6 Urban-Rural Interrelations—A Challenge for Sustainable Land …
103
6.2 Societal Discourses About Urban-Rural Spaces
and Interlinkages
Seeking to define urban and rural spaces as distinct places or regions, various
attempts have been made to define their characterising factors (Stead 2002; Smith and
Courtney 2009; Schnore 1966). In the European Union, for example, each Member
State has its own definition of a rural area (Smith and Courtney 2009). Variables
such as population size, population density, employment density and land use type
are often used to this end, either individually or in combination, depending on the
country, organisation and purpose (Stead 2002; Schaeffer et al. 2013, p.81). Nonetheless, there is a “lack of a single standard definition of urban and rural areas”, as Stead
(2002: 299–300) ascertained.
Looking back to the history of definitions of rural and urban areas reveals an
interesting development. While compact cities prevailed up to the nineteenth century,
implying a clear dichotomy between the rural and the urban area, the ensuing industrialisation and expansion of urban spaces softened this division towards a rural-urban
continuum (Repp et al. 2012; Borsdorf and Bender 2010). By the mid twentieth
century at the latest, the progress of urbanisation and of social and economic development had resulted in an approximation of these previously opposing areas (Schaeffer
et al. 2013). Seto et al. 2012 confirmed this transformation of the understanding of
the term by calling the rural-urban dichotomy a “false idea” (p. 7687). Schaeffer et al.
even talked about “one system” with regard to this interconnected area (Schaeffer
et al. 2013, p. 81), coming back to Jefferson (1931, p. 446) who was convinced, as
early as 1931, that “[u]rban and rural, city and country are one thing, not two things.”
Although there are ongoing discussions about “blurred boundaries” (Woods
2009), “middle landscapes” or “hybrid geographies” (Ulied et al. 2010), a recent
publication issued by the European Parliament acknowledges that “the traditional
division is not completely gone and despite nowadays being urbanised and largely
made up of ‘hybrid geographies’, Europe retains clearly recognisable rural and
urban areas” (Augère-Granier 2016, p. 2). This dichotomy is questionable, but the
underlying assumption of two relational spaces with reciprocal flows is useful when
urban-rural interrelations need to be investigated or governed (Repp et al. 2012).
Only a few efforts have been made to address the interlinkages between the rural
and the urban area in their entirety, although many specific areas (e.g. commuting)
have been thoroughly investigated as stand-alone phenomena (Stead 2002; Smith and
Courtney 2009; Schulze Bäing 2007; Schaeffer et al. 2013; Tacoli 1998). However,
the complexity of interactions between both spaces appear to have been underestimated (Smith and Courtney 2009, see Caffyn and Dahlström 2005; Hoggart 2005). In
fact, at the urban–rural interface, land use planning and land management in general
remain quite challenging (Woods 2009; Geneletti et al. 2017).
Not only scientists and planners have recognised the increasing need to take into
account rural-urban interrelations—the political sphere has also become aware of
the considerable importance of these ties.
103
6.2 Societal Discourses About Urban-Rural Spaces
and Interlinkages
Seeking to define urban and rural spaces as distinct places or regions, various
attempts have been made to define their characterising factors (Stead 2002; Smith and
Courtney 2009; Schnore 1966). In the European Union, for example, each Member
State has its own definition of a rural area (Smith and Courtney 2009). Variables
such as population size, population density, employment density and land use type
are often used to this end, either individually or in combination, depending on the
country, organisation and purpose (Stead 2002; Schaeffer et al. 2013, p.81). Nonetheless, there is a “lack of a single standard definition of urban and rural areas”, as Stead
(2002: 299–300) ascertained.
Looking back to the history of definitions of rural and urban areas reveals an
interesting development. While compact cities prevailed up to the nineteenth century,
implying a clear dichotomy between the rural and the urban area, the ensuing industrialisation and expansion of urban spaces softened this division towards a rural-urban
continuum (Repp et al. 2012; Borsdorf and Bender 2010). By the mid twentieth
century at the latest, the progress of urbanisation and of social and economic development had resulted in an approximation of these previously opposing areas (Schaeffer
et al. 2013). Seto et al. 2012 confirmed this transformation of the understanding of
the term by calling the rural-urban dichotomy a “false idea” (p. 7687). Schaeffer et al.
even talked about “one system” with regard to this interconnected area (Schaeffer
et al. 2013, p. 81), coming back to Jefferson (1931, p. 446) who was convinced, as
early as 1931, that “[u]rban and rural, city and country are one thing, not two things.”
Although there are ongoing discussions about “blurred boundaries” (Woods
2009), “middle landscapes” or “hybrid geographies” (Ulied et al. 2010), a recent
publication issued by the European Parliament acknowledges that “the traditional
division is not completely gone and despite nowadays being urbanised and largely
made up of ‘hybrid geographies’, Europe retains clearly recognisable rural and
urban areas” (Augère-Granier 2016, p. 2). This dichotomy is questionable, but the
underlying assumption of two relational spaces with reciprocal flows is useful when
urban-rural interrelations need to be investigated or governed (Repp et al. 2012).
Only a few efforts have been made to address the interlinkages between the rural
and the urban area in their entirety, although many specific areas (e.g. commuting)
have been thoroughly investigated as stand-alone phenomena (Stead 2002; Smith and
Courtney 2009; Schulze Bäing 2007; Schaeffer et al. 2013; Tacoli 1998). However,
the complexity of interactions between both spaces appear to have been underestimated (Smith and Courtney 2009, see Caffyn and Dahlström 2005; Hoggart 2005). In
fact, at the urban–rural interface, land use planning and land management in general
remain quite challenging (Woods 2009; Geneletti et al. 2017).
Not only scientists and planners have recognised the increasing need to take into
account rural-urban interrelations—the political sphere has also become aware of
the considerable importance of these ties.