This presentation by Dr Agata Cieszweska from the Warsaw University of Life Sciences focuses on greenbelts and greenbelt research, their different functions which also differ from city to city and what conclusions can be drawn from the analysis of those greenbelts.

1. Dr Agata Cieszewska
Department of Landscape Architecture
Warsaw University of Life Sciences
Polish Association for Landscape Ecology IALE PL
Rural Landscape Services
from food security to better environment
within greenbelts of metropolitan areas

2. Green belts
structure
- system of open spaces
in urban fringe
/within metropolitan area/
- belt / wedges / areas
tool
- planning instrument
formed to limit
urban sprawl
Agata Agata Cieszewska, Warsaw University of LifeHow green is the Greenbelt?
Cieszewska, Joanna Adamcyk
Sciences
15-18.04.2013, UT, Austin, Texas
15-18.04.2013, UT, Austin,

3. Greenbelt research
UK
London
Manchester
The Netherlands
Ranstad
Denmark
Copenhagen
Sweden
Stockholm
Austria
Wien
Germany
Berlin
Frankfurt
France
Paris
Italy
Rome
Canada
Ottawa
Toronto
Vancouver
USA
Seattle
Portland
San Francisco
Austin – Barton Creek
Brazil
Sao Paulo
Japan
Tokyo
Korea South
Seoul
China
Beijing
Hong Kong
Thailand
over 40 green belts
Bangkok
Pakistan
Islamabad
Australia
Adelaide
Melbourne
Sydney
New Zealand
Dunedin
RPA
Durban

4. Greenbelt research
Great Britain
London
Manchester
The
Netherlands
Denmark
Ranstad
Green Heart
Copenhagen
Sweden
Stockholm
Austria
Vienna
Germany
Berlin
Frankfurt
France
10 green belts
and the like planning tools in Europe
Paris
Italy
Rome

5. Greenbelt’s like structures – European examples
London
Manchester
Paris
Green belts
system of open spaces
that surrounds the city
Copenhagen
Stockholm
Green wedges
system of green wedges
that split development areas
Randstad – Green
Heart of the
Netherland
Greenheart
system of open spaces which is
located inside the group
of cities (polycentric regions)
Berlin
Vienna
System of protected
open areas
Rome
Frankfurt
Green network
system of protected open
spaces within metropolitan
area
ecological network in
metropolitan area
similar aim and idea of application vs. different approaches

6. Fuctions of Green belts
Structural Functions (Carrier ES)
Feeding function
Separating cities from each other
(Provisioning ES)
To check the further growth of large built up area
Preserving farmland, Preserving forest
Preserve openness, Allows/controls some growth
Preserving resources mineral extraction
Yang, Jinxing, 2007 Ministry of Housing and Local Government 1955,
Bengston, Youn 2006, Amati Yokohari 2006
Howard, Yang, Jinxing 2007 Amati Yokohari 2006
Environmental function
(Regulation ES)
Preserving natural environments
Reduction of pollution, Flood prevention
Yang, Jinxing 2007, Kahn , Abbasi 2000, Yokohari et all 2000
Recreation
(Cultural ES)
Recreation activities
Amenity (leisure facilities)
Bengston, Youn 2006, Amati
Yokohari 2006
Other
Ecological (Habitat ES)
Local facilities (low-cost housing to promote
community facilities)
Landscape protection and
Unavoidable urban fringe development
Amati Yokohari 2006
Green corridor, green wedges
Amati Yokohari 2006, Mortberg and Wallnuts
2000, Turner 1995, Frey 2000

7. Green Belt Functions
- feeding
o feeding
o feeding
o feeding
o feeding
o structural
o structural
o structural
o structural
o recreational o recreational
o environmental
o recreational
o environmental
(natural hazard
(natural hazard
protection)
protection)
o ecological

8. Greenbelts land cover
London
Manchester
Berlin
Vienna
Paris
Rome
Copenhagen
Randstad –
Green Heart
Stockholm
Frankfurt

9. Greenbelts – Feeding Function
London
Berlin
Manchester
Vienna
Paris
Randstad –
Copenhagen
Rome
Stockholm
Frankfurt
Green Heart
Protected Forests

10. Greenbelts – Environmental Function
Groundwater resources
protection
Manchester

11. Greenbelts – Environmental Function
London
Manchester
Berlin
Vienna
Paris
Randstad –
Green Heart
Copenhagen
Rome
Stockholm
Frankfurt

12. Greenbelts Recreation Function
London
Manchester
Berlin
Vienna
Paris
Rome
Copenhagen
Randstad –
Green Heart
Stockholm
Frankfurt

13. Greenbelts Main Functions Comparison
Feeding Function
Recreation Function
Environmental Function
Habitat Function

14. Greenbelts Main Functions Comparison
Main Goals
Structural
London
Manchester
Paris
Green belts
Copenhagen
Stockholm
Green wedges
Feeding
Recreation
Ecological
Recreation
Feeding
Randstad – Green
Heart of the
Netherland
Greenheart
Berlin
Vienna
System of protected
open areas
Structural
Recreation
Recreation
Feeding
Structural
Rome
Frankfurt
Green network
Ecological
Recreation
Environmental function is invisible

15. Conclusions:
-
Idea of protection of open spaces within metropolitan areas reflect
different structures / tools
BUT
- Beside feeding function that secure food / timber production
There are many different functions:
- Environmental: erosion control, flood control,
local climate control, water resources
- Ecological : biodiversity and connectivity protection
- Cultural – recreation…
Invisible in greenbelt strategies
- Environmental function

16. Agata Cieszewska
contact
agata_cieszewska@sggw.pl
Thank you
Polish National Science Centre Award
Nr N 305 175240