Managing Urban Change in Five European Urban Agglomerations: Key Policy Documents and Institutional Frameworks

  • Peter Schmitt
Part of the GeoJournal Library book series (GEJL, volume 106)


This chapter focuses on the thematic scope and approaches to urban and regional policy in the five case study cities of Lisbon, Oporto, Istanbul, Stockholm and Rotterdam, while the spatial dynamics and vulnerabilities of each case are explored in  Chap. 5. For each of these large urban agglomerations, a number of key documents are introduced and evaluated to provide an understanding of their approach to managing urban change, and an examination is made of their operating institutional framework as regards planning and policy in urban management. These documents constitute key elements of the formal planning systems (e.g. municipal urban development plans or regional comprehensive plans). In addition to spatial plans, a number of other strategic documents that have a clear impact on the management of urban change are identified that complement the spatial plans in various ways. As the intention in this chapter is only to provide an overview, the analysis is restricted to the most important among them.


Spatial Planning Urban Agglomeration Urban Change Strategic Document Stockholm Region 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Böhme, K., & Waterhout, B. (2008). The Europeanisation of planning. In A. Faludi (Ed.), European spatial research and planning (pp. 225–248). Cambridge: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.Google Scholar
  2. CCDR-LVT. (2007). Lisboa 2020 Uma estratégia de Lisboa para a Região de Lisboa. António Fonseca Ferreira (coord.). Lisboa: CCDR-LVT. Retrieved September 21, 2011, from
  3. CCDR-LVT. (2009). Alteração ao Plano Regional de Ordenamento do Território da Área Metropolitana de Lisboa [Amendment to the Regional Spatial Plan of Lisbon Metropolitan]. Documento de Trabalho, versão preliminar, Julho 2009, CCDR-LVT, Lisboa. Retrieved September 21, 2011, from
  4. CCDR-N. (2006). NORTE 2015 Competitividade e Desenvolvimento – Uma Visão Estratégica (Versão de Trabalho), CCDR-N. Retrieved September 21, 2011, from
  5. CCDR-N. (2009). Plano Regional de Ordenamento do Território da Região Norte (North Regional Spatial Plan), CCDR-N, Porto. Retrieved September 21, 2011, from
  6. City of Stockholm Executive Office. (2007). A world-class Stockholm – Vision 2030. Stockholm.Google Scholar
  7. Crespo, J., & Cabral, J. (2010). The institutional dimension to urban governance and territorial management in the Lisbon metropolitan area. Análise Social, XLV(197), 639–662.Google Scholar
  8. Dühr, S., Colomb, C., & Nadin, V. (2010). European spatial planning and territorial cooperation. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Eraydin, A. (2011). The outcome of neoliberal policies on Istanbul metropolitan area: Where neoliberal planning stands for? In T. Taşan-Kok & G. Beaten (Eds.), Contradictions of neoliberal planning: Cities, policies, and politics (pp. 61–79). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Gemeente Rotterdam. (2007). Rotterdam spatial development strategy 2030: Rotterdam urban vision. Retrieved May 16, 2009, from
  11. Herschel, T., & Newman, P. (2002). Governance of Europe’s city regions. Planning, policy and politics. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Istanbul Büyükşehir Belediyesi. (2009). 1/100.000 Ölçekli Istanbul çevre düzeni planı. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from
  13. Istanbul Kalkinma Ajansı. (2010). Istanbul Bölge Planı 2010–2013. Retrieved January 15, 2011, from
  14. Jensen, O. B., & Richardson, T. (2004). Making European space: Mobility, power and territorial identity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. MAOTDR. (2007). Programa Nacional da Política de Ordenamento do Território – PNPOT (National Programme for Spatial Planning Policies). Relatório, Lisboa, Ministério do Ambiente, do Ordenamento do Território e do Desenvolvimento Regional. Retrieved September 21, 2011, from
  16. Nieuwe WRO. (2006). Nieuwe Wet van Ruimtelijke Ordening (the New Spatial Planning Act). Retrieved May 16, 2009, from
  17. Nota Ruimte. (2006). Interdepartementaal Project Nota Ruimte [National Spatial Strategy, English Summary]. Ruimte voor Ontwikkeling (Creating space for development). Ministries VROM, LNV, V&W, en EZ, The Hague.Google Scholar
  18. Office of Regional Planning (Regionplanekontoret). (2010). RUFS 2010 – Regional Utvecklingsplan för Stockholmsregionen 2010. Rapport 1:2010, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  19. Pinho, P. (2009). Atlas da Grande Área Metropolitana do Porto. Porto, FEUP/JMP.Google Scholar
  20. Rijksoverheid. (2011). Gemeenten en provincies ontwikkelen eigen region [Municipalities and provinces develop their own region]. Retrieved July 7, 2011, from
  21. RPR. (2010). Ruimtelijk Plan Rotterdam 2010. Rotterdam: Gemeente Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  22. RR. (2005). The spatial plan for the Rotterdam region [Ruimtelijk Plan Regio Rotterdam]. Retrieved July 7, 2011, from
  23. Schiess, L. (2007). A compact city and a better balance new flexibility in Dutch planning provides a model for balanced development. NEURUS 2006–2007. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  24. Schmitt, P. (Ed.). (2010). Intra-metropolitan polycentricity in practice – Reflections, challenges and conclusions from 12 European metropolitan areas. Final report of the METREX – Expert Group on Intra-Metropolitan Polycentricity. Retrieved November 28, 2010, from
  25. Stadsplan Rotterdam. (1992). Een visie op de ruimtelijke ontwikkeling van Rotterdam tot 2005. Rotterdam: B&W Rotterdam.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nordregio, Nordic Centre for Spatial DevelopmentStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations