The paradox of planning the compact and green city: analyzing land-use change in Amsterdam and Brussels

Abstract

Strategies applied by urban policy makers in order to achieve sustainable city development may be in conflict with each other because it crosses many disciplines and policy areas. This research focusses on the dilemma between compact city and urban greenspace policies and their influence on actual land-use change in Amsterdam and Brussels. These cases are selected because of their similar urban growth yet diverse policy and governance contexts. We contend that comparing how urban policies try to address this dilemma can provide a deeper understanding of how policy strategies affect land-use change. The results show that densification indeed decreases the quantity (Amsterdam: À4.7% Brussels: À11.9%), average size (A: À3.1% B: À25.6%) and connectivity of urban greenspaces. Observed land-use changes seem disconnected from purported urban greenspace policies, whereas urban development plans seem to dominate changes in greenspace quantity and form.

Towards a Better Understanding of Compact Cities

“…Urban densification has also been found incompatible with preserving urban green space. An analysis based in Brussels and Amsterdam showed that densification processes reduced the quantity of urban green spaces and negatively affected their connectivity and average size (Balikci, Giezen and Arundel 2021). The study attributed this to the inadequacy of existing green land use policies and their inability to offset the pressures resulting from densification.…”

“…What emerges is a vision for a policy model comprised of a set of integrated strategies that are concerned with: urban growth containment; density optimization; functions, and social groups collocation; accessibility enhancement and multimodal mobility enablement; green structure preservation. The five core elements distilled herein are neither exhaustive nor limited, but they offer those interested in applying this model to new contexts an adaptable conceptual framework that directs their attention toward the links, mechanisms, policies, and strategies by which different combinations of elements can produce desirable and sustainable planning outcomes. Furthermore, this conceptual framework joins a trending perspective that considers the compact city holistically as an integrated system of design elements and principles, the synergy among which renders the concept more than a total sum of its parts (Bay 2017; Bhagwat and Devadas 2020; Bibri 2020 a ; Stevenson and Gleeson 2018).…”

“…It consistently identifies a set of obstacles and provides suggestions to overcome them. Among the identified challenges and associated recommendations are the following: Social resistance: Many studies concur that local opposition and social concerns against compact city policies, especially infill development approaches and densification, are among the most significant limitations (Bay 2017; Crommelin et al 2017; Garcia and Vale 2017; Lehmann 2017; Stevenson and Gleeson 2018; Swapan et al 2020). Alternatives to overcoming this opposition include supporting densification strategies through improved demand forecasting and giving community opinions due consideration as well as investment in infrastructure, public transportation and space quality (Bay 2017; Crommelin et al 2017; Garcia and Vale 2017; Lehmann 2017).…”

“…Among the identified challenges and associated recommendations are the following: Social resistance: Many studies concur that local opposition and social concerns against compact city policies, especially infill development approaches and densification, are among the most significant limitations (Bay 2017; Crommelin et al 2017; Garcia and Vale 2017; Lehmann 2017; Stevenson and Gleeson 2018; Swapan et al 2020). Alternatives to overcoming this opposition include supporting densification strategies through improved demand forecasting and giving community opinions due consideration as well as investment in infrastructure, public transportation and space quality (Bay 2017; Crommelin et al 2017; Garcia and Vale 2017; Lehmann 2017). Furthermore, the careful selection of where to increase density and the amount of increase that is feasible and socially acceptable are essential for reducing opposition (Garcia and Vale 2017; Lehmann 2017; Stevenson and Gleeson 2018).…”

A Dynamic Performance and Differentiation Management Policy for Urban Construction Land Use Change in Gansu, China

“…Song [79] analyzed the cultivated land use change in China from 1999 to 2007, and they suggested the development of multifunctional land management policies based on regional differences to promote the sound development of cultivated land protection. Balikci [80] found a disconnect between realistic trends in urban land use change and urban green space policies through an analysis of the urban green space policies and compact urban development policies of Amsterdam and Brussels.…”