Gottero Agrourbanism

Tools for Governance and Planning of Agrarian Landscape
1. Auflage 2018
ISBN: 978-3-319-95576-6
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: 1 - PDF Watermark

E-Book, Englisch, Band 124, 266 Seiten

Reihe: GeoJournal Library

This book provides a much needed overview of the agrourbanism topic in the context of territorial studies. It carefully looks at rural, urban, periurban farming in both professional and unprofessional capacities as one of the main sustainable forms of land use and management. This cutting edge text explores the various forms of agricultural and urban planning, as well as the main innovations that the agro-urban approach entails in terms of governance, spatial dimensions and functions. Agrourbanism provides a breadth of information and serves as a practical study of concerns facing policy and decision makers, planners and landscape managers, as well as farmers, managers of protected areas, local authorities and local action groups.  As such this book is suitable as a course accompaniment to provide an overview of the complexity of agro-urban issues.

Enrico Gottero is lecturer in Landscape and Regional Planning at the Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning (Politecnico di Torino), as well as researcher at the Institute of Economic and Social Research of Piedmont (IRES Piemonte, Italy). His main interests focus on the interaction between agriculture and rural-agrarian landscapes, urban-rural linkages, farmland preservation, urban agriculture, agri-food policies and practices. He is also author of several publications on these topics, including at international level.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Gottero, Enrico

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1;Contents;6
2;Editor and Contributors;8
3;1 Approaching a Vision of Agrarian Urbanism: Innovative Domains, Key Definitions and Concepts;10
3.1;References;14
4;Agrourbanism from a Global Perspective;17
5;2 Farmland Preservation and Rural Development in Canada;18
5.1;2.1 Introduction;18
5.2;2.2 Farmland Loss and Urban Development: The Canadian Context;20
5.3;2.3 Ontario: Policy Responses to Population Growth and the Protection of High Quality Farmland;21
5.3.1;2.3.1 The Provincial Policy Instruments;22
5.3.1.1;2.3.1.1 The Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement (PPS);22
5.3.1.2;2.3.1.2 Smart Growth in Ontario;23
5.3.1.3;2.3.1.3 Greenbelt Act (2004);23
5.3.1.4;2.3.1.4 Places to Grow Act (2005);26
5.3.2;2.3.2 Ontario’s Planning System: Outcomes and the Protection of Farmland;26
5.4;2.4 Québec: Protecting Prime Agricultural Land and Integrating Strategic Development Planning for Agricultural Development;27
5.4.1;2.4.1 Québec’s Legislative Basis for Preserving Farmland and Farm Activities;27
5.4.2;2.4.2 Planning Agricultural Development in the Agricultural Reserves;28
5.5;2.5 Conclusion;29
5.6;References;30
6;3 Managing Urban and Rural Agricultural Landscape Processes in Japan;33
6.1;3.1 Change of the Positioning of Agriculture in Urban and Rural Areas;33
6.1.1;3.1.1 Positioning of Farmland at the Time of the City Planning Act (1968) and the Act on Establishment of Agricultural Promotion Regions (1969);33
6.1.2;3.1.2 Revision of the Productive Green Space Act (1991);35
6.2;3.2 Current Situation of Urban and Rural Agriculture;37
6.2.1;3.2.1 Problems in the Periods of Population Decline;37
6.2.2;3.2.2 Expectation of Urban Agriculture by Urban Inhabitants and Enhancement of Citizen’s Awareness of the Environment;38
6.3;3.3 Recent Measures for the Promotion of Urban Agriculture;40
6.3.1;3.3.1 Established Act and Plan for Urban Agriculture;40
6.3.2;3.3.2 Future Challenges and Perspectives of Urban Agriculture and Urban Farmland;43
6.4;3.4 Recent Measures for Promotion of Agriculture in Rural Areas;44
6.4.1;3.4.1 Established Act and Plan of Agriculture;44
6.4.2;3.4.2 Future Challenges and Perspectives of Agriculture and Farmlands in Rural Areas;48
6.5;3.5 Conclusion;48
6.6;References;49
7;4 Cities Linked Through Food Trans-Boundaries: The Case of Singapore as an Agri-Pelago;51
7.1;4.1 Singapore’s Food Security;51
7.2;4.2 Land Scarcity and High-Tech Alternatives;52
7.3;4.3 Food Source Diversification & Competition;56
7.3.1;4.3.1 The Hinterlands in Malaysia;56
7.3.2;4.3.2 Jakarta: Indonesia’s Megacity;58
7.3.3;4.3.3 Localism in Australia;60
7.3.4;4.3.4 Renting Land in China;61
7.3.5;4.3.5 One Island in an Agri-Pelago;62
7.4;4.4 Conclusion;63
7.5;References;63
8;Governing the Agro-urban Spaces in Europe;67
9;5 Contraposition, Juxtaposition, and Transposition of the Urban and the Rural;68
9.1;5.1 The Urban and the Rural;68
9.2;5.2 Blurring Boundaries: Urban-Rural Morphologies;71
9.3;5.3 Looking at Practices of Transposition;72
9.4;5.4 Conclusions: Still in Need of Knowing What Is Rural (?);74
9.5;References;75
10;6 Towards and Effective Implementation of Green Infrastructure in Rural Areas. Challenges and Options for a Substantial Integration with Spatial Planning;77
10.1;6.1 Introduction;77
10.2;6.2 Green Infrastructure in Europe: Concepts and Objectives;78
10.2.1;6.2.1 The Planning Component;78
10.2.2;6.2.2 Multifunctionality in Practice: The Delivery of Multiple Ecosystem Services;79
10.2.3;6.2.3 Connectivity;82
10.3;6.3 Planning for Green Infrastructure in Agricultural Areas;83
10.4;6.4 Conclusions;86
10.5;References;87
11;7 Spatial Dimension of the CAP: Territorial Congruence, Supposed and Explicit Territoriality;90
11.1;7.1 CAP and Planning: Evidence of Exchanges, Interactions and Alliance;90
11.2;7.2 Spatial Evidence of the CAP: Materials, Methods and Results from the Piedmont Case Study (Italy);93
11.2.1;7.2.1 Spatial-Explicit of CAP 2014–2020 in the Piedmont Region;94
11.2.2;7.2.2 Spatial Congruence of the Piedmont RDP 2007–2013;95
11.2.3;7.2.3 Supposed Territorialisation of Piedmont RDP 2014–2020;101
11.3;7.3 Discussion;106
11.4;7.4 Conclusions;108
11.5;Acknowledgements;109
11.6;References;110
12;8 Foodscape and Food Urbanism in Europe: The Urban-Rural Interface;112
12.1;8.1 Introduction;112
12.2;8.2 Framing the Chapter;113
12.3;8.3 Historic and Gastronomic Context;115
12.4;8.4 Urban Edges as Foodspace Today;116
12.5;8.5 Two Examples from European Applied Research;120
12.5.1;8.5.1 Retrofitting for Food in Hatfield, Hertfordshire;120
12.5.2;8.5.2 Rural-Urban Edge, Montpelier and Florence;121
12.6;8.6 The Chapter in Review;124
12.7;References;124
13;Agrourbanism Forms and Places;133
14;9 Urban Agriculture Forms in Europe;134
14.1;9.1 Introduction;134
14.2;9.2 Definition and Typology of Urban Agriculture;135
14.3;9.3 Distribution of Forms;137
14.3.1;9.3.1 Mapping Urban Food Gardening;137
14.3.2;9.3.2 Aspects of Innovation in Urban Food Gardening;139
14.3.3;9.3.3 Mapping the Evolution of Urban Farming;141
14.3.4;9.3.4 Aspects of Innovation in Urban Farming;143
14.3.5;9.3.5 Conclusions;146
14.4;References;147
15;10 Agricultural Park in Europe as Tool for Agri-Urban Policies and Design: A Critical Overview;149
15.1;10.1 Introduction: Framework of Reference;149
15.2;10.2 Genesis, Evolution and Basic Features of the Peri-urban Agricultural Park Model;151
15.2.1;10.2.1 Origins and Development of the Concept;151
15.3;10.3 Peri-urban Agricultural Parks in the European Context. Some Regional Cases;156
15.3.1;10.3.1 Spain;156
15.3.2;10.3.2 France;157
15.3.3;10.3.3 Italy;160
15.4;10.4 Discussion;163
15.5;10.5 Final Remarks;165
15.6;References;166
16;11 Urban Agriculture in Urban Food Policies: Debate and Practices;170
16.1;11.1 Introduction;170
16.2;11.2 Urban Agriculture as Part of Urban Food Systems;170
16.3;11.3 The Emergence of Urban Food Strategies;172
16.4;11.4 Urban Food Policies and Urban Agriculture: The Debate;174
16.5;11.5 Which Scales and Dimensions of Urban Agriculture in Urban Food Policies?;176
16.5.1;11.5.1 Microscale;177
16.5.2;11.5.2 Mesoscale;179
16.5.3;11.5.3 Macroscale;180
16.6;11.6 Concluding Remarks;181
16.7;References;181
17;12 Preserving and Restoring Italian Traditional Rural Landscapes. Addresses from Social Perception to Spatial Planning, Policies and Research;185
17.1;12.1 Traditional Rural Landscapes in Marginal Territories: Common Values and Threats;185
17.2;12.2 Relevance of Population Consultation in Rural Policy-Making and Planning;187
17.3;12.3 Framing the Methodology: The Case Study of the Traditional Rural Landscape of the Morainic Amphitheatre of Ivrea;189
17.3.1;12.3.1 The Study Area;189
17.3.2;12.3.2 Aims and Methodology;191
17.4;12.4 Results;192
17.4.1;12.4.1 Farmers’ Perception of Their Landscaping Action. Between Tenacious Pride and Partial Unconsciousness;192
17.4.2;12.4.2 Landscape as an Income Factor for Farmers? the Perceived Role of Disjoined Policies, Generational Discontinuity and New Farmers;193
17.4.3;12.4.3 Suggestions Addresses to Planning and Policy-Making Concerning Marginal Traditional Rural Landscape;194
17.5;12.5 Main Findings and Conclusions: Policies, Plans and Regulations Affecting Farmers’ Landscaping Action;196
17.6;References;199
18;Agrourbanism Functions and Tools;202
19;13 Towards Countryside Revival: Reducing Impacts of Urban Expansion on Land Benefits;203
19.1;13.1 Urban Expansion and Ecosystem Services Assessment;203
19.2;13.2 Lessons Learned from ES-Based Applications in Italy;209
19.3;13.3 What’s Next? Looking Beyond the Ecosystem Services-Based Approach;212
19.4;References;213
20;14 Ecosystems Services and Spatial Planning: Lessons Learned from the Life SAM4CP Project;219
20.1;14.1 Land Consumption and Spatial Planning;219
20.1.1;14.1.1 The Project LIFE?+?Soil Administration Model 4 Community Profit;220
20.1.2;14.1.2 The Government of Sustainable Changes of Land Use;221
20.1.2.1;14.1.2.1 Sharing Knowledge and Building Consensus;222
20.2;14.2 Ecosystem Services Paradigm for Integrating Spatial Planning and Environmental Assessment;223
20.2.1;14.2.1 Methodology;223
20.2.1.1;14.2.1.1 The Context of Study;226
20.2.2;14.2.2 Results and Discussion: The Distribution of the Ecosystem Service Value;229
20.3;14.3 Conclusions;233
20.4;References;234
21;15 Spatial Tools to Renew the Planning Paradigm Through Metropolitan Agriculture. The Case Study of Turin (Italy);237
21.1;15.1 Introduction;237
21.2;15.2 Methodological Approach;239
21.2.1;15.2.1 Description and Evolution of the Study Area;239
21.2.2;15.2.2 The Construction of a Cognitive Framework of UA in the TMA;241
21.2.3;15.2.3 The Construction of an Interpretative Framework of UA in the TMA;243
21.3;15.3 Results;246
21.3.1;15.3.1 Cognitive Framework;246
21.3.2;15.3.2 Interpretative Framework;247
21.4;15.4 Discussion;249
21.5;15.5 Conclusions;251
21.6;Acknowledgements;253
21.7;References;253
22;16 Conclusion: Ten Good Reasons to Foster an Innovative Vision of Agrarian Urbanism in Europe;255
22.1;16.1 Contrasting Land Consumption and Reducing Land Degradation;255
22.2;16.2 Restating the Role of Agriculture in the Urban Environment;256
22.3;16.3 Strengthening the Urban-Rural Bond;257
22.4;16.4 (Re)-Assigning Value to the Food Supply Chain;257
22.5;16.5 Reviving Green and Blue Infrastructural Networks;258
22.6;16.6 Strengthening Agroecosystem Services and Reducing Disservices;259
22.7;16.7 Revitalising Rural Areas and Preventing Abandonment of Farmland;259
22.8;16.8 Stating the Social Role of Farmers;260
22.9;16.9 (Re)Assigning Historical and Identity Values to Cultural and Traditional Agricultural and Rural Landscapes;261
22.10;16.10 Improving Wellbeing and Quality of Life;261
22.11;References;263