Presence and trends of linear sprawl: Explaining ribbon development in the north of Belgium

Thomas Verbeek, Kobe Boussauw, Ann Pisman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a method to analyze ribbon development outside settlements and urban areas in Flanders (Belgium). Based on available statistics, three research hypotheses are tested, which are aimed at giving more insight in the presence and growth rate of ribbon density. From a historical perspective, we can say that an important part of the present ribbons is rooted in previously existing patterns, and that especially in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the phenomenon mainly developed in those areas where ribbon development was already considerably present. From an agglomeration effects perspective, however, we note that ribbon development is most prevalent in the most urbanized areas, with the fastest growth rates also observed in these areas. Therefore, today ribbon development is still one of the important morphologies in which urbanization processes materialize. Finally, from a policy perspective, we find that the introduction of spatial policies by means of the regional zoning plans has strongly determined the locations where ribbons could further develop, as well as the growth rate of these ribbons. Since in the most recent period we find significant differences in growth rate between the various zoning districts, the political decision-making processes that underlay the plans prove to have been of great importance for the most recent and future development of ribbons.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)48-59
JournalLandscape and Urban Planning
Volume128
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Urban sprawl
  • Ribbon development
  • Urban and regional planning
  • Flanders

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Presence and trends of linear sprawl: Explaining ribbon development in the north of Belgium'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this