Interpretation of Trends in Land Transformations—A Case of Green Heart Region (The Netherlands)


The sprawl-versus-containment debate relates to many different aspects of the broad concept of sustainability, and as such the answers found by research are rarely decisive, compact cities have advantages in some respects, but disadvantages in others. The present study focuses on the patterns of urbanization process in Netherlands as a whole and within the “Green Heart” in particular. The present study finds over the last decades, the Green Heart is under attack from suburbanization of larger and smaller settlements as several political concessions have been made to local development needs. The Green Heart is also affected by the construction of new roads and railway lines. This infrastructure is built for tangential transport of an increasing volume of commuters. The spatial policies for preserving green spaces suffer from a dilemma between two contradicting functions of green space in a regional context: to be a separator of urban and rural areas and to be an integrator towards the Regional City of “Green Metropolis”.

Share and Cite:

S. Fazal, S. Geertman and F. Toppen, "Interpretation of Trends in Land Transformations—A Case of Green Heart Region (The Netherlands)," Natural Resources, Vol. 3 No. 3, 2012, pp. 107-117. doi: 10.4236/nr.2012.33015.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] C. R. Bryant, L. H. Russwurm and A. G. McLellan, “The City’s Countryside: Land and Its Management in the Rural-Urban Fringe,” Longman, London, 1982.
[2] E. Burgess, “The Growth of the City,” In: R. Park and E. Burgess, Eds., The City, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1925, pp. 47-62.
[3] P. Mann, “An Approach to Urban Sociology,” Routledge, London, 1965.
[4] M. Pacione, “Urban Geography: A Global Perspective,” Routledge, London, 2001. doi:10.4324/9780203454626
[5] D. Stanners and P. Bourdeau, “Europe’s Environment: The Dobrísˇ Assessment,” Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 1995.
[6] M. Herold, K. C. Clarke and J. Scepan, “Remote Sensing and Landscape Metrics to Describe Structures and Changes in Urban Land Use,” Environment and Planning A, 34, 8, 2002, 1443-1458. doi:10.1068/a3496
[7] J. H. Huang, et al., “A Global Comparative Analysis of Urban Form: Applying Spatial Metrics and Remote Sensing,” Landscape and Urban Planning, 82, 4, 2007, 184-197. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.02.010
[8] A. Frenkel and M. Ashkenazi, “Measuring Urban Sprawl: How Can We Deal with It?” Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 35, 1, 2008, 56-79. doi:10.1068/b32155
[9] M. Kasanko, J. I. Barredo, C. Lavalle, N. McCormick, L. Demicheli, V. Sagris, et al., “Are European Cities becoming Dispersed? A Comparative Analysis of 15 European Urban Areas,” Landscape Urban Plan, 77, 1-2, 2006, 111-130. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.02.003
[10] Y. Tsai, “Quantifying Urban Form: Compactness versus ‘Sprawl’,” Urban Studies, 42, 1, 2005, 141-161. doi:10.1080/0042098042000309748
[11] N. B. Grimm, et al., “Global Change and the Ecology of Cities,” Science, Vol. 319, No. 5864, 2008, pp. 756-760. doi:10.1126/science.1150195
[12] M. Alberti, “The Effects of Urban Patterns on Ecosystem Function,” International Regional Science Review, 28, 2, 2005, pp. 169-192. doi:10.1177/0160017605275160
[13] Q. Weng and D. Quattrochi, “Urban Remote Sensing,” Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, 2007.
[14] F. Dieleman and M. Wegener, “Compact City and Urban Sprawl,” Built Environment, 30, 4, 2004, 308-323. doi:10.2148/benv.30.4.308.57151
[15] M. Jenks, E. Burton and K. Williams, “The Compact City—A Sustainable Urban Form,” E & FN Spon, London, 1996.
[16] K. Williams, E. Burton and M. Jenks, “Defining Sustainable Urban Form,” In: K. Williams, E. Burton and M. Jenks, Achieving Sustainable Urban Form, E & FN Spoon, London, 2000, 7-9.
[17] S. Ryan and M. G. McNally, “Accessibility of Neotraditional Neighborhoods: A Review of Design Concepts, Policies, and Recent Literature,” Transportation Research Part A, 29, 2, 1995, 87-105. doi:10.1016/0965-8564(94)E0008-W
[18] D. Banister, “Reducing the Need to Travel,” Environment and Planning B, 24, 3, 1997, pp. 437-449. doi:10.1068/b240437
[19] M. Guérois and D. Pumain, “Built-Up Encroachment and the Urban Field: A Comparison of Forty European Cities,” Environment and Planning A, 40, 9, 2008, 2186-2203. doi:10.1068/a39382
[20] Jabareen, “Sustainable Urban Forms: Their Typologies, Models, and Concepts,” Journal of Planning Education and Research September, 6, 1, 2006, 38-52
[21] R. L. Gant, et al., “Land-Use Change in the ‘Edgelands’: Policies and Pressures in London’s Rural-Urban Fringe,” Land Use Policy, Elsevier Science Publication, United Kingdom, Vol. 28, No. 1, 2011, pp. 266-279.
[22] S. Fazal, “Land Use Dynamics in the London Metropolitan Fringe,” Lambert Academic Publishing, Germany, 2010.
[23] Siebert, Julia/Steingrube and Wilhelm, “Inszenierte Natur,” In: Institut für L?nderkunde Leipzig (IfL), Ed., Nationalatlas Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Bd. 10, Freizeit und Tourismus, Heidelberg und Berlin, 2000, 40-43.
[24] Gemeinsame Landesplanung Berlin und Brandenburg (Ministerium für Landwirtschaft, Umweltschutz und Raumordnung des Landes Brandenburg/Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung des Landes Berlin) “Regionalparks in Brandenburg und Berlin,” Potsdam, 2001.
[25] G. L. Burke, “Greenheart Metropolis. Planning the Western Netherlands,” St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1966.
[26] M. Luccarelli, “Lewis Mumford and the Ecological Region: The politics of planning,” The Guilford Press, New York, London, 1995.

Copyright © 2023 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.