Sistemi di governo del territorio e consumo di suolo in Europa

Titolo Rivista TERRITORIO
Autori/Curatori Erblin Berisha, Giancarlo Cotella, Umberto Janin Rivolin, Alys Solly
Anno di pubblicazione 2023 Fascicolo 2022/102
Lingua Italiano Numero pagine 10 P. 123-132 Dimensione file 0 KB
DOI 10.3280/TR2022-102016OA
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Vedi l'articolo Scarica l'articolo open access

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

Anche se una relazione tra governo del territorio e consumo di suolo è verosimile, non esistono studi sistematici sull’argomento. Scopo di questo contributo è veri?care se le variazioni di consumo di suolo registrate in Europa dal 2000 siano proporzionate alle diverse prestazioni dei sistemi di governo del territorio. Il lavoro, impostato sui dati raccolti nell’ambito di due ricerche ESPON, riguarda 39 stati europei. Il confronto conferma che le variazioni più contenute di consumo di suolo sono effettivamente correlate con i tipi europei di sistema percepiti come capaci di rinnovarsi al ?ne di un migliore controllo pubblico delle trasformazioni spaziali. All’opposto, variazioni più marcate si riscontrano in presenza dei sistemi - come quello italiano - più obsoleti e inef?caci.;

Keywords:governo del territorio; consumo di suolo; sostenibilità

  1. UN-Habitat-United Nations Human Settlement Programme, 2016, New Urban Agenda. -- http://habitat3.org/the-new-urban-agenda/ (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  2. UN-United Nations General Assembly, 2015, Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. www.refworld.org/ docid/57b6e3e44.html (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  3. Adams N., Cotella G., Nunes R., 2014, «The engagement of territorial knowledge communities with European spatial planning and the territorial cohesion debate: A Baltic perspective». European Planning Studies, 22, 4: 712-734. DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2013.772735
  4. Berisha E., Cotella G., 2021, «Territorial development and governance in the Western Balkans». In: Berisha E., Solly A., Cotella, G. (eds.), Governing Territorial Development in the Western Balkans. Challenges and Prospects of Regional Cooperation. New York: Springer, 23-42.
  5. Berisha E., Solly A., Cotella G., 2021, «Introduction: The Western Balkans between continuity and change». In: Berisha E., Solly A., Cotella G. (eds.), Governing Territorial Development in the Western Balkans. Challenges and Prospects of Regional Cooperation. New York: Springer, 1-19.
  6. Berisha E., Cotella G., Janin Rivolin U., Solly A., 2021, «Spatial governance and planning systems in the public control of spatial development: a European typology». European planning studies, 29, 1: 181-200. DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2020.1726295.
  7. Blanc F., Cabrera J.E., Cotella G., García A., Sandoval J.C., 2022, «Does planning keep its promises? Latin American spatial governance and planning as an ex-post regularisation activity». Planning Practice & Research, 37, 6: 1-22. DOI: 10.1080/02697459.2022.2042921
  8. Botticini F., Auzins A., Lacoere P., Lewis O., Tiboni M., 2022, «Land take and value capture: Towards more efficient land use». Sustainability, 14, 2: 778.
  9. Buitelaar E., Leinfelder H., 2020, «Public design of urban sprawl: Governments and the extension of the urban fabric in Flanders and the Netherlands». Comparative Planning, Learning and Evolving Gover- nance, 5, 1: 46-57.
  10. CEC, 1990, Green Paper on the Urban Environment. -- https://op.europa.eu/ it/publication-detail/-/publication/0e4b169c-91b8-4de0-9fed-ead286a- 4efb7 (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  11. CEC, 1997, The EU Compendium of Spatial Planning Systems and Policies. Regional Development Studies, 28. Luxembourg: CEC.
  12. CEC, 2007a, Leipzig Charter on Sustainable European Cities. -- https:// territorialagenda.eu/wp-content/uploads/leipzig_charter_2007.pdf (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  13. CEC, 2007b, Territorial Agenda of the European Union. Towards a More Competitive and Sustainable of Europe of Diverse Regions. -- https:// territorialagenda.eu/wp-content/uploads/Territorial_Tgenda_EU_2007. pdf (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  14. CEC, 2011, Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe. -- https://eur- lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=%20CELEX:- 52011DC0571&from=EN (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  15. CEC, 2011, Territorial Agenda of the European Union 2020. Towards an Inclusive, Smart and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions. www.nweu- rope.eu/media/1216/territorial_agenda_2020.pdf (accesso: 2022.12.16). CEC, 2016a, Future Brief: No Net Land Take by 2050? Science for Environmental Policy, 14. Luxembourg: CEC.
  16. CEC, 2016b, Urban Agenda for the European Union: Pact of Amsterdam. -- https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/system/files/ged/pact-of-amster- dam_en.pdf (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  17. CEC, 2020a, Territorial Agenda 2030. -- https://territorialagenda.eu/wp-con- tent/uploads/TA2030_jun2021_en.pdf (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  18. CEC, 2020b, New Leipzig Charter. The Trasformative Power of Cities for the Common God. -- https://base.citego.org/docs/new-leipzig-charta-2020. pdf (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  19. Colsaet A., Laurans Y., Levrel H., 2018, «What drives land take and urban land expansion? A systematic review». Land Use Policy, 79: 339-349.
  20. Cotella G., 2007, «Central Eastern Europe in the global market scenario: Evolution of the system of governance in Poland from socialism to ca- pitalism». Jurnal fur Entwicklungspolitik 23, 1: 98-124. DOI: 10.20446/JEP-2414-3197-23-1-98
  21. Cotella G., 2014, «Spatial planning in Poland between European influences and dominant market forces». In: Reimer M., Blotevogel H., Getimis P. (eds.), Spatial Planning Systems and Practices in Europe. A Comparative Perspective on Continuity and Change. London: Routledge, 255-277.
  22. Cotella G., Janin Rivolin U., Berisha E., Solly A., 2020, «Governo del terri- torio e controllo pubblico delle trasformazioni: una tipologia europea». Territorio, 92: 140-148. DOI: 10.3280/TR2020-092016
  23. Couch C., Petschel-Held G., Leontidou L., 2008, Urban Sprawl in Europe: Landscape, Land-Use Change and Policy. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Davies H., Edwards D., Hooper A., Punter J., 1989, «Comparative stu- dy». In: Davies H. (ed.), Planning Control in Western Europe. London: HMSO, 409-442.
  24. Djukic A., Branislav A., Vujičić T., 2017, «Urban shinkage in a ‘shrinking’ Serbia. The approach to a global phenomenon in a local context». Geodetski Vestnik, 4, 61: 614-629. DOI: 10.1080/13563475.2016.1219652.
  25. ESPON, 2018, COMPASS. Comparative Analysis of Territorial Governance and Spatial Planning Systems in Europe. Final Report. Luxembourg: ESPON. ESPON, 2020a, SUPER. Sustainable Urbanisation and Land-Use Practices in European Regions. Final Report. Luxembourg: ESPON.
  26. ESPON, 2020b, Territorial Patterns and Relations in Belgium. Country fiche. -- www.espon.eu/belgium (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  27. Eva M., Cehan A., Lazăr A., 2021, «Patterns of urban shrinkage: A systematic analysis of Romanian cities (1992-2020)». Sustainability, 13, 13: 7514.
  28. Galland D., Elinbaum P., 2018, «A ‘field’ under construction: The state of planning in Latin America and the Southern turn in planning: In- troduction to the special Issue on Latin America». disP-The Planning Review, 54, 1: 18-24. DOI: 10.1080/02513625.2018.1454665
  29. Gawron T., Bovet J., Hofmann E., Köck W., 2007, «Activating spatial I planning law: Options for the reduction of land consumption». Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law, 4, 1: 2-16. DOI: 10.1163/187601007X00361
  30. Getzner M., Kadi J., 2020, «Determinants of land consumption in Austria and the effects of spatial planning regulations». European Planning Studies, 28, 6: 1095-1117. DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2019.1604634
  31. Ivanisevic M., Marjanovic M., Iliev D., 2021, «Spatial planning and territorial governance in North Macedonia: from socialist Yugoslavia to European integration». In: Berisha E., Cotella G., Solly A. (eds.), Governing Ter- ritorial Development in the Western Balkans. Cham: Springer, 107-129.
  32. Janin Rivolin U., 2008, «Conforming and performing planning systems in Europe: An unbearable cohabitation». Planning Practice and Research, 2, 23: 167-186. DOI: 10.1080/02697450802327081
  33. Janin Rivolin U., 2012, «Planning systems as institutional techno- logies: A proposed conceptualization and the implications for comparison». Planning Practice and Research, 1, 27: 63-85. DOI: 10.1080/02697459.2012.661181
  34. Janin Rivolin U., 2017, «Global crisis and the systems of spatial governance and planning: A European comparison». European Planning Studies, 25, 6: 994-1012. DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2017.1296110
  35. Javanovska D., Melovski L., 2012, «Land cover succession as a result of changing land use practices in North Macedonia». Proceedings of the 4th Congress of Ecologists of Macedonia with International Participa- tion, Ohrid (North Macedonia), 12-15 October 2012.
  36. Kovács Z., Farkas Z.J., Egedy T., Kondor A.C., Szabó B., Lennert J., Baka D., Kohán B., 2019, «Urban sprawl and land conversion in post-socialist cities: The case of metropolitan Budapest». Cities, 92: 71-81.
  37. Kretschmer O., Ultsch A., Behnisch M., 2015, «Towards an understanding of land consumption in Germany-outline of influential factors as a basis for multidimensional analyses». Erdkunde, 69, 3: 267-279.
  38. Maksin-Mićić M., 2008, «Problems and possibilities for steering urban sprawl in Serbia». Proceedings of the 44th ISOCARP Congress, Dalian (China), 19-23 September 2008.
  39. Marquard E., Bartke S., Gifreu i Font J., Humer A., Jonkman A., Jürgens- on E., Bovet J., 2020, «Land consumption and land take: enhancing conceptual clarity for evaluating spatial governance in the eu context». Sustainability, 12, 19: 8269.
  40. Moroni S., Minola L., 2019, «Unnatural sprawl: Reconsidering public responsibility for suburban development in Italy, and the desirability and possibility of changing the rules of the game». Land Use Policy, 86: 104-112.
  41. Nadin V., 2012, «International comparative planning methodology: In- troduction to the theme issue». Planning Practice and Research, 27, 1: 1-5. DOI: 10.1080/02697459.2012.669928
  42. Newman P., Thornley A., 1996, Urban planning in Europe. Interna- tional Competition, National Systems and Planning Projects. London: Routledge.
  43. Nivola P.S., 1999, Laws of the Landscape: How Policies Shape Cities in Europe and America. Brookings metro series. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
  44. OECD, 2017, Land-use Planning Systems in the OECD. Paris: OECD Pu- blishing.
  45. OECD, 2018, Rethinking Urban Sprawl: Moving Towards Sustainable Cities. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  46. Poelmans L., Van Rompaey A., 2009, «Detecting and modelling spatial patterns of urban sprawl in highly fragmented areas: A case study in the Flanders-Brussels region». Landscape and Urban Planning, 1, 93: 10-19.
  47. Prokop G., Jobstmann H., Schönbauer A., 2011, Report on Best Practices for Limiting Soil Sealing and Mitigating its Effects. Study contracted by the European Commission, DG Environment, Technical Report-2011-50. -- https://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/soil/pdf/sealing/Soil%20 sealing%20-%20Final%20Report.pdf (accesso: 2022.16.12).
  48. RERC-Real estate research Corporation, 1974, The Costs of Sprawl. Wa- shington, DC: Real Estate Research Corporation.
  49. Simeonova V., Milkova K., 2020, «‘Shrinking cities’ in Bulgaria: An attempt for defining the models of ‘urban shrinkage’». In: Koutsopoulos K.C., De Miguel R., Schmeinck D. (eds.), Smart Geography. Key Challenges in Geography. Cham: Springer, 143-153.
  50. Smiraglia D., Salvati L., Egidi G., Salvia R., Giménez-Morera A., Hal- bac-Cotoara-Zamfir R., 2021, «Toward a new urban cycle? A closer look to sprawl, demographic transitions and the environment in Euro- pe». Land, 10, 2: 127.
  51. Solly A., Berisha E., Cotella G., 2021, «Towards sustainable urbaniza- tion. Learning from what’s out there». Land, 10, 4: 356.
  52. Solly A., Berisha E., Cotella G., Janin Rivolin U., 2020, «How sustainable are land use tools? A Europe-wide typological investigation». Sustain- ability, 12, 3: 1257.
  53. Tulumello S., Cotella G., Othengrafen F., 2020, «Spatial planning and territorial governance in Southern Europe between economic crisis and austerity policies». International planning studies, 25, 1: 72-87. DOI: 10.1080/13563475.2019.1701422
  54. UN-United Nations General Assembly, 2000, Millennium Development Goals www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/uni- ted-nations-millennium-declarati (accesso: 2022.12.16).
  55. Yang J., 2009, «Spatial planning in Asia». In: Florida R. (ed.), Megare- gions. Planning for Global competitiveness. Washington, DC: Island Press, 35-52.
  56. UN-Habitat, United Nations Human Settlement Programme, 2021, Implementing the International Guidelines on Urban Territorial Planning 2018-2020. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme.

  • Co-produzione urbana e sistemi di governo del territorio in Europa Francesca Bragaglia, Erblin Berisha, Giancarlo Cotella, Umberto Janin Rivolin, in TERRITORIO 106/2024 pp.83
    DOI: 10.3280/TR2023-106011

Erblin Berisha, Giancarlo Cotella, Umberto Janin Rivolin, Alys Solly, Sistemi di governo del territorio e consumo di suolo in Europa in "TERRITORIO" 102/2022, pp 123-132, DOI: 10.3280/TR2022-102016OA