Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu Wrocław 2015
PRACE NAUKOWE
Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu
RESEARCH PAPERS
of Wrocław University of Economics
Nr
402
Polityka ekonomiczna
Redaktorzy naukowi
Jerzy Sokołowski
Arkadiusz Żabiński
Redakcja wydawnicza: Agnieszka Flasińska Redakcja techniczna: Barbara Łopusiewicz Korekta: Marcin Orszulak
Łamanie: Małgorzata Czupryńska Projekt okładki: Beata Dębska
Informacje o naborze artykułów i zasadach recenzowania znajdują się na stronie internetowej Wydawnictwa www.pracenaukowe.ue.wroc.pl
www.wydawnictwo.ue.wroc.pl
Publikacja udostępniona na licencji Creative Commons
Uznanie autorstwa-Użycie niekomercyjne-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Polska (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 PL)
© Copyright by Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny we Wrocławiu Wrocław 2015
ISSN 1899-3192 e-ISSN 2392-0041
ISBN 978-83-7695-534-6
Wersja pierwotna: publikacja drukowana
Zamówienia na opublikowane prace należy składać na adres: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu ul. Komandorska 118/120 53-345 Wrocław
tel./fax 71 36 80 602; e-mail:econbook@ue.wroc.pl www.ksiegarnia.ue.wroc.pl
Spis treści
Wstęp ... 9
Piotr Adamczewski: Informatyczne wspomaganie organizacji sieciowych ... 11
Franciszek Adamczuk: Górnołużycki Związek Sześciu Miast (GZSM) –
sie-ciowy produkt regionalny na pograniczu polsko-niemieckim ... 20
Grażyna Adamczyk-Łojewska, Adam Bujarkiewicz: Wieloczynnikowa
me-toda oceny przekształceń w strukturze przestrzennej gospodarki Polski ... 30
Wioletta Bieńkowska-Gołasa: The ways of acquiring investors by
self-gov-ernment authorities exemplified by the Mazowieckie Voivodeship ... 40
Małgorzata Bogusz, Marcin Tomaszewski: Wykorzystanie środków
pomo-cowych UE na rozwój przedsiębiorczości w ramach PROW 2007–2013 .. 50
Magdalena Czułowska, Marcin Żekało: Regionalne zróżnicowanie
efek-tów produkcyjnych i ekonomicznych w wyspecjalizowanych gospodar-stwach mlecznych ... 60
Ireneusz Dąbrowski, Zbigniew Staniek: Property rights in the process of
privatization of the Polish energy sector ... 70
Monika Fabińska: Klastry w nowej perspektywie programowej 2014–2020 84 Aleksander Grzelak: Procesy reprodukcji majątku a poziom dopłat do
dzia-łalności operacyjnej i inwestycyjnej w gospodarstwach rolnych prowa-dzących rachunkowość rolną (FADN) ... 95
Ewa Gwardzińska: Zmiany w strukturze rynku usług pośrednictwa celnego
w Polsce ... 104
Tomasz Holecki, Karolina Sobczyk, Magdalena Syrkiewicz-Świtała, Michał Wróblewski, Katarzyna Lar: Usługa zdrowotna jako narzędzie
budowania przewagi konkurencyjnej ... 114
Katarzyna Anna Jabłońska: Klastry energetyczne jako narzędzie
wspiera-nia rozwoju nowoczesnych systemów elektroenergetycznych ... 123
Ewa Jaska, Agnieszka Werenowska: Wizerunek spółki giełdowej a jej
no-towania ... 133
Urszula Kobylińska: Innowacje w administracji publicznej w Polsce na
po-ziomie samorządu lokalnego ... 142
Aleksandra Koźlak: Gospodarcze, społeczne i ekologiczne skutki kongestii
transportowej ... 153
Justyna Kujawska: Analiza porównawcza dostępności do świadczeń opieki
zdrowotnej w polskich województwach ... 165
Renata Lisowska: Współpraca małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw w regio-
6
Spis treściPiotr Lityński: Degree and features of urban sprawl in selected largest Polish
cities ... 184
Aleksandra Majda: Succession strategy in Polish family businesses – a
com-parative analysis ... 194
Arkadiusz Malkowski: Koncepcje rozwoju społeczno-gospodarczego
ob-szarów przygranicznych ... 210
Aleksandra Nacewska-Twardowska: Wpływ sankcji rosyjskich na
wymia-nę towarową Polski ... 220
Małgorzata Niklewicz-Pijaczyńska, Małgorzata Wachowska: Stopień
ko-mercjalizacji polskich wynalazków. Patenty akademickie a patenty biznesu 231
Karolina Olejniczak: Funkcjonowanie i obszary wsparcia
Szwajcarsko-Pol-skiego Programu Współpracy ... 240
Iwona Oleniuch: Rola facylitatorów sieci w rozwoju klastrów ... 251 Dorota Pasińska: Polski rynek wołowiny po wstąpieniu do Unii Europejskiej 261 Katarzyna Peter-Bombik, Agnieszka Szczudlińska-Kanoś: Family policy
as a postulate in the Polish presidential election in 2015 ... 273
Elżbieta Pohulak-Żołędowska: Innowacyjność przedsiębiorstw w
gospo-darce rynkowej ... 284
Halina Powęska: Inwestycje w handlu w regionach przygranicznych Polski 297 Marcin Ratajczak: Wdrażanie kluczowych składowych koncepcji CSR
w małych i średnich przedsiębiorstwach agrobiznesu z Małopolski ... 307
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska: Bariery popytu na pracę w wymiarze regionalnym
na przykładzie podlaskich producentów bielizny ... 318
Jarosław Ropęga: Przetrwanie małych firm w Polsce a systemy ostrzegania
przed niepowodzeniem ... 327
Ewa Rosiak: Zmiany na rynku rzepaku po integracji Polski z Unią Europejską 338 Dariusz Eligiusz Staszczak: Zmiany pozycji głównych uczestników handlu
międzynarodowego ... 348
Piotr Szajner: Relacje cenowe na polskim rynku mleka po akcesji do Unii
Europejskiej ... 359
Maciej Szczepkowski: Strefy wolnego handlu w Rumunii na tle rozwiązań
światowych ... 368
Karolina Szymaniec-Mlicka: Wykorzystanie podejścia zasobowego do
po-prawy funkcjonowania organizacji publicznych ... 378
Agnieszka Zalewska-Bochenko: Białostocka Karta Miejska jako przykład
innowacyjnego narzędzia zarządzania komunikacją miejską na terenie Białostockiego Obszaru Metropolitalnego ... 387
Anna Zielińska-Chmielewska, Tomasz Strózik: Ocena klasyfikacji
pozy-cyjnej przedsiębiorstw przetwórstwa mięsnego według stanu ich kondycji finansowej w ujęciu dynamicznym ... 397
Arkadiusz Żabiński: Realizacja funkcji stymulacyjnej w uldze na zakup
Spis treści
7
Summaries
Piotr Adamczewski: Computer-aid in network organizations ... 11
Franciszek Adamczuk: The Upper Sorbian Six-City League – regional
net-work product on the Polish-German borderland ... 20
Grażyna Adamczyk-Łojewska, Adam Bujarkiewicz: Multifactorial
assess-ment method of transformation in the spatial structure of Polish economy 30
Wioletta Bieńkowska-Gołasa: Sposoby pozyskiwania inwestorów przez
władze samorządowe na przykładzie województwa mazowieckiego ... 40
Małgorzata Bogusz, Marcin Tomaszewski: The use of the European Union
aid funds for the development of entrepreneurship in the frame of Rural Development Program in 2007–2013 ... 50
Magdalena Czułowska, Marcin Żekało: Regional diversity of production
and economic effects in specialised dairy farms ... 60
Ireneusz Dąbrowski, Zbigniew Staniek: Prawa własności w procesie
pry-watyzacji polskiego sektora energetycznego ... 70
Monika Fabińska: Clusters in the new programming perspective 2014–2020 84 Aleksander Grzelak: The processes of reproduction of assets vs. the level
of operating and investing subsidies in agricultural holdings conducting agricultural accountancy (FADN) ... 95
Ewa Gwardzińska: Changes in the structure of customs brokerage services market in Poland ... 104
Tomasz Holecki, Karolina Sobczyk, Magdalena Syrkiewicz-Świtała, Mi-chał Wróblewski, Katarzyna Lar: Health service as an instrument of
competitive advantage building ... 114
Katarzyna Anna Jabłońska: Energy clusters as a tool of support of
develop-ment of modern electroenergy systems ... 123
Ewa Jaska, Agnieszka Werenowska: The image of a listed company and its
quotes ... 133
Urszula Kobylińska: Innovation in the public sector at the local government
in Poland ... 142
Aleksandra Koźlak: Economic, social and environmental effects of transport
congestion ... 153
Justyna Kujawska: Comparative analysis of accessibility to the healthcare
services in Polish voivodeships ... 165
Renata Lisowska: Cooperation of small and medium-sized enterprises in the
region – stimulants and barriers ... 175
Piotr Lityński: Stopień i cechy zjawiska urban sprawl w wybranych
naj-większych polskich miastach ... 184
Aleksandra Majda: Strategia sukcesyjna w polskich firmach rodzinnych –
8
Spis treściArkadiusz Malkowski: Socio-economic development concepts for border
regions ... 210
Aleksandra Nacewska-Twardowska: The influence of Russian sanctions on
Polish trade ... 220
Małgorzata Niklewicz-Pijaczyńska, Małgorzata Wachowska: The degree
of commercialisation of Polish inventions. Academic patents vs. business patents ... 231
Karolina Olejniczak: Functioning and support areas of the Swiss-Polish
Co-operation Programme ... 240
Iwona Oleniuch: The role of network facilitators in the development of
clus-ters ... 251
Dorota Pasińska: Polish beef market after the accession to the European
Union ... 261
Katarzyna Peter-Bombik, Agnieszka Szczudlińska-Kanoś: Polityka
ro-dzinna jako postulat w wyborach prezydenckich w 2015 roku ... 273
Elżbieta Pohulak-Żołędowska: Innovation in enterprises in the conditions
of market economy ... 284
Halina Powęska: Investment in trade in border regions in Poland ... 297 Marcin Ratajczak: Implementation of key components of CSR concept in
small and medium-sized enterprises of agribusiness from Lesser Poland 307
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska: Barriers of labour demand in the regional
dimen-sion exemplified by the Podlasie lingerie manufacturers ... 318
Jarosław Ropęga: Survival of small companies in Poland vs. failure warning
systems ... 327
Ewa Rosiak: Changes on the Polish rapeseed market after the integration
with the European Union ... 338
Dariusz Eligiusz Staszczak: Changes of major participants’ positions in the
international trade ... 348
Piotr Szajner: Price relationships on the Polish milk market after the acces-
sion to the European Union ... 359
Maciej Szczepkowski: Free trade zones in Romania in comparison to world
solutions ... 368
Karolina Szymaniec-Mlicka: The use of resource-based view to improve
the functioning of public organisations ... 378
Agnieszka Zalewska-Bochenko: The Białystok Urban Card as an example
of an innovative tool of management of public transport within the territo-ry of the Białystok Metropolitan Area ... 387
Anna Zielińska-Chmielewska, Tomasz Strózik: Assessment of the
posi-tional classification of chosen meat processing enterprises according to the state of their financial condition – a dynamic approach ... 397
Arkadiusz Żabiński: The function of stimulation in tax relief on the purchase
PRACE NAUKOWE UNIWERSYTETU EKONOMICZNEGO WE WROCŁAWIU RESEARCH PAPERS OF WROCŁAW UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS nr 402 • 2015
Polityka ekonomiczna ISSN 1899-3192 e-ISSN 2392-0041
Piotr Lityński
Cracow University of Economics e-mail: litynskp@uek.krakow.pl
DEGREE AND FEATURES OF URBAN SPRAWL
IN SELECTED LARGEST POLISH CITIES
STOPIEŃ I CECHY ZJAWISKA URBAN SPRAWL
W WYBRANYCH NAJWIĘKSZYCH POLSKICH
MIASTACH
DOI: 10.15611/pn.2015.402.18
Abstract: The aim of the article was to evaluate urban sprawl in Kraków, Wrocław and Łódź using a method based on publicly obtainable statistical data. The modified method of evaluation proposed by G. Galster et al. was used, which characterized urban sprawl by such land use indicators as: density, continuity, concentration, clustering, centrality, as well as mixed uses. The data for the calculation of these indicators came from The Local Data Bank of the Central Statistical Office of Poland and Google Earth. The results of the analysis indicated that the greatest degree of sprawl is observed in the urban area of Łódź, and each of the three cities studied has a different profile of sprawl.
Keywords: urban sprawl, density, continuity, concentration, clustering, centrality, mixed uses. Streszczenie: Celem artykułu jest ocena urban sprawl w Krakowie, Wrocławiu i Łodzi z za-stosowaniem metody bazującej na danych statystycznych powszechnie dostępnych. Wyko-rzystano zmodyfikowaną metodę zaproponowaną przez G. Galstera i in., która charaktery-zuje zjawisko przez pryzmat wskaźników dotyczących form zagospodarowania terenu, tj.: gęstości, ciągłości, skupienia, grupowania, centralizacji, zróżnicowania użytkowania. Dane do obliczenia wskaźników pochodzą z BDL-GUS i Google Earth. Wyniki analiz wskazały, że największy stopień urban sprawl obserwuje się obszarze miejskim Łodzi, a każde z trzech analizowanych miast cechuje się innym profilem sprawlu.
Słowa kluczowe: urban sprawl, gęstość, ciągłość, skupienie, grupowanie, centralizacja, zróżnicowanie użytkowania.
1. Introduction
The phenomenon of urban sprawl is associated primarily with a sparse form of housing, both on the outskirts of cities and suburbs. For many years this phenomenon
Degree and features of urban sprawl in selected largest Polish cities
185
has been considered as a negative one, due to the macroecomic as well as microecomic costs it generates, e.g.: increase in public expenditure on the construction and maintenance of infrastructure and public services; commercially negative impact on the city center; increase in consumption of energy and fuel; inefficiencies of negative impact on household budgets [Mumford 1961; McHarg 1969; RERC 1974; Jackson 1985; Downs 1994; Bank of America 1995; Fulton et al. 2002]. The difficulty of urban sprawl is recognized in the current Polish government documents, i.e. The National Spatial Development Concept 2030 [MRR 2012], which dedicates to this issue one of its six policy objectives of The National Spatial Development (Goal 6). Meanwhile, research on the sprawl implications of economy is not commonly conducted in Poland, which is furthermore recognized in the Concept [MRR 2012, p. 165], moreover, the diagnosis of sprawl effects in the document is based on the study of foreign research studies – mostly American. On the other hand, there are the conclusions of current studies conducted outside of Poland, which indicate that a large sprawl of the city can be potentially beneficial from an economic point of view [Anas 2012]. The insignificant amount of studies on the effects of sprawl in Poland is caused by the lack of developed methods of measuring this phenomenon. The purpose of this article is to define the practicality of urban sprawl along with its methodical operationalization but also the availability of specific data required.
Thus bearing in mind the need for the development of empirical research on urban sprawl in Poland, the aim of the article is to assess the degree of this phenome-non in urban areas of selected Polish cities: Kraków, Wrocław and Łódź. The inter-mediate aim is also to create a method of research, which would allow the usage of free and widely available statistical data, which would encourage the development of other studies related to the impact of urban sprawl on economy, but also on society, the environment, etc.
2. Materials and methods
The literature describing the phenomenon of urban sprawl does not encompass a uni-fied definition, but is rather presented through the dominant characteristics that can be applied to a specific area of the city outskirts and suburbs [Bose 2004; Burchell et al. 1998; Daneshopur, Shakibamanesh 2011; Ewing 1997; Ewing, Pendall, Chen 2002; Knapp 2002; Lisowski, Grochowski 2009; Nelson, Duncan 1995; Neuman 2005; Wassmer 2002]. Thus, the phenomenon of urban sprawl is described as a di-spersion process of the cities’ population to more suburban municipalities. Among the features of urban sprawl the authors mention dispersion of buildings and low density rates. The phenomenon of urban sprawl is also associated with a sparse, cha-otic form of housing and the lack of spatial continuity. Very often the lack of building continuity is referred to as a leapfrog effect, which is to illustrate the rise of housing estates within agricultural land thus creating a patchwork.
186
Piotr LityńskiThe measurement of urban sprawl is typically based on the indicators of ho-using densities and residence [Ewing, Pendall, Chen 2002; Fulton et al. 2002; Gal-ster et al. 2001; Gleaser, Khan 2003; Knaap et al. 2005; Pendal 1999; Sierra Club 1998]. However, the discussion in literature concerning urban sprawl points to ad-ditional significant measures which in combination with density may better depict this phenomenon. This suggests the need to take into account a multi-criteria ana-lysis to measure urban sprawl. This approach to sprawl can be found in the work of P.M. Torrens and M. Alberti [2000] who propose an approach based on: density, scatter, esthetic, ecology, and accessibility. The multi-criteria analysis is also sugge-sted by A. Frenkel and M. Ashkenazi [2005] in an attempt to measure sprawl from the perspective of the landscape, using the inventory of land use. According to them sprawl can be measured by: growth rates, density, spatial geometry, accessibility, and esthetic measures. Both approaches to measure sprawl, although appealing, are characterized by high demands in terms of methodological skills and the availabi-lity of the required data.
An interesting approach is presented by G. Galster et al. [2001] who indicate the possibility of measuring urban sprawl from the perspective of its eight dimensions that relate to the form of land use. These are: density, continuity, concentration, clu-stering, centrality, nuclearity, mixed uses, proximity. The method is used to assess the degree of urban sprawl in a given area, but does not serve to a delimitation of the phenomenon. In their work, G. Galster et al. [2001] proposed both a theoretical framework for measuring urban sprawl based on statistical indicators, exemplifying this approach in assessing the degree of urban sprawl in 13 US metropolitan areas. Thus, this method allowed for the presentation of both the overall degree of urban sprawl and differences between the studied cities.
In this article, an approach proposed by G. Galster et al. [2001] is proposed to evaluate sprawl modified to the availability of free data from The Local Data Bank of the Central Statistical Office (LDB) of Poland and Google Earth. Due to methodo-logical requirements the data taken from LDB were collected at the level of villages (units smaller than municipalities). The data encompasses the year 2011, being the most recent data regarding villages. The functions of Google Earth made it possible to acquire data from 2011.
The assessment of urban sprawl refers to housing characterized by the following indicators: density, continuity, concentration, clustering, centrality, as well as mixed uses. The study is conducted in relation to the three cities: Kraków, Wrocław, Łódź. These cities apart from the capital of Poland (Warszawa) are amongst the largest in the country. Due to the nature of the phenomenon of sprawl, the study involved mu-nicipalities primarily neighboring the listed cities. The spatial extent of the analysis is presented in Figure 1.
The method used in this paper is associated with the assessment of the degree of urban sprawl to the following indicators: density, continuity, concentration, cluste-ring, centrality, and mixed uses.
Degree and features of urban sprawl in selected largest Polish cities
187
Figure 1. Study area Source: own work.
Density: number of housing units (single-family house, apartment in a
multi--family building, etc.) per 1 ha. of developable land. Developable land (DL) is the area that does not have the natural features or development barriers that would pre-vent housing development. In this study DL is the difference between the total area of a municipality and the sum of the following areas: the land beneath the waters, forests, recreation areas, roads and land transport, ecological usage.
Density measurement is carried out at the municipal level included in the study area. Densities can be represented by the formula:
1 [ ( ) ] ( ) M , m T i m D i u Au = =
∑
where: T(i)m – the total number of housing units in the m-th spatial unit (municipa-lity), Au – DL throughout the study urban area.
Continuity: the degree to which the DL has been developed in an unbroken
fashion. Research is conducted in the smallest possible area networks – villages in the presented case. For each village there is determined average density housing in
188
Piotr Lityńskiits DL. A certain village is considered to be developed if the density is greater than 5 housing units per 1 ha. The proportions of all the villages that are this developed are a measure of continuity. Continuity shows a pattern:
1
CONT( ) S [ ( ) 5housunits 1;otherwise 0] / ,
s
i u D i s S
=
=
∑
> = =[min 0;max 1],= =
where: D(i)s – density of housing units in a village, S = number of villages.
Concentration: the degree to which the housing units are disproportionately
lo-cated on a relatively low area rather than spread throughout the area. The analysis is conducted at the municipal level. For the described calculation of the concentration a so-called delta index is used:
1 1 ( ) DELTA( ) , 2 ( ) M m T i m Am i u T i u Au = = −
∑
where: T(i)u – the total number of housing units in the total study urban area u,
Am – the total area of DL in m-th space unit (municipality).
Clustering: degree to which development has been tightly bunched to minimize
amount of land in each of the municipality DL. For calculating clustering the follow- ing formula is used:
[
]
1 4 2 2 1 1 1 ( ) ( ) / 4 / CLUS( ) , ( ) / M m s M m D i s D i m M i u D i m M = = = − = ∑ ∑
∑
where: D(i)m – the density of housing units in a municipality, M – number of muni-cipalities.
Centrality: the degree to which a building is located in relation to the center of
the city core. The measurement is based on the calculation of the average distance of housing villages from the city center. The city center is defined as the address of the City Hall. The center of village councils were assigned by Google Earth. The discussed is presented by the pattern:
1 ( ) dist = , ( , ) ( ) S s T i u A CBD F k s T i s =
∑
Degree and features of urban sprawl in selected largest Polish cities
189
where: F(k, s) – the distance between the center of the city and villages, T(i)s – the total number of observations i-th of land use (housing units) in land area s (village).
Mixed uses: the degree to which a significant number of two different types of
land use (residential and agricultural) operate in the same area of analysis furthermo-re this pattern is characteristic to the study afurthermo-rea. As a unit of analysis, proposed is the surface area of the municipality. The measure is expressed by the formula:
1 ( ) ( , ) ( ) / ( ) ( ) M m D j m MXU j i D i m D i u T j u = =
∑
,
[min = 0; max = D(i)m observed any area occupied by j],
where: D(j)m – the density of farm units in the municipality, T(j)u – the total number of the j-th observation area use (farms) in the total study area u.
3. Results and discussion
Table 1 shows the raw results of calculations of the six selected dimensions (indica-tors) of urban sprawl. Each of the indicators is divided into two results: “City & Sub-urbs” as the index for the city core and the surrounding municipalities; “SubSub-urbs” as the index only for municipalities surrounding the city core.
Table 1. Indicators of urban sprawl
Average deviationStandard Kraków Wrocław Łódź Density City & Suburbs 4.08 1.90 6.01 2.22 4.02
Suburbs 0.84 0.40 0.92 0.41 1.20
Continuity City & Suburbs 0.15 0.09 0.11 0.08 0.25
Suburbs 0.09 0.10 0.06 0.00 0.20
Concentration City & Suburbs 0.65 0.03 0.63 0.68 0.63
Suburbs 0.34 0.23 0.24 0.17 0.59
Clustering City & Suburbs 0.15 0.06 0.10 0.21 0.12
Suburbs – – – – –
Centrality City & Suburbs 116.61 28.32 147.84 109.37 92.61
Suburbs 16.24 2.43 14.69 15.00 19.04
Mixed uses* City & Suburbs – – – – –
Suburbs 0.00027 0.00029 0.00014 0.00008 0.00060 * Participation of residential in rural areas.
190
Piotr LityńskiFrom the data in Table 1 it can be noted that for each dimension of sprawl a Z Score has been developed (the ratio of the difference between the indicator value and the average to standard deviation). The lower the value of the Z Score, the higher the degree of sprawl. Consequently the 6 Z Scores of each city have been summed to provide the Sprawl Composite Index. The calculation results from the Z Scores and the Sprawl Composite Index are both presented in Table 2. The urban area (City & Suburbs) with the highest degree of sprawl is Łódź. Interestingly, the sprawl assessment conducted only in the suburbs indicates that municipalities around Łódź are strongly characterized by the smallest sprawl. This means that these suburbs are the most compact amongst the considered in the study, but there is a high degree of sprawl within the city of Łódź itself (outskirts).
The urban area with the lowest degree of sprawl is Kraków. At the same time sprawl in the surrounding municipalities is relatively high – significantly higher than that in municipalities around Łódź. Thus, the high position of the Kraków urban area is due to a high densification of the city itself.
Wrocław’s rating indicates a very high degree of sprawl in the municipalities surrounding the city. In contrast, due to the high densification of the city core, Wrocław as the urban area has a moderate degree of urban sprawl.
Table 2. Urban sprawl indicators: Z Scores
Kraków Wrocław Łódź Density City & SuburbsSuburbs 1.020.20 –0.98–1.08 –0.030.89 Continuity City & SuburbsSuburbs –0.39–0.28 –0.75–0.83 1.141.11 Concentration City & Suburbs –0.42 1.14 –0.72
Suburbs –0.42 –0.72 1.14
Clustering City & SuburbsSuburbs –0.74– 1.14– –0.40– Centrality City & SuburbsSuburbs –0.641.10 –0.26–0.51 –0.851.15 Mixed uses City & SuburbsSuburbs –0.47– –0.67– 1.15– Composite
Index City & SuburbsSuburbs –1.610.57 –3.830.29 –0.865.44 RANK City & SuburbsSuburbs 12 23 31 Source: own calculations.
It may occur that extreme values of one or two sprawl dimension may affect the assessment of the overall Composite Index. Therefore it has been proposed in the study to carry out the ranking for each dimension of the sprawl followed by
sum-Degree and features of urban sprawl in selected largest Polish cities
191
ming them for each of the cities. The lowest value of the sum represents the lowest sprawl, which is the highest position in the ranking. The ranking results are shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Ranking of urban sprawl indicators
Kraków Wrocław Łódź
Density City & Suburbs 1 3 2
Suburbs 2 3 1
Continuity City & Suburbs 2 3 1
Suburbs 2 3 1
Concentration City & Suburbs 2 1 3
Suburbs 2 3 1
Clustering City & Suburbs 3 1 2
Suburbs – – –
Centrality City & Suburbs 1 2 3
Suburbs 3 2 1
Mixed uses City & Suburbs – – –
Suburbs 2 3 1
Total City & Suburbs 9 10 11
Suburbs 11 14 5
RANK City & Suburbs 1 2 3
Suburbs 2 3 1
Source: own calculations.
The results in Table 3, aside from the overall assessment degree of sprawl also allow observing the special features of urban sprawl as for the interpretation of re-sults for individual dimensions for sprawl (sub-indicators). This detailed measure-ment should be carried out on the basis of Table 3, in conjunction with the analysis of the results from Tables 1 and 2. Thus, it enables to specify the profile of sprawl in the examined three urban areas (City & Suburbs):
• a characteristic of Kraków’s urban sprawl is the deficiency in clustering of ho-using in settlements. Hoho-using is freely and randomly located in the study area (the lowest assessment of the clustering in the evaluation of Z Score and rank). The described housing is however, relatively dense and located in close proximi-ty to the ciproximi-ty core (high marks from the Z Score and ranked in terms of densiproximi-ty and centrality). This high density is a result of high land cost in the mentioned study area;
• the urban sprawl of Wrocław is characterized by a lack of continuity of spa-tial development, i.e. leapfrog combined with a relatively low density of houses (lowest scores from the Z Score and ranked in terms of continuity and
densi-192
Piotr Lityńskity). These residences, however, are not very dispersed, but rather grouped (high
Z Score concentration and clustering);
• the sprawl of Łódź is characterized by two features. The first one is the lack of centralization, which means the housing development is located relatively far from the city core. The second feature is the lack of concentration of housing, which means houses are scattered throughout the area, especially along roads (continuity is high so the dispersion of housing can be sustainable).
4. Conclusions
The dimensions of urban sprawl studies in this article differ conceptually. Each of them relates to a process of land development, which can be observed and quanti-fied on the basis of the widely available and free of charge statistical data in Poland. The method of calculating the indicators is accessible, allowing its use for a broad measure in relationships between urban sprawl and other crucial phenomena based on science or public policy. There is a possibility to study an individual indicator-di-mension of sprawl as well as the assessment of the overall phenomenon in the form of the Sprawl Composite Index. Such analysis may therefore be carried out not only by the experts but also individual researchers.
A review of the results of this method with additional related data may determine the economic consequences of urban sprawl or its individual dimensions. From the viewpoint of public policy makers it becomes possible to set up appropriate action on the one hand, and on the other, to evaluate their effectiveness. Since the method shows a couple of dimensions of sprawl, mentioned policies and their evaluation as well as scientific research can be specific and targeted. Sprawl analysis can also be carried out in respect of a smaller segment of the urban area as well as all metropo-litan areas in Poland.
References
Anas A., 2012, Discovering the efficiency of urban sprawl, [in:] Brooks N., Donaghy K., Knaap G.-J. (eds.), Urban Economics and Planning, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Bank of America, 1995, Beyond Sprawl: New Patterns of Growth to Fit the New California, San Fran-cisco.
Bose S., 2004, Smart Growth in the State of Ohio: Conflicts and Constraints; An Analysis and
Eva-luation of the Evolution of Smart Growth in the Cleveland and Cincinnati Metropolitan Regions,
The School of Planning of the College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati.
Burchell R.W., Shad N.A., Listokin D., Phillips H., Downs A., Siskin S., Davis J.S., Moore T., Helton D., Gall M., ECONorthwest, 1998, Costs of Sprawl – Revisited, National Academy Press, Wa-shington, D.C.
Daneshopur A., Shakibamanesh A., 2011, Compact city: Dose it create an obligatory context for urban
sustainability?, International Journal of Architectural Engineering and Urban Planning, vol. 21,
Degree and features of urban sprawl in selected largest Polish cities
193
Downs A., 1994, New Visions for Metropolitan America, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C. Ewing R., 1997, Is Los Angeles-style sprawl desirable?, Journal of the American Planning Association,vol. 63, no. 1, p. 107–126.
Ewing R., Pendall R., Chen D., 2002, Measuring Sprawl and Its Impact, Smart Growth America, Wash-ington, D.C.
Frenkel A., Ashkenazi M., 2005, Measuring urban sprawl – how can we deal with it?, ERSA Confer-ence Papers, European Regional SciConfer-ence Association.
Fulton W., Pendall R., Nguyen M., Harrison A., 2002, Who Sprawls Most? How Growth Patterns Differ
Across the U.S, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
Galster G., Hanson R., Ratcliffe M.R., Wolman H., Coleman S., Freihage J., 2001, Wrestling sprawl
to the ground: Defining and measuring an elusive concept, Housing Policy Debate, vol. 12, no. 4.
Glaeser E.L., Kahn M.E., 2003, Sprawl and Urban Growth, NBER Working Paper, Series no. 9733. Jackson K., 1985, The Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States, Oxford
Univer-sity Press, Oxford.
Knaap G.J., Song Y., Ewing R., Clifton K., 2005, Seeing the elephant: Multidisciplinary measure of
urban sprawl, National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education, Urban Studies and
Planning Program, University of Maryland.
Knapp G., 2002, Talking Smart in the United States, International Meeting for Multiple Intensive Land Use, Holland.
Lisowski A., Grochowski M., 2009, Procesy suburbanizacji. Uwarunkowania, formy i konsekwencje, Instytut Demografii Społeczno-Ekonomicznej i Gospodarki Przestrzennej, Uniwersytet Warszaw-ski, Warszawa.
McHarg I.L., 1969, Design with Nature. Garden City, Natural History Press, New York.
MRR, 2012, Koncepcja przestrzennego zagospodarowania kraju 2030, Ministerstwo Rozwoju Regio-nalnego, Warszawa.
Mumford L., 1961, The City in History: Its Origins, its Transformations, and Its Prospects, Harcourt Brace, New York.
Nelson A.C., Duncan J.B., 1995, Growth Management Principles and Practices, American Planning Association, Chicago.
Neumann M., 2005, The compact city fallacy, Journal of Planning Education and Research (JPER), vol. 25, no. 1, p. 11–26.
Pendall R., 1999, Do land use controls cause sprawl?, Environment and Planning, vol. 26, no. 4, p. 555–571.
RERC, 1973, Costs of Sprawl: Environmental and Economic Costs of Alternative Residential
Develop-ment Patterns at the Urban Fringe, Real Estate Research Corporation, Washington, D.C.
Sierra Club, 1998, Sprawl: The Dark Side of the American Dream, San Francisco, CA.
Torrens P.M., Alberti M., 2000, Measuring Sprawl, Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Atlanta.
Wassmer R.W., 2002, An Economic Perspective on Urban Sprawl: With an Application to the
Ame-rican West and a Test of the Efficacy of Urban Growth Boundaries, California State University,
