IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v33y2006i4p619-636.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scenarios of Future Urban Land Use in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Isabelle Reginster
  • Mark Rounsevell

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to present the development of quantitative, spatially explicit, and alternative scenarios of future urban land use in Europe. The scenario-construction methodology is based on three steps: (1) an interpretation of four global-scale storylines describing in qualitative terms alternative urban-development pathways, (2) the development and application of a simple statistical model to estimate the future demand for urban land, and (3) the development of rules to allocate this urban demand geographically through the consideration of land-use planning goals. The qualitative part of the analysis is based on an interpretation of the four storylines of the Special Report on Emission Scenarios by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. This interpretation describes the principal driving forces that are specific to the European region and to the urban sector on the basis of the theoretical principles of urban economy. The urban-demand model includes two driving forces: (a) the population, representing demographic trends and the demand for housing; and (b) the gross domestic product, reflecting the economic level and dynamism. A further three variables are used as drivers of spatial patterns: (c) accessibility to the transport network; (d) the degree of restriction arising from land-use planning policy, and (e) the relative attractiveness (in terms of residential-location choice) of small, medium, and large cities. Thus, the urban-land-use change model is based on a multilevel analysis, which integrates theory and empirical evidence. The results are original urban-land-use maps of Europe for each of the four scenarios on the basis of a 10′ (latitude and longitude) geographic grid. The comparison of these alternative views of the future and the transparency of the development of these views provide a rich and consistent method for understanding the relationships between driving forces, their intensity, and their consequence for geographic space. Scenario analysis is a useful tool to test incentives, measures, or planning regulations according to different policy objectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Isabelle Reginster & Mark Rounsevell, 2006. "Scenarios of Future Urban Land Use in Europe," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 33(4), pages 619-636, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:33:y:2006:i:4:p:619-636
    DOI: 10.1068/b31079
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/b31079
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/b31079?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Helen Couclelis, 2005. "“Where has the Future Gone?†Rethinking the Role of Integrated Land-Use Models in Spatial Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(8), pages 1353-1371, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiaoyun Zhao & Kenneth Carling & Johan Håkansson, 2017. "Residential planning, driver mobility and CO emission: a microscopic look at Borlänge in Sweden," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(9), pages 1597-1614, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    2. Stan Geertman & John Stillwell, 2020. "Planning support science: Developments and challenges," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(8), pages 1326-1342, October.
    3. Marco Te Brömmelstroet & Luca Bertolini, 2010. "Integrating land use and transport knowledge in strategy-making," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 85-104, January.
    4. Stephen M McCauley & John Rogan & James T Murphy & Billie L Turner & Samuel Ratick, 2015. "Modeling the Sociospatial Constraints on Land-Use Change: The Case of Periurban Sprawl in the Greater Boston Region," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 42(2), pages 221-241, April.
    5. James Derbyshire, 2020. "Answers to questions on uncertainty in geography: Old lessons and new scenario tools," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(4), pages 710-727, June.
    6. Sohl, Terry L. & Wimberly, Michael C. & Radeloff, Volker C. & Theobald, David M. & Sleeter, Benjamin M., 2016. "Divergent projections of future land use in the United States arising from different models and scenarios," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 281-297.
    7. Pelzer, Peter, 2017. "Usefulness of planning support systems: A conceptual framework and an empirical illustration," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 84-95.
    8. Lei, Yayuan & Flacke, Johannes & Schwarz, Nina, 2021. "Does Urban planning affect urban growth pattern? A case study of Shenzhen, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    9. Yoonshin Kwak & Brian Deal & Grant Mosey, 2021. "Landscape Design toward Urban Resilience: Bridging Science and Physical Design Coupling Sociohydrological Modeling and Design Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Vitor Vieira Vasconcelos & Sandra Momm, 2020. "Rapid Environmental Planning Methodology: Developing Strategies for the Planners’ Education," Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, , vol. 14(2), pages 271-296, September.
    11. Peter Pelzer & Stan Geertman & Rob van der Heijden, 2015. "Knowledge in communicative planning practice: a different perspective for planning support systems," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 42(4), pages 638-651, July.
    12. Abdus Samie & Xiangzheng Deng & Siqi Jia & Dongdong Chen, 2017. "Scenario-Based Simulation on Dynamics of Land-Use-Land-Cover Change in Punjab Province, Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-17, July.
    13. Katarzyna Pukowiec-Kurda & Hana Vavrouchová, 2020. "Land Cover Change and Landscape Transformations (2000–2018) in the Rural Municipalities of the Upper Silesia-Zagłębie Metropolis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-16, November.
    14. Gerber, Pierre J. & Carsjens, Gerrit J. & Pak-uthai, Thanee & Robinson, Timothy P., 2008. "Decision support for spatially targeted livestock policies: Diverse examples from Uganda and Thailand," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 96(1-3), pages 37-51, March.
    15. Hemati, Touraj & Pourebrahim, Sharareh & Monavari, Masoud & Baghvand, Akbar, 2020. "Species-specific nature conservation prioritization (a combination of MaxEnt, Co$ting Nature and DINAMICA EGO modeling approaches)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    16. Cayo Costa & Sugie Lee, 2019. "The Evolution of Urban Spatial Structure in Brasília: Focusing on the Role of Urban Development Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-21, January.
    17. Ying Long & Zhenjiang Shen & Qizhi Mao, 2012. "Retrieving Spatial Policy Parameters from an Alternative Plan Using Constrained Cellular Automata and Regionalized Sensitivity Analysis," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 39(3), pages 586-605, June.
    18. René Ulloa-Espíndola & Susana Martín-Fernández, 2021. "Simulation and Analysis of Land Use Changes Applying Cellular Automata in the South of Quito and the Machachi Valley, Province of Pichincha, Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-25, August.
    19. te Brommelstroet, Marco, 2010. "Equip the warrior instead of manning the equipment: Land use and transport planning support in the Netherlands," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 25-41.
    20. Helen Briassoulis, 2008. "Land-Use Policy and Planning, Theorizing, and Modeling: Lost in Translation, Found in Complexity?," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 35(1), pages 16-33, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:33:y:2006:i:4:p:619-636. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.