Landscape change and the urbanization process in Europe
Introduction
Landscapes are on the political agenda today. Natural and cultural aspects of landscapes receive increasing attention from researchers, planners and policy makers (Anonymous, 2000, Council of Europe, 2000, Brandt, 2000, Klijn and Vos, 2000). The main reason is the general observation that the changes in landscapes become extremely devastating and many heritage values and resources become irreversibly lost. The speed of the changes, their frequency and magnitude increased unprecedented in the second half of the 20th century (Antrop, 2000a). Many new elements and structures are superimposed upon the traditional landscapes that become highly fragmented and lose their identity. New landscapes are created, which are characterized by a functional homogeneity. They form new challenges for landscape research as they are highly dynamic and little is known about the ongoing processes (Brandt et al., 2001). Planners and policy makers are in growing need of new significant data and scientific knowledge. Urbanization, effects of transportation networks and globalization are the important driving forces of these changes and the emergence of new landscapes.
Urbanization is a complex process of change of rural lifestyles into urban ones. It showed an almost exponential growth since the end of the 19th century (Champion, 2001, Pacione, 2001a, Antrop, 2000a, Bryant et al., 1982). This process is intimately related to the introduction of new modes of transportation, in particular those that allowed mobility of the masses such as the railroad. After the Second World War, the use of the automobile started a new era of mobility and landscape change. Accessibility became the most important factor in landscape change and even in the remote countryside urbanization processes can be noticed when the region is disclosed by transportation. Finally, the growing globalization of all activities and decision-making causes changes at the local level that are difficult to handle by the people living there. What new tools and methods do researchers, planners and policy makers need or have already at their disposal to cope with these processes? The task will be difficult as transdisciplinary approach is recommended and good communication is required.
Earlier views considered urbanization as a diffusion process starting from the growing urban centers that affected the countryside in concentric spheres of differentiated influence (Burgess, 1925, Mann, 1965, Bryant et al., 1982). The reality proved to be much more complex and many city models and models for urban land use structure have been made since (Pacione, 2001b). Lewis and Maund (1976) stressed the importance of accessibility of places and the transportation infrastructure. Antrop (2000b) defined urbanization as a complex process that transforms the rural or natural landscapes into urban and industrial ones forming star-shaped spatial patterns controlled by the physical conditions of the site and its accessibility by transportation routes. The relation between urban and rural becomes extremely complex and receives a growing attention in spatial and environmental planning (SPESP, 2000, Stanners and Bourdeau, 1995). Typical is the transition between an urban center or agglomeration and the countryside becoming unclear and diffuse. The urban fringe or suburban landscapes are characterized by a wide variety of land uses, which is expressed in a complex, diverse and highly fragmented morphology. Suburbs and urbanized rural landscapes consist of a mosaic of varied land cover, constructions and transportation infrastructures. The delimitation between urban and rural becomes a difficult task involving a lot of uncertainty and it is very unlikely that land zoning borders remain a stable delineation.
Nowadays, urbanization is no longer typical for the growth of cities or towns only but it influences the processes in the rural countryside as well. The actual changes of landscapes are induced by urbanization processes such as residential or industrial land development and new communication infrastructures. These processes are mainly controlled by social and economic factors that exceed the local conditions. These changes are characterized by a generalized homogenization of the existing traditional landscape diversity and the creation of largely chaotic patterns. Such a chaotic development is typical for complex systems and is also referred to as autonomous development (Antrop, 1998). New forms of land use are not ecologically related any more with the land and the place. Spatial and environmental planning aims to steer and control these changes, but the lack of concerted actions at the appropriate scale level might enhance this chaotic character.
This article discusses the main phases and trends of the urbanization processes in Europe and how it acts upon the actual rural landscapes, illustrated by some case studies near large cities and in remote rural areas.
Section snippets
The advantages of agglomerated economies and the power of geographical localization
Permanent human settlement is a direct result of the success of agriculture, which created a food surplus and allowed labor, so new activities could develop. The success of the sedentary life resides mainly in a concentration of different complementary activities in one place. These agglomeration economies allowed specialization and stimulated trade, offering win–win situations for all (Pacione, 2001a). Cities were efficient structures to harbor such activities and to form the necessary route
Cycles of urbanization and counterurbanization
Several phases in the urbanization have been recognized (Champion, 2001, Geyer and Kontuly, 1993, Van der Berg et al., 1982, Klaassen et al., 1981). The urbanization phases are defined according to the combined growth and decline of the urban center and the urban fringe area (Fig. 2). The first phase (called ‘urbanization’) consists of a concentration of the population in the city center by migration of the people from the fringe. The second phase (‘suburbanization’) still shows a growing
The countryside in the urban shadow of large cities
Large cities show most characteristic patterns of star-shaped urban sprawl (Antrop, 2000b). Most urban development starts along the main access roads. When congestion occurs new peripheral motorways are built, which stimulates the development of edge cities characterized by new commercial and industrial activities. Between these lobes of urban development, wedges of remarkably untouched countryside can remain. This phenomenon has been explained by the ‘urban implosion’ in time–space as larger
Urban population and urban land
Although most of the population is living in cities, only one percent of the land area of Europe is estimated to be urban (Table 2). However, comparable data about the built-up land are rare and hard to find. It is significant that the HABITAT reports (United Nations Center for Human Settlement, 1996, United Nations Center for Human Settlement, 2001) do not give any data about the areas occupied by urban settlements.
The high level of urbanization in the world is a recent phenomenon that was
Conclusions
Urbanization is primarily a complex of functional changes, followed by morphological and structural ones. It occurs near cities as well as in the rural countryside. It should be regarded as a diffusion wave of changing life-style mainly controlled by the changing accessibility of places offering new opportunities. Urbanization causes a polarization of space by changing population densities, economical activities and mobility. Remote rural areas with poor accessibility become abandoned and in
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Margareta Ihse and Prof. Dr. Ülo Mander, the organizers of the IALE 2001 European Conference on the Development of European Landscapes, for inviting me to present this topic at the plenary session. I would also like to thank the Ministry of the Flemish Community and the Support Center of GIS Flanders for the maps and orthophotos in Fig. 5, Fig. 6.
Marc Antrop (1946) is geographer specialized in landscapes sciences, remote sensing, GIS and planning. He is professor lecturing at the University of Ghent (Belgium, Flanders) and at the moment head of the Department of Geography. His interest in the landscape is broad and holistic, covering and integrating aspects of landscape genesis (in particular, focusing upon the natural and cultural aspects of the European landscapes), landscape perception, landscape evaluation and land assessment,
References (58)
Landscape change: plan or chaos?
Landsc. Urban Plann.
(1998)Background concepts for integrated landscape analysis
Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
(2000)- et al.
Holistic aspects of suburban landscapes: visual image interpretation and landscape metrics
Landsc. Urban Plann.
(2000) - et al.
Western Europe, current city expansion and the use of GIS
Landsc. Urban Plann.
(1997) - et al.
Scenic routes linking and protecting natural and cultural landscape features: a greenway skeleton
Landsc. Urban Plann.
(1995) - et al.
The post-suburban era comes to Richmond: city decline, suburban transition and exurban growth
Landsc. Urban Plann.
(1997) - et al.
The decentered city: edge cities and the expanding metropolis
Landsc. Urban Plann.
(1997) - et al.
How to use roads in the creation of greenways: case studies in three New Zealand landscapes
Landsc. Urban Plann.
(2001) - Anonymous, 2000. Get Connected To Your Place! The Dornach Landscape Document, Discussion Document of the International...
Geografische aspekten van de Europese cultuur
De Aardrijkskunde
(1992)
Changing patterns in the urbanized countryside of Western Europe
Landsc. Ecol.
A new phase of urban development in Western Europe? The evidence for the 1980s
Urban Stud.
Roads and their major ecological effects
Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst.
A theoretical foundation for the concept of differential urbanization
Int. Reg. Sci. Rev.
Cited by (0)
Marc Antrop (1946) is geographer specialized in landscapes sciences, remote sensing, GIS and planning. He is professor lecturing at the University of Ghent (Belgium, Flanders) and at the moment head of the Department of Geography. His interest in the landscape is broad and holistic, covering and integrating aspects of landscape genesis (in particular, focusing upon the natural and cultural aspects of the European landscapes), landscape perception, landscape evaluation and land assessment, landscape ecology and landscape architecture. Practical application of this knowledge is achieved in planning and environmental impact assessment and monitoring land degradation. His main work areas are Belgium, France, the Mediterranean, Egypt and Central Europe. His main research field are actually the elaboration of the survey of the relicts of traditional landscapes of Flanders, the elaboration of methods for strategic environmental impact assessment (SEA) and the development of new structural spatial planning. He is member of the Royal Committee for Protection of Monuments and Landscapes in Flanders and vice-president for the division of landscape protection. He is a consultant for the Flemish and Belgian government on the field of environmental impact assessment and the implementation of GIS in administration, environmental policy and planning and is member of the Scientific GIS Committee.