Anti-urbanism in Flanders: the political and social consequences of a spatial class struggle strategy

Abstract

Anti-urbanism in Flanders: the political and social consequences of a spatial class struggle strategy Les attitudes anti-urbaines en flandre: conséquences politiques et sociales d'une strategie spatiale de lutte deS classes

The influence of land use and mobility policy on travel behavior: A comparative case study of Flanders and the Netherlands

“…Belgium clearly opted for an "anti-urban" policy, resulting in a cheap and spatially widespread public transportation network and limited spatial planning regulations. Hence, cities spread outward, generating sub-centers around transportation nodes such as train and tram stations, thus making it possible for employees to reside (far) away from the workplace (e.g., De Vos et al 2012;De Vos and Witlox 2013;Kesteloot, De Maesschalk 2001;Verhetsel et al 2010). It is, however, only after the Second World War that urban sprawl really took off.…”

“…However, not all western countries have implemented measures to restrict urban sprawl and promote compact, mixed-use development as a means of reducing car use to the same extent (Schwanen et al 2004). In this study we will compare the Netherlands, a country with a long history of intervention by spatial planners in the development of urban forms (e.g., van der Cammen et al 2003;Van Der Burg and Dieleman 2004) with Flanders (the northern region of Belgium), a region where policymakers, until the end of the twentieth century, opted for limited spatial planning regulations in order to stimulate house ownership outside the city (e.g., De Decker 2011;Kesteloot and De Maesschalk 2001;Mougenot 1988). In doing so, this paper aims to provide better insight into the influence of regional land use (in contrast to local neighborhood levels) and spatial planning policies on travel behavior, although mobility policies will also be taken into account.…”

Urban renewal without displacement? Belgium’s ‘housing contract experiment’ and the risks of gentrification

“…The first one is the historically powerful position of the Christian-Democrats. The Christian-Democrats dominated the Belgian government and used their power to strengthen their base in rural areas through the promotion of homeownership and affordable transportation (Kesteloot and De Maesschalck 2001;Uitermark 2003;De Decker 2008). In effect, home-ownership has become a major pillar of the Belgian welfare state and constitutes an alternative to social security provision (De Decker and Dewilde 2010).…”

Electoral geography and manifestoes of new «urban» parties from 1977 to 1999: how urban are they really?

“…(2001) observe that the new parties Agalev and Vlaams Blok, since their establishment at the end of the 1970s, have shown themselves increasingly as «urban» parties, to the detriment of the classical urban fractions of liberals and socialists. However, Kesteloot and De Maesschalck (2001) describe a discrepancy between the decidedly urban electorate of the Vlaams Blok and the anti-urban ideology of the party. Their Marxist interpretation of Louis Wirth's seminal definition of the urban (size, density and diversity) defines the city as a place where wealth is concentrated (size and density), wealth that can be used to liberate certain individuals of reproductive tasks to spend their time thinking, innovating, creating.…”