Grow or die! Land-use strategy mismatch in the ‘post-political’ metropolitan planning era
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2024 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | Progress in Planning |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| web | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305900624000503 |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2024.100892 |
| Keywords | Land-use municipal planning; Metropolitan planning; Population growth; Spatial growth; Post-policy; Smart growth |
| Description | Metropolitan spaces are perceived as spatiotemporally dynamic entities where traditional settlement patterns transform into heterogeneous post-suburban forms, integrating complex networks of social and economic relationships. Inadequate coordination in local spatial planning is commonly seen as a crucial factor contributing to landscape fragmentation and persistent urban sprawl. The current ‘post-political’ era of metropolitan planning supposedly offers less formalized problem-solving approaches that are not burdened by institutionally fixed settings and excessive bureaucratic structures. However, it is not clear whether and how integrated metropolitan strategies emerging within the ‘soft spaces’ of governance can influence the local spatial strategies of individual municipalities and what spectrum of attitudes various stakeholders in the metropolitan area hold towards spatial and population growth. The main research question is: What differences in approaches to territorial and population development of settlements in the metropolitan area are observed from the perspective of various public administration actors? Using a case study of the Brno Metropolitan Area (Czech Republic) and employing quantitative spatial analysis of recent and planned population and spatial development, along with qualitative textual analysis of planning documentation rationale at various scales impacting the metropolitan area, this article elucidates the narratives typically underpinning pro-growth planning strategies. Additionally, it contextualizes the meanings attributed to the metropolitan dimension of development at the local level. The findings suggest a negligible impact of integrated metropolitan strategy on local land-use policies. Competitive mechanisms of municipal spatial planning contradicting metropolitan authority visions exacerbate the crisis of spatial identities and residential cannibalism. Population growth in the hinterland triggers narratives of inevitability, adaptation, smart growth, economic rationality, and population rejuvenation at the local planning level, culminating in land oversupply. The results provide urban policies with an explanatory framework for the diversity of attitudes towards spatial and land-use planning within the multi-scale metropolitan arena and argue for the introduction of more effective integrated metropolitan spatial planning tools. |
| Related projects: |