Tendencies and Spatial Pattern of Urban Growth in the Catchment Area of Hungarian Middle Cities between 1990-2018
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36249/57.2Keywords:
Urban Growth, Middle cityAbstract
Highlighted challenges of landscape management and urban policy are land use and urban sprawl management (EEA 2016, EEA 2007). Important concerns occurred from the aspect of landscape architecture, like sustainability, disproportional land take, loss of natural habitats, as well as traditional land use (Artmann et al. 2019; Antrop 2004). Nevertheless, the concept of urban sprawl is commonly used, several qualitative and quantitative definitions exist (some examples: Steurer and Bayr 2020; Luc-Normand 2020; Szirmai 2011; Ewing 2008; Galster et al. 2001) it is hard to define precisely (Tsai 2005). Egidi et al. (2020: 4) highlights “sprawl still remains a mixed morphological and functional issue, e.g., in terms of housing, land-use, fragmentation, and confusion of landscape characters” referring to Colantoni et al. (2015) and Di Feliciantonio and Salvati (2014). The analyses of different spatial patterns or morphological distribution of urban sprawl is a core topic of urban planning (Angel et al. 2010; Schneider and Woodcock 2008; Schwarz, 2010; Galster et al. 2001). Compact city, as an objective for urban planning is on the political agenda, to foster organic growth of urban areas and fill the gaps within the urban tissue (CEC 1990, 1996; Kasanko et al. 2005; Batty et al. 2003). In the literature, the most influenced territories are in focus: the central city and its settlement network (Szirmai 2011) and also the periphery, edge, peri urban territories (Lennert 2018; Csemez 2008; Antrop 2004). The definitions of functional urban area (FUA) (OECD 2013; 2012) or urban settlement groups (KSH 2014) are integrated into the international and national discussions and the statistical systems as well. FUA regions are determined on the basis of population density and continuity of integration. The definition of urban settlement group, just like agglomeration and agglomerating area are used in Hungarian context, determined by multiple indicators by KSH Inostroza et al. (2013) distinguish three main spatial pattern infill, axial and isolated development. By all new development, that is taking place in adjacency with the pre-existing urban tissue, infilling increase compactness, axial growth follows the main development axis, and is strongly determined by infrastructure. No doubt, spatial analyses of urban sprawl needs to be the basis of urban planning an overall review from this respect has not appeared yet from Hungary. The motivation for compact urban planning was missing from the regulatory environment until 2019 (Act CXXXIX of on Land Use Framework Plan of Hungary and Priority Areas, OTrT). The country-level studies focus on the Budapest agglomeration (for example Lennert et al. 2020; Kovács et al. 2019; Cegielska et al. 2018; Egyedné Gergely 2014; Schuchmann 2013; Tosics 1998). However, on the situation of smaller towns, only short term or case-focused studies were born (Hoyk et al. 2020). The present paper explores the trends of spatial growth of functional urban area (FUA) of 12 secondtier Hungarian towns since 1990.
References
A 2018. évi CXXXIX. törvény. Magyarország és egyes kiemelt térségeinek területrendezési tervéről
Allen, A. (2003): Environmental planning and management of the peri-urban interface: perspectives on an emerging field. Environment and Urbanization, 15(1), 135–148. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/095624780301500103
Angel, S. – Parent, J. – Civco, D. (2010): The Fragmentation of Urban Footprints: Global Evidence of Urban Sprawl 1990-2000. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy Working Paper: Cambridge, MA
Antrop, M. (2004): Landscape change and the urbanization process in Europe. Landscape and Urban Planning, 67(1-4), 9–26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00026-4
Artmann, M. – Inostroza, L. – Peilei, F. (2019): Urban sprawl, compact urban development and green cities. How much do we know, how much do we agree? Ecological Indicators, 96(2), 3–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.10.059
Batty, M. – Besussi, E. – Chin, N. (2003): Traffic, Urban Growth and Suburban Sprawl. (CASA Working paper 70). Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (UCL Discovery): London, UK.
Beluszky P. – Sikos T. T. (2008): Változó falvaink (Magyarország falutípusai az ezredfordulón), MTA Társadalomkutató Központ: Budapest.
Bossard, M. – Feranec, J. – Otahel, J. (2000): CORINE land cover technical guide – Addendum 2000. Technical report 40. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency. [online] URL: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/tech40add [2020.04.09]
Cegielska, K. – Noszczyk, T. – Kukulska-Kozieł, A. et al. (2018): Land use and land cover changes in post-socialist countries: Some observations from Hungary and Poland. Land Use Policy. 78, 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.06.017
Colantoni, A. – Mavrakis, A. – Sorgi, T. – Salvati, L. (2015): Towards a ‘polycentric’ landscape? Reconnecting fragments into an integrated network of coastal forests in Rome. Rendiconti Lincei. 26, 615–624. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12210-015-0394-5
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (CEC) 1990. Green Paper on the Urban Environment. Communication from the Commission to the Council and Parliament. COM 1990/218 final
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (CEC) 1996. Expert Group on Urban Environment. European Sustainable Cities Report. Brussels CORINE LAND COVER (CLC) INVENTORY 1990—2018. Accessed: https://land.copernicus.eu/pan-european/corine-land-cover,
Csemez A. (2008): Változó városkörnyék. Falu Város Régió. 1, 45–51.
Di Feliciantonio, C. – Salvati, L. (2014): ‘Southern’ Alternatives of Urban Diffusion: Investigating SettlementCharacteristics and Socio-Economic Patterns in Three Mediterranean Regions. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie. 106, 453–470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12102
Diaz-Pacheco, J. – Gutiérrez, J. (2014): Exploring the limitations of CORINE Land Cover for monitoring urban land-use dynamics in metropolitan areas. Journal of Land Use Science, 9(3), 243–259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1747423X.2012.761736
(European Environment Agency) 2007. The pan-European environment: glimpses into an uncertain future. EEA Report No. 4/2007. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen. EEA (European Environment Agency) 2016. Urban Sprawl in Europe. Joint EEA-FOEN Report. Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
Egidi, G. – Sirio, C. – Vinci, S. – et al. (2020): Towards Local Forms of Sprawl: A Brief Reflection on Mediterranean Urbanization. Sustainability. 12(2), 582. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020582
Egyedné Gergely J. (2015): Az önkormányzatok lehetőségei a szuburbanizációs folyamatok alakításában. A szuburbanizációs hatások térbeli megjelenése és a különbségek mögötti lehetséges okok vizsgálata a Budapesti Agglomeráció példáján. [PhD disszertáció]. Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem, Szociológia Doktori Iskola, Budapest. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14267/phd.2015013
Enyedi Gy. (2011): The Stages of Urban Growth. In Szirmai, V. (ed.): Urban Sprawl in Europe. Similarities or Differences?, Aula kiadó: Budapest. pp. 45-62.
Enyedi Gy. (2016): Városi világ. Akadémiai Kiadó: Budapest.
Ewing, R. H. (2008): Characteristics, Causes, and Effects of Sprawl: A Literature Review. In: Marzluff, J. M. – Shulenberger, E. – Endlicher, W., et al. (eds.): Urban Ecology: An International Perspective on the Interaction between Humans and Nature. Springer: Boston, MA. pp. 519–535.
Feranec, J. – Soukup, T. – Taff, G. et al. (2017): Overview of Changes in Land Use and Land Cover in Eastern Europe. In: Gutman, G. – Radeloff, V. (eds.): Land-Cover and Land-Use Changes in Eastern Europe after the Collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Springer International Publishing: Cam, pp. 13–33. [online] DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42638-9_2
Galster, G. – Hanson, R. – Ratcliffe, M. R. et al. (2001): Wrestling Sprawl to the Ground: Defining and measuring an elusive concept. Housing Policy Debate, 12(4), 681–717. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2001.9521426
Geneletti, D. – La Rosa, D. – Spyra, M. – Cortinovis, C. (2017): A review of approaches and challenges for sustainable planning in urban peripheries. Landscape and Urban Planning, 165, 231–243. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.01.013
Heymann, Y. – Steenmans, Ch. – Croissille, G. – Bossard, M. (1994): CORINE land cover. Technical guide. Office for Official Publications European Communities: Luxembourg.
Hoyk, E. – Hardi, T. – Farkas, J. Zs. (2020): Environmental impacts of urbanization processes on the examples of Kecskemét and Győr functional urban areas. Journal of Central European Green Innovation, 7(1), 13–33.
Inostroza, L – Baur, R. – Csaplovics, E. (2013): Urban sprawl and fragmentation in Latin America: A dynamic quantification and characterization of spatial patterns. Journal of Environmental Management, 115, 87—97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.11.007
Iváncsics, V. – Filepné Kovács, K. (2019): Characteristics of Post Socialist Spatial Development of the Functional Urban Area of Veszprém, Hungary. Journal of Environmental Geography, 12(3-4), 33–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jengeo-2019-0010
Iváncsics V. – Filepné Kovács K. (2019): Napjaink tájváltozási folyamatai funkcionális városi térségeinkben. In: Fazekas I., Lázár I. (szerk.): VIII. Magyar Tájökológiai Konferencia: Összefoglalók. MTA DTB Földtudományi Szakbizottság, Kisvárda. pp. 185–189.
Kasanko, M. – Barredo, J. – Lavalle, C., et al. (2005): Towards urban un-sustainability in Europe? An indicator-based analysis. 45th Congress of the European Regional Science Association. Land Use and Water Management in a Sustainable Network Society, Amsterdam, 23—27 August 2005
Kovács, Z. – Farkas, Zs. J. – Egedy, T., (2019): Urban sprawl and land conversion in post-socialist cities: The case of metropolitan Budapest. Cities, 92, 71–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.03.018
KSH Hungarian Central Statistical Office (2014): Regional Atlas. [online] URL: https://www.ksh.hu/ [2020.09.01.]
Lennert J. (2018): Felszínborítás-változás a visegrádi országokban a rendszerváltás után. Magyar Tudomány, 179(3), 319–330. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1556/2065.179.2018.3.2
Lennert, J. – Farkas, J. Zs. – Kovács, A. D., et al. (2020): Measuring and predicting long-term land cover changes in the functional urban area of Budapest. Sustainability, 12(8), 3331. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083331
Luc-Normand, T. (2021): Characterizing urban form by means of the Urban Metric System. Land Use Policy, 111, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104672
Mari L. (2010): Tájváltozás elemzés a CORINE adatbázisok alapján. In: Szilassi P. – Henits L. (ed.): Földrajzi Tanulmányok V. Tájváltozás értékelési módszerei a XXI. században. Szeged. pp.317–330.
OECD (2012): Redefining “Urban”: A New Way to Measure Metropolitan Areas. OECD Publishing: Paris. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264174108-en
OECD (2013): Definition of Functional Urban Areas (FUA) for the OECD metropolitan database. [online] URL: https://www.oecd.org/cfe/regionaldevelopment/ [2018.07.31.]
Ricz, J. – Salamin, G. – Sütő, A. et al. (2009): Koordinálatlan városnövekedés az együtt tervezhető térségekben: a települések lehetséges tervezési válaszai. [Jelentés]. Váti Területi Tervezési és Értékelési Igazgatóság Nemzetközi Területpolitikai és Urbanisztikai Iroda: Budapest.
Schneider, A. – Woodcock, C. (2008): Compact, dispersed, fragmented, extensive? A comparison of urban growth in twenty-five global cities using remotely sensed data, pattern metrics and census information. Urban Studies, 45(3), 659—692. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098007087340
Schuchmann J. (2013): Lakóhelyi szuburbanizációs folyamatok a Budapesti agglomerációban. [PhD disszertáció], Széchenyi István Egyetem: Győr.
Schwarz, N. (2010): Urban form revisited e Selecting indicators for characterising European cities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 96(1), 29—47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.01.007
Steurer, M. – Bayr, C. (2020): Measuring urban sprawl using land use data. Land Use Policy, 97, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104799
Szirmai V. (ed.) (2011): Urban Sprawl in Europe. Similarities or Differences? Aula Kiadó: Budapest.
Tosics I. (szerk.) (1998): Szuburbanizációs tendenciák és településfejlesztési stratégiák Budapesten és agglomerációjában. [Kézirat]. Városkutatás Kft.: Budapest.
Tsai, Y. (2005): Quantifying Urban Form: Compactness versus 'Sprawl'. Urban Studies, 42(1), 141–161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098042000309748
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Iváncsics Vera, Filepné Kovács Krisztina
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
A folyóirat Open Access (Gold). Cikkeire a Creative Commons 4.0 standard licenc alábbi típusa vonatkozik: CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0. Ennek értelmében a mű szabadon másolható, terjeszthető, bemutatható és előadható, azonban nem használható fel kereskedelmi célokra (NC), továbbá nem módosítható és nem készíthető belőle átdolgozás, származékos mű (ND). A licenc alapján a szerző vagy a jogosult által meghatározott módon fel kell tüntetni a szerző nevét és a szerzői mű címét (BY).
