Search results

The article examines the environmental qualities perceived by ageing populations in suburban low-density and car-oriented neighbourhoods in comparison to more dense and central areas. The study focuses on Nicosia, Cyprus, a city that suffers from extended sprawl and car dependency in almost every urban district. The aim of the article is to investigate how older adults perceive and evaluate their place of residence and if this assessment relates to the suburban or the city centre profile of their neighbourhoods. For this reason, the study takes five residential districts, two central and three suburban areas, as case studies. Each of the selected residential districts performs differently in terms of percentage of the population over the age of 65; scale and street layout; adequacy in supporting land uses; building density; distance from the city centre and public space availability and condition. The almost exclusive use of private cars, as the main transportation mode is a common feature of all older adults interviewed in these areas. The older adults' perceptions of place are assessed through the Place Standard (PS), a simple recently awarded framework which structures conversations about place in regard to its physical elements as well as its social composition. PS is used as an interview tool, which allows the mapping/visualization of qualitative data. Qualitative in-depth interviews conclude to an evaluation of fourteen aspects that outline a residential district profile from mobility to green and urban image attractiveness, and from facilities to social contact and safety, covering almost every aspect of daily life. The article concludes that the neighbourhood assessment from older residents varies depending on the nature of the suburban neighbourhood. Density, layout and distance from the city centre matter according to the participants' evaluation and there is a clear preference towards suburban low-density areas.

The paper studies the evolution of early suburban neighbourhoods in the context of the post-colonial urban development and planning. The Planning Report of the colonial Government of Cyprus in 1959 examines the foundations of urban development in Cyprus and at the same time implies a surprisingly sustainable vision for the future of planning. Despite this early intentions and guidance, the urban districts developed far from being sustainable under widely accepted criteria and indicators (participation, effectiveness of planning and development control, sprawl, character and identity, green). The basic hypothesis is that planning has proved insufficient in providing rational urban development. The paper outlines the roots of the planning shortcomings during the last fifty years. British perceptions on planning of the first half of the 20th century influenced the 1959 Report, which affected, in turns, the legislation which followed. It is explained why development constrains and land market restrictions prevented the implementation of rational key ideas, and sustainable visions throughout the years. The paper concludes in attempting to visualize these dynamic processes at the early suburban neighbourhoods and measure distortions on densities, green spaces and layouts by taking an early suburban district as a case study.

The paper studies the evolution of early suburban neighbourhoods in the context of the post-colonial urban development and planning. The Planning Report of the colonial Government of Cyprus in 1959 examines the foundations of urban development in Cyprus and at the same time implies a surprisingly sustainable vision for the future of planning. Despite this early intentions and guidance, the urban districts developed far from being sustainable under widely accepted criteria and indicators (participation, effectiveness of planning and development control, sprawl, character and identity, green). The basic hypothesis is that planning has proved insufficient in providing rational urban development. The paper outlines the roots of the planning shortcomings during the last fifty years. British perceptions on planning of the first half of the 20th century influenced the 1959 Report, which affected, in turns, the legislation which followed. It is explained why development constrains and land market restrictions prevented the implementation of rational key ideas, and sustainable visions throughout the years. The paper concludes in attempting to visualize these dynamic processes at the early suburban neighbourhoods and measure distortions on densities, green spaces and layouts by taking an early suburban district as a case study.

This article examines the interactions between digital and social media as the contemporary incubators of place perceptions and the critical debate of environmental quality. Digital and social media may change the way people live but not the way they use physical spaces. This indirect reading of place acts in terms of perceptual understanding in a number of ways, but, most importantly, it becomes fundamental in the "construction" of the sense of place. This is because it impacts on the way information is associated with reality or a contract of the reality which is generated through its "interference" with our intellectual and emotive understanding of place. At the same time, the politics of a new "sociality" contains participations and exclusions. The article adopts comparative case study research as the methodological approach for investigating notions of how urban space is perceived through the case study of Eleftheria Square in Nicosia, a controversial urban regeneration project that generated an extensive debate through digital and social media in Cyprus during the last two decades. It is an attempt of a parallel decoding of (i) a more formal or directive view through digital newspapers' survey and (ii) an informal view through a Facebook group content analysis. Through the case study, the inefficiencies and potentialities of the new media tools in informing the wider public are clear by providing at the same time evidence of their priorities, preferences, and fears. The article comes to two basic conclusions: (i) the perceptions of urban projects through digital media are not static but fluent and constantly updated, usually turning positive as projects are completed and experienced; and (ii) the interactive and synchronous nature of social media provides a more accurate and updated picture of the society's changing perceptions of public space.

The article approaches different concepts of Large Urban Developments (LUDs) as products of the notion of a "spatial fix" (Harvey, 2001), which explains why built or natural environments can be deployed in the process of creating opportunities for new investments. Greece and Cyprus are two countries in the south of the European Union that underwent delayed urbanisation and significant land fragmentation in the form of small size private ownerships and with limited experience in comprehensive development. Greece has adopted a well-structured but complex spatial planning system, bureaucratic with limited effectiveness, adaptability or flexibility of delivery processes. On the other hand, Cyprus has a flexible but centralized system, effective in processing change but problematic in regulating quality in the built environment. Both countries recently experienced major financial crises. In the early 2010s, both governments promoted, as part of an economic recovery policy, extensive real estate development on public or privately-owned land with emphasis on LUDs as ways of addressing economic shortfalls. Inappropriately, LUDs have been primarily "conceived" as opportunities to attract foreign investments rather than a means of tackling crucial current deficiencies. New spatial planning frameworks merely add greater "flexibility" to the system in order to accelerate large private real estate investment. The article attempts to reveal, through case studies' reviews, the impact of LUDs in countries with no infrastructure or experience in accommodating large-scale investment. It explores how the experience in Greece and Cyprus differs in terms of the relevant legislation adopted, the effectiveness in fulfilling its primary objective in attracting investment, and what are the possible social and environmental consequences on the planning acquis.

The article approaches different concepts of Large Urban Developments (LUDs) as products of the notion of a "spatial fix" (Harvey, 2001), which explains why built or natural environments can be deployed in the process of creating opportunities for new investments. Greece and Cyprus are two countries in the south of the European Union that underwent delayed urbanisation and significant land fragmentation in the form of small size private ownerships and with limited experience in comprehensive development. Greece has adopted a well-structured but complex spatial planning system, bureaucratic with limited effectiveness, adaptability or flexibility of delivery processes. On the other hand, Cyprus has a flexible but centralized system, effective in processing change but problematic in regulating quality in the built environment. Both countries recently experienced major financial crises. In the early 2010s, both governments promoted, as part of an economic recovery policy, extensive real estate development on public or privately-owned land with emphasis on LUDs as ways of addressing economic shortfalls. Inappropriately, LUDs have been primarily "conceived" as opportunities to attract foreign investments rather than a means of tackling crucial current deficiencies. New spatial planning frameworks merely add greater "flexibility" to the system in order to accelerate large private real estate investment. The article attempts to reveal, through case studies' reviews, the impact of LUDs in countries with no infrastructure or experience in accommodating large-scale investment. It explores how the experience in Greece and Cyprus differs in terms of the relevant legislation adopted, the effectiveness in fulfilling its primary objective in attracting investment, and what are the possible social and environmental consequences on the planning acquis.

International audience ; The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial proportions of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of planning for climate change by collecting and analysing local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and analysis framework was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their spatial (alignment with local, national and international policy) and sectoral integration (alignment into existing local policy documents). We document local climate plans that we call type A1: non-compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international climate networks; A2: compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international networks; A3: plans developed as part of international networks. This most comprehensive analysis to date reveals that there is large diversity in the availability of local climate plans with most being available in Central and Northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have an A1, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, 17% joint adaptation and mitigation plans, and about 30% lack any form of local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but mitigation does not always precede adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 70% of the cities above 1 million inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1 or A2). Countries with national climate legislation (A2), such as Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are found to have nearly twice as many urban mitigation plans, and five times more likely to produce urban adaptation plans, than countries without such legislation. A1 and A2 mitigation plans are particularly numerous in Denmark, Poland, Germany, and Finland; while A1 and A2 adaptation plans are prevalent in Denmark, Finland, UK and France. The integration of adaptation and mitigation is country-specific and can mainly be observed in countries where local climate plans are compulsory, especially in France and the UK. Finally, local climate plans of international climate networks (A3) are mostly found in the many countries where autonomous, i.e. A1 plans are less common. The findings reported here are of international importance as they will inform and support decision-making and thinking of stakeholders with similar experiences or developments at all levels and sectors in other regions around the world.

International audience ; The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial proportions of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of planning for climate change by collecting and analysing local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and analysis framework was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their spatial (alignment with local, national and international policy) and sectoral integration (alignment into existing local policy documents). We document local climate plans that we call type A1: non-compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international climate networks; A2: compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international networks; A3: plans developed as part of international networks. This most comprehensive analysis to date reveals that there is large diversity in the availability of local climate plans with most being available in Central and Northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have an A1, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, 17% joint adaptation and mitigation plans, and about 30% lack any form of local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but mitigation does not always precede adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 70% of the cities above 1 million inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1 or A2). Countries with national climate legislation (A2), such as Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are found to have nearly twice as many urban mitigation plans, and five times more likely to ...

The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century to well below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of local planning for climate change by collecting and analysing information about local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and framework for analysis was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their alignment with spatial (local, national and international) and other climate related policies. Out of eight types of local climate plans identified in total we document three types of stand-alone local climate plans classified as type Al (autonomously produced plans), A2 (plans produced to comply with national regulations) or A3 (plans developed for international climate networks). There is wide variation among countries in the prevalence of local climate plans, with generally more plans developed by central and northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have a type Al, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, and 17% a joint adaptation and mitigation plan, while about 33% lack any form of stand-alone local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as Al, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but planning for mitigation does not always precede planning for adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 80% of the cities with above 500,000 inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (Al). Cities in four countries with national climate legislation (A2), i.e. Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are nearly twice as likely to produce local mitigation plans, and five times more likely to produce local adaptation plans, compared to cities in countries without such legislation. Al and A2 mitigation plans are particularly numerous in Denmark, Poland, Germany, and Finland: while Al and A2 adaptation plans are prevalent in Denmark, Finland, UK and France. The integration of adaptation and mitigation is country-specific and can mainly be observed in two countries where local climate plans are compulsory, i.e. France and the UK. Finally, local climate plans produced for international climate networks (A3) are mostly found in the many countries where autonomous (type Al) plans are less common. This is the most comprehensive analysis of local climate planning to date. The findings are of international importance as they will inform and support decision making towards climate planning and policy development at national, EU and global level being based on the most comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge of local climate planning available to date.

The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of local planning for climate change by collecting and analysing information about local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and framework for analysis was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their alignment with spatial (local, national and international) and other climate related policies. Out of eight types of local climate plans identified in total we document three types of stand-alone local climate plans classified as type A1 (autonomously produced plans), A2 (plans produced to comply with national regulations) or A3 (plans developed for international climate networks). There is wide variation among countries in the prevalence of local climate plans, with generally more plans developed by central and northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have a type A1, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, and 17% a joint adaptation and mitigation plan, while about 33% lack any form of stand-alone local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but planning for mitigation does not always precede planning for adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 80% of the cities with above 500,000 inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1). Cities in four countries with national climate legislation (A2), i.e. Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are nearly twice as likely to produce local mitigation plans, and five times more likely to produce local adaptation plans, compared to cities in countries without such legislation. A1 and A2 mitigation plans are particularly numerous in Denmark, Poland, Germany, and Finland; while A1 and A2 adaptation plans are prevalent in Denmark, Finland, UK and France. The integration of adaptation and mitigation is country-specific and can mainly be observed in two countries where local climate plans are compulsory, i.e. France and the UK. Finally, local climate plans produced for international climate networks (A3) are mostly found in the many countries where autonomous (type A1) plans are less common. This is the most comprehensive analysis of local climate planning to date. The findings are of international importance as they will inform and support decision-making towards climate planning and policy development at national, EU and global level being based on the most comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge of local climate planning available to date. ; EU COST Action TU0902 that made the initial work possible and the positive engagement and interaction of the members of this group which led to this work. MO acknowledges funding from the Spanish Government (Grant no. FPDI-2013-16631). EKL was supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of CR within the National Sustainability Program I (NPU I), grant number LO1415. OH and RD were funded by the EC project RAMSES Reconciling Adaptation, Mitigation and Sustainable Development for Cities (contract Ref 308497) and the EPSRC project LC Transforms: Low Carbon Transitions of Fleet Operations in Metropolitan Sites Project (EP/N010612/1).

The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial proportions of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of planning for climate change by collecting and analysing local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and analysis framework was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their spatial (alignment with local, national and international policy) and sectoral integration (alignment into existing local policy documents). We document local climate plans that we call type A1: non-compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international climate networks; A2: compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international networks; A3: plans developed as part of international networks. This most comprehensive analysis to date reveals that there is large diversity in the availability of local climate plans with most being available in Central and Northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have an A1, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, 17% joint adaptation and mitigation plans, and about 30% lack any form of local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but mitigation does not always precede adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 70% of the cities above 1 million inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1 or A2). Countries with national climate legislation (A2), such as Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are found to have nearly twice as many urban mitigation plans, and five times more likely to produce urban adaptation plans, than countries without such legislation. A1 and A2 mitigation plans are particularly numerous in Denmark, Poland, Germany, and Finland; while A1 and A2 adaptation plans are prevalent in Denmark, Finland, UK and France. The integration of adaptation and mitigation is country-specific and can mainly be observed in countries where local climate plans are compulsory, especially in France and the UK. Finally, local climate plans of international climate networks (A3) are mostly found in the many countries where autonomous, i.e. A1 plans are less common. The findings reported here are of international importance as they will inform and support decision-making and thinking of stakeholders with similar experiences or developments at all levels and sectors in other regions around the world.