An example of RA regions and enlarged communities

Vahan V. Yengidunyan

Keywords – Enlarged community, region, territorial governance, vulnerability, spatial organization, socio-spatial planning, spatial control, cluster analysis, adaptive capacity, sense of place, spatial engagement, local leadership.

Summary

From the point of view of the territorial management of settlements, primary importance is given to the creation of a comfortable and functional environment for the residents. Territorial management of settlements is quite a sensitive process, because each unjustified change can significantly harm the daily operations of the residents, increasing the vulnerability of the settlement in the context of possible changes. From the point of view of the above-mentioned risks management, it is more important than ever to harmonize the professional approaches of territorial management strategy development with the endogenous and exogenous factors of settlement reproduction. Since territorial management is manifested in the dimensions of spatial organization, socio-spatial planning and spatial control, then the process of harmonization is logically derived from the realities in these dimensions. The process of community enlargement has been completed in RA and the methodological and procedural features of its implementation allow us to assume that there is an unequal distribution based on vulnerability, both in RA regions and in enlarged communities. Taking into account the possible negative impact of the above-mentioned assumption on the stable operation of settlements, as well as the lack of research knowledge aimed at this issue, the research was conducted to identify the most vulnerable regions of the Republic of Armenia and enlarged communities in the context of territorial governance, as well as to identify the characteristics of the manifestation of vulnerability in these settlements.

As a result of the research, it became clear that inequality according to vulnerability in RA regions and enlarged communities is observable in the context of spatial organization, socio-spatial planning and spatial control. In particular, the analysis of demographic and socio-economic indicators at the level of spatial organization makes it clear that on average Syunik and Vayots Dzor regions have the smallest number of inhabitants per settlement. Parallelly, the highest score of population dispersion in the enlarged communities was recorded in the Tatev enlarged community of Syunik. The picture is the same, also in the context of the comparative analysis of employment and education indicators in settlements. In particular, if in the case of employment there are labor and labor resources, then in the case of education, there is student attendance per public educational institution, which also records the lowest scores in the Vayots Dzor region. The highly unequal population distribution between the southwestern and southern regions of RA is a significant risk for managing the resources and opportunities of the territories. The uncontrollable processes of urbanization, in the context of which the population is concentrated in specific settlements, violates the principle of ensuring equal opportunities for the development of settlements, because in the perspective of short-term strategy, it is not advisable to implement large-scale projects in settlements with a decreasing population. It is interesting that, if the vulnerability of Vayots Dzor and Syunik regions is more emphasized in the dimension of spatial organization compared to other regions, then in the context of socio-spatial planning, Gegharkunik region stands out with multidimensional vulnerability. The vulnerability of Gegharkunik region is manifested, in particular, in terms of health conditions and average monthly income of households. Finally, the most vulnerable enlarged communities and settlements with the spatial control component belong to Syunik and VayotsDzor. The vulnerability of these regions in terms of spatial control is especially evident in the state-local government-residents relationship, where local residents meet and interact with the local government rarely and the state’s subsidies to the settlements of these regions are the smallest. At the same time, in these regions, there is the lowest quality of public services.

The vulnerability of RA regions and enlarged communities was investigated, also by clustering indicators of sense of place, spatial engagement and local leadership, which are considered components of socio-spatial planning and spatial control. The obtained results prove that only Gegharkunik region belongs to the cluster with relatively low indicators and Gavar is the only enlarged community belonging to this cluster. The obtained results prove that there is multidimensional vulnerability in Gegharkunik, Syunik and Vayots Dzor regions, which makes the enlarged communities of these regions and the settlements that make up these communities less flexible to possible changes. In these conditions, more than ever, the development of separate territorial development procedures is important, which, in connection with the general principles of the development of the RA regions, will monitor and promptly respond to every change taking place in the settlements of the mentioned marzes.