trusted would form a common platform because it has to be acceptable internationally. Have we addressed too many problems instead of opportunities? The critic Sixtus Lanner just gave an answer to this: we responded, also to the issue of fisheries by the way. This congress and this final statement do not specifically deal with the problems facing deep-sea fishing.

Some other aspects were mentioned to us, e.g. the aspect of SMEs (small- and medium-sized enterprises) and, and, and. I would like to note that there are many, many other individual aspects.

But I checked everything through again especially from the angle of summarizing and understanding everything on a broader scale. And from that stance I have no problem, for example, with classifying SMEs under the economic locational factor. Otherwise I could demand that local supply must also be specifically mentioned and, and, and. There are so many individual aspects which were and cannot be the specific concern or substance of this declaration.

The main concern of this Potsdam Declaration rural 21 is, and this is our joint concern uniting politics and society, in view of the presence of a German president and so many international experts, to communicate that we are advocates of rural areas that we want to fight for rural areas all over the globe and we are signaling to society where the problems lie and where the opportunities.

If you would just pick up this final declaration - I won't read it to you, of course, this would be impossible - then I would just briefly go through it with you again.
You see that the first part is dedicated to the initial situation. I think the congress contributions, especially the speeches and workshops made it plain that the international community is still faced with major problems and challenges, just think of the speeches by Rau, Diouf, Morales, the workshops yesterday or just now the speech by Mr. von Braun and that we are all obliged to master these problems to do something for sustainability. Food, agriculture, rural development and natural resources constitute a key part of this problem. There are people in our country, in Germany who have been wondering for a long time why we still care about agriculture?

We would have to send them out into the world more. Then they would realize how important agriculture is. Sixtus Lanner showed us today that there is another important aspect to agriculture, i.e. the indispensable "cultural and ecological benefits" for society.

If we carry on reading the declaration we find a common and incontestable statement formulated to this effect: despite of the differences in starting conditions " rural areas fulfill equally vital functions for developing and developed countries".
There are some variations in the priorities set by the respective countries for this task to be met by agriculture.
Rural21 aims at pointing out objectives, opportunities, ways and strategies for the sustainable development of rural areas as well as ways of implementing them.
The second part of the Declaration - what do we want?" deals with framework conditions being established and secured so that rural areas can develop as areas with their own identity.
If you think that through you will realize that this has some significant implications: "with their own identity", whereas our Regional Planning Act, even our Basic Law state that there should be equal living conditions everywhere. This is a statement with a lot of depth. This is what Diouf meant in saying that developing countries must pay more attention to their rural areas, if only because of food security. I believe that it has become very clear that the key to such a sustainable development in rural areas, which will also be viable in future, lies in developing specific and equal prospects for them, if possible, and not in being attachments to urban areas or compensatory areas with recreational and protective functions. In Chile I was told by ministries that they did not even know the concept of "regional planning policy in rural areas".
There is only urban regional planning with policies being focused on urban areas. The Declaration means something else: specific prospects for rural areas, the development of endogenous potential and an exchange of experience with other regions.
Add to this what we are constantly being told by UN experts and by all global players: of course these strategies for development cannot be "sold" and exported 1:1, and allowances must be made for the diversity of initial conditions and the respective chances and constraints.
You experienced it yourselves: the fields of action set out in the Declaration were basically illustrated to you in the speeches, especially in the workshops and in the examples given.
1st Field of action; combating poverty, securing food supplies, overcoming inequality.
Or the 2nd field of action: investing in people, creating more and better jobs.
If you examine all these aspects, you will see that this conference dealt with all of them, maybe not in every detail, this was impossible, but they were touched upon. The same goes for the 3rd issue: guaranteeing access to productive resources, settling conflicts over land use. I refer to workshop 1, for example, or the speech held by Mr. Morales.
All issues were raised, even technology was included despite some complaints to the contrary today.
Fourth point, 4th field of action: conserving natural life support systems, integrating environmental aspects in all decisions. This is surely a delicate point. But we cannot issue a declaration where we shirk these issues and utter vague and meaningless statements. The Congress made it plain that the environmental issue is a crucial matter of concern all over the world.
Fifth point: establishing a balanced partnership between urban and rural areas.
We heard this, too, so many times today, the workshop chairmen, von Lanner, von Hirsch-Reinshagen called this to mind, it was the subject of one workshop even.
6th field of action: creating an efficient infrastructure and securing access to it. May I draw your attention specifically to the issue: easier access to telecommunications facilities". You could hold a proper conference just about these new media. Then we would probably go home after two days and still not know what this really signifies for rural areas. This is easier said than done. Key prerequisites must be created beforehand.
7th issue: securing an efficient, multifunctional agriculture and forestry. No further comment is necessary.
And the 8th issue: ensuring good governance and participation.
This strongly reminds me of the international principle of good governance. These principles are being observed more and more. And if we talk and write about transparent and responsible governance, we also subsume administrations and other institutions under it.

The emerging civil society requires space for involvement and assumption of responsibility for the shaping of local policies. I find this very enriching myself to hear that Director-General Diouf regards this statement as universally valid for the whole world. This was quite impressive.
Yes, and then the final point in the Declaration: What do we have to do? I will only go into one point because it came in for criticism today. We expressly wrote in this concluding chapter that this also encompasses academic institutions, thus also universities, research and science. It would have been a bit strange if I had not thought of science as a participant in this Congress.
The priorities are set out. In my view they represent a nice cross-section of the need for action and also a signal, a message going outwards. This message is to go out into the world in the sense of multiplication as the Federal Agriculture Ministry (BML) is asked, of course: "Why on earth did you hold this meeting. This must have cost a bit". This is our German contribution especially in the year of EXPO! The organizer BML was generous and thus provided a wonderful atmosphere.
Now BML can tell all those inquiring to just look at this declaration endorsed by all participants.
This is a result you can invoke.

I witnessed how the FIG issued a declaration with the United Nations in Bathurst - this declaration is on everyone's lips. This is precisely why our Potsdam Declaration rural21 carries that much weight.

What do we stress: combating poverty and food insecurity, promoting employment in rural areas and not just merely jobs in agriculture. The Declaration states emphatically: as well as in other economic areas".
And "ensuring legal access to resources, land use, property. Stepping up efforts for sustainability.
This is certainly of interest to Federal President Rau that this declaration fully reflects his appeal.
Or: striking a balance in the economic, social and ecological developments of rural and urban areas. We expressly avoided confining ourselves to the rural corner. We also integrated urban areas - masterfully, I believe. The highest-ranking representative of regional planning and the building industry in Germany, Professor Krautzberger, was present at our congress in his capacity as ambassador of urban21. We would lay ourselves open to criticism if we fail to address urban areas as well. Yet, you could also demand in reverse: it would not be bad if urban areas would also address issues relating to rural areas.

Keyword: establishing and maintaining an efficient, ecologically compatible infrastructure.
This has also been discussed today, the soft locational factors. Mr. Stolpe even said that these soft factors will eventually become hard factors, we also require hard infrastructure. It would be absurd to rave about soft locational factors in Ghana, for example. Then the people would be justified in asking:"Yes and what are we supposed to live on?" It is clear that both must be there and we therefore included the point " establishing and maintaining the infrastructure" in our set of actions.

Or the observance of a multifunctional role of agriculture and forestry and its contribution to a sustainable development prospect - agriculture also in the sense of sustainable action.
And finally, this is also a concrete suggestion from a workshop we took up, the initiation, monitoring and coordination of local and regional development processes. As I see it this satisfies all planners present here because this aspect has been clearly underlined now. And it goes without saying that the rural population should take centre stage. Yet, we expressly incorporated the aspect mentioned by Minister Morales again: respect for ethnic groups and respect for different cultures.

Rural areas require a specific policy for their conservation and further development.

My request to you is to really support this "final apotheosis" with all your heart and that we agree in championing this declaration and sending it out into the world and taking pride in saying, whether in Zagreb, Santiago or Manila or elsewhere: this is the result we achieved in Potsdam.
We want a continuation and deepening of the international exchange of views and experience.
Mr. Kroll-Schlüter already suggested a resumption at a different place.
This is our final apotheosis.

Allow me a brief concluding remark, Ladies and Gentlemen:
"combine the pleasant with the useful" I mentioned this earlier as the philosophy of 200 years of land embellishment here in Potsdam. For aesthetic and cultural reasons a landscape is currently being restored here in the city of Potsdam with the help of rural development. This re-establishment is seen as an economic contribution to sustainable urban development. Just let this melt in your mouth. I believe that this is a wonderful bridging between town and country, between urban and rural development, also in the spirit of the opening address by Director-General Diouf.

Is the bridging between town and country a new insight? If we just return to land embellishment again whose sustainable attributes we still admire today in Potsdam. A spearhead of land embellishment from Bavaria, Gustav Vorherr, said in 1807:"farmers and urban dwellers may gain the deep insight and understanding that they cannot exist without each other." Town and country depend on each other! I believe that this is a wonderful message of our international congress rural21, also as a bridging to the international congress urban21 in three weeks that we as champions of urban areas know and signalize that we need vibrant cities, but that the cities also should know that they have no future without vibrant rural areas.

I should like to wind up by expressing my warmest thanks again to my efficient team from the university and especially to Mr. Rupert Linder. Special thanks also go to you, Professor Schlagheck, as the BML representative for allowing us to organize and have a share in shaping this excellent congress. I would also like to thank the BML team, Mr. Lenk and Mr. Schulz, for your support and cooperation.

Contact

Univ. Prof. Dr-Ing. Holger Magel
Vice President of FIG
Chair of Land Readjustment and Land Development
Technische Universität München
Institute of Geodesy, GIS and Land Management
Arcisstrasse 21
D-80290 München
GERMANY
Tel. + 49 89 289 22535
Fax + 49 89 289 23933
E-mail: magel@landentwicklung-muenchen.de 

 This page is maintained by the FIG Office. Last revised on 15-03-23.