Environmental fragility in a mining area is evaluated both in terms of its biophysical (natural) and socio-economic components and their anthropogenic interactions. We identified multiple criteria and indicators for this task, but then reduced these according to responses given by 60 experts in domains related to spatial planning. We used the selected criteria and indicators to develop environment fragility indices for each territorial administrative unit (LAU2) in Gorj County in south-western Romania. The resulting indices reveal quite large spatial variations in fragility and evidence that highly fragile human and physical environments are to some extent intertwined. In this respect, such environmental components as climate, soils, ecosystems, natural hazards and economic issues provide constraints on human activities, whilst humans themselves can, without sufficient care, increase fragility and adversely affect the quality of living environments for present and future generations. We also explore how such estimates of natural and anthropogenic fragility might enable better specific planning for local and regional development that aims to ameliorate both environmental and human adversity in an integrated way.

The study of the vision of spatial development at different scales can often suggest different solutions, due to the different priorities imposed by the distinct territorial governance levels. In this respect, it can be useful to point out the meanings of the terms like urban growth, urbanisation, urban expansion or urban sprawl and their relevance for the future of a defined human settlements system. The presentation of the case of Brasov city and its agglomeration emphasised some of the problems of urban dynamic.

Two concepts, the “territorial system” and the “ecosystem”, describe similar realities from different standpoints. For both systems, one of the key features is diversity, called geodiversity in the first case, and eco- or biodiversity in the second. The paper analyzes their definitions and proposes a clarification: overlapping with geodiversity, eco-diversity includes biodiversity. In this interpretation, urbanization processes determine the loss of biodiversity, but increased geodiversity, reflected by the consumption of resources appreciated as primary eco-energies.