IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v11y2021i8p717-d604051.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Vernacular and Rural Houses of Agrarian Areas in the Zeta Region, Montenegro

Author

Listed:
  • Goran Skataric

    (National Parks of Montenegro, 81000 Podgorica, Montenegro
    Faculty of Economics and Engineering Management, University Business Academy, 21102 Novi Sad, Serbia)

  • Velibor Spalevic

    (Biotechnical Faculty, University of Montenegro, 81000 Podgorica, Montenegro
    Study Program of Geography, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Montenegro, 81400 Niksic, Montenegro)

  • Svetislav Popovic

    (Faculty of Architecture, University of Montenegro, 81000 Podgorica, Montenegro)

  • Nenad Perosevic

    (Study Program of History, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Montenegro, 81400 Niksic, Montenegro)

  • Rajko Novicevic

    (Faculty of Business Economics and Law, Adriatic University, 85000 Bar, Montenegro)

Abstract

Architectural quality and preservation of rural characteristics is a goal of building design for sustainable environments. The environment has a different function for different societies, creating a large variety of meanings. In the Zeta region of Montenegro, the negative transformation of the rural environment is happening more rapidly than the recording of its traditional built assets. Protection and conservation of traditional rural architecture in this rural region of south-eastern Europe are important to both mitigation of the consequences of unsustainable rural shifts and the preservation of cultural heritage. This research focuses on the meaning of the different dwelling and residential environment features for the residents of the traditional houses of the rural areas of the Zeta region, Montenegro. The aim of the research was to obtain more insight and information on the meaning of architectural and rural design features by exploring the sustainability-related characteristics of traditional rural houses in the so-far insufficiently studied micro-region of the western Balkans to reveal their value and to initiate discussion of the role of heritage regeneration in sustainable rural development. Fifty (50) traditional houses of agrarian and rural areas of the Zeta region of Montenegro were observed and analysed in terms of the building site, space planning of the interior space, and building materials used. The analysis has revealed that many ecological aspects were taken into consideration and different methods were implemented during the construction of the traditional houses of the Zeta region. Taking into consideration the age of those structures, the constructors did not have an in-depth awareness of sustainability theories, and they were acting based on their personal practices and specific environmental requirements. This study’s results can help update a database of sustainability for the traditional architectural heritage of Montenegro, which will enhance the process of creating sustainable buildings without losing the place identity and staying in the same cultural context. Restoration of the traditional houses of the Zeta region of Montenegro, but also of the other rural areas of Montenegro, must in future be defined in a way that enables the preservation of recognized general values and further improvement of environmental quality and climate resilience. Simultaneously, functional reactivation of traditional houses should be understood as a contribution to the sustainable development of the studied region of Montenegro.

Suggested Citation

  • Goran Skataric & Velibor Spalevic & Svetislav Popovic & Nenad Perosevic & Rajko Novicevic, 2021. "The Vernacular and Rural Houses of Agrarian Areas in the Zeta Region, Montenegro," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-35, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:8:p:717-:d:604051
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/8/717/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/8/717/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maria-Jesus Agost & Margarita Vergara, 2020. "Principles of Affective Design in Consumers’ Response to Sustainability Design Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Željka Čurović & Milić Čurović & Velibor Spalević & Milorad Janic & Paul Sestras & Svetislav G. Popović, 2019. "Identification and Evaluation of Landscape as a Precondition for Planning Revitalization and Development of Mediterranean Rural Settlements—Case Study: Mrkovi Village, Bay of Kotor, Montenegro," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Sadra Sahebzadeh & Abolfazl Heidari & Hamed Kamelnia & Abolfazl Baghbani, 2017. "Sustainability Features of Iran’s Vernacular Architecture: A Comparative Study between the Architecture of Hot–Arid and Hot–Arid–Windy Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-28, May.
    4. Saja Kosanović & Branislav Folić & Stefan Kovačević & Ivana Nikolić & Ljubiša Folić, 2019. "A Study on the Sustainability of the Traditional Sirinić Houses in the Šar Mountain Region, the South-Western Balkans," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Tiziano Cattaneo & Emanuele Giorgi & Mauricio Flores & Viviana Barquero, 2020. "Territorial Effects of Shared-Living Heritage Regeneration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-28, October.
    6. Francesca Nocca, 2017. "The Role of Cultural Heritage in Sustainable Development: Multidimensional Indicators as Decision-Making Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-28, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    2. Carlos Smaniotto Costa & Marluci Menezes & Petja Ivanova-Radovanova & Tatiana Ruchinskaya & Konstantinos Lalenis & Monica Bocci, 2021. "Planning Perspectives and Approaches for Activating Underground Built Heritage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-15, September.
    3. Joris Van Doorsselaere, 2021. "Connecting Sustainable Development and Heritage Education? An Analysis of the Curriculum Reform in Flemish Public Secondary Schools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Saja Kosanović & Mirjana Miletić & Ljubo Marković, 2021. "Energy Refurbishment of Family Houses in Serbia in Line with the Principles of Circular Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-14, May.
    5. Jiayi Shi & Tao Zhang & Hiroatsu Fukuda & Qun Zhang & Lujian Bai, 2022. "Socio-Environmental Responsive Strategy and Sustainable Development of Traditional Tianshui Dwellings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-27, July.
    6. Elena Gorbenkova & Elena Shcherbina, 2020. "Historical-Genetic Features in Rural Settlement System: A Case Study from Mogilev District (Mogilev Oblast, Belarus)," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-17, May.
    7. Shen Wang & Guohe Huang & Yurui Fan, 2018. "A Multistage Distribution-Generation Planning Model for Clean Power Generation under Multiple Uncertainties—A Case Study of Urumqi, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-30, September.
    8. Dana Badau & Adela Badau, 2018. "The motric, Educational, Recreational and Satisfaction Impact of Adventure Education Activities in the Urban Tourism Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    9. Tomas Kačerauskas & Dalia Streimikiene & Rasa Bartkute, 2021. "Environmental Sustainability of Creative Economy: Evidence from a Lithuanian Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-18, August.
    10. Stefania Środa-Murawska & Elżbieta Grzelak-Kostulska & Jadwiga Biegańska & Leszek S. Dąbrowski, 2021. "Culture and Sustainable Tourism: Does the Pair Pay in Medium-Sized Cities?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-26, August.
    11. Daniela Angelina Jelinčić, 2021. "Indicators for Cultural and Creative Industries’ Impact Assessment on Cultural Heritage and Tourism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-13, July.
    12. Rocío González-Sánchez & Sara Alonso-Muñoz & María-Sonia Medina-Salgado & María Torrejón-Ramos, 2023. "Driving circular tourism pathways in the post-pandemic period: a research roadmap," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 17(3), pages 633-668, September.
    13. Qindong Fan & Fengtian Du & Hu Li, 2020. "A Study of the Spatial Form of Maling Village, Henan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-24, September.
    14. Sanober Naheed & Salman Shooshtarian, 2022. "The Role of Cultural Heritage in Promoting Urban Sustainability: A Brief Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    15. Andris Kairiss & Ineta Geipele & Irina Olevska-Kairisa, 2023. "Sustainability of Cultural Heritage-Related Projects: Use of Socio-Economic Indicators in Latvia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-29, June.
    16. Shu-Yen Wang & Shyh-Huei Hwang, 2019. "Research on Field Reconstruction and Community Design of Living Settlements—An Example of Repairing a Fish Stove in the Hua-Zhai Settlement on Wang-An Island, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-30, October.
    17. Maysa Ali Selim & Noura Anwar Abdel-Fattah & Yasmine Sabry Hegazi, 2021. "A Composite Index to Measure Smartness and Competitiveness of Heritage Tourism Destination and Historic Building," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-24, November.
    18. Francesca Di Turo & Laura Medeghini, 2021. "How Green Possibilities Can Help in a Future Sustainable Conservation of Cultural Heritage in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-14, March.
    19. Louis J. Durrant & Atish N. Vadher & Mirza Sarač & Duygu Başoğlu & Jacques Teller, 2022. "Using Organigraphs to Map Disaster Risk Management Governance in the Field of Cultural Heritage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-12, January.
    20. Dalia Streimikiene & Asta Mikalauskiene & Ilona Kiausiene, 2019. "The Impact of Value Created by Culture on Approaching the Sustainable Development Goals: Case of the Baltic States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-25, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:8:p:717-:d:604051. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.