Metropolitan processes in post‐communist states: an introduction

Abstract

This study introduces a collection of theme issue papers on metropolitan processes in post-communist states. We first identify and discuss five key significant socialist-era legacy aspects that continue to mould the course of events in the postcommunist urban scene. These are central planning, land allocation, the second economy, defence considerations, and the implications of the ideological leadership of the communist parties. We then procede to investigate the literature on the unfolding urban geography of post-communism and the factors underpinning its development, and we place the papers collected in this theme issue into their context.

Ethno-Political Effects of Suburbanization in the Vilnius Urban Region: An Analysis of Voting Behavior

“…Like many other formerly centrally planned cities in Europe, also Vilnius -the capital of Lithuania -is undergoing rapid suburbanization, a process which started right after 1990 (see Ubarevičienė et al 2011;Cirtautas 2013;Brade et al 2009). The processes of urban sprawl and outward mobility in Vilnius are quite similar to what can be observed in other post-Soviet countries (Boren and Gentile 2007;Novak and Sýkora 2007;Krišjāne and Bērziņš 2009).…”

“…These transformations have a clear expression in the spatial development of the major cities of post-communist Europe (Hamilton et al 2005;Timar and Varadi 2001). Suppressed urbanization and rural retention during the Soviet period resulted in major changes in land use patterns after the introduction of the market economy in these states (Bertaud and Renaud 1997;Boren and Gentile 2007). One of the most significant features of this spatial process was urban expansion through the process of suburbanization (Nuissl and Rink 2005;Ouředníček 2007;Tammaru et al 2009;Kok and Kovács 1999;Leetmaa and Tammaru 2007;Novak and Sýkora 2007).…”

Cycling in the post-socialist city: On travelling by bicycle in Sofia, Bulgaria

“…This is particularly evident in the major metropolitan areas and capital cities of the region (Bore´n and Gentile, 2007;Sy´kora and Cerma´k, 1998;Tammaru and Kontuly, 2011). Suburbanisation has partly been driven by significant rural to urban migration, itself an outcome of deregulation and the shift from primarily industrial and agricultural employment to service-sector employment (Andrusz, 1996;Ka¨hrik et al, 2012).…”

Migration as a factor of development of the depopulating areas in East EU countries – The case of Lithuania

“…Unemployment, wage differences, images of the places and other reasons that determine migrations are well known, but they can hardlyexplain the exceptional scale of the depopulationin Lithuania (Arango 2000;Abreu 2010;Boyle et al1998). Unusual spatial structure (settlement system) of the country might beone of the alternative answers.Redistribution of population from rural areas and towns to urban areas and especially to metropolitan regions is absolutely natural process taking placein all developing countries and in post-communist states in particular (Boren & Gentile 2007). Best jobs are concentrated in the biggest metropolitan areas due to the comparative advantages they can offer, though this can have many negative aspects as well.…”