Advertisement

Contrast, Contact, Contract; Pathways to Pacify Urbanization and Natural Processes

  • Dirk Sijmons
Chapter
Part of the Contemporary Urban Design Thinking book series (CUDT)

Abstract

This chapter develops design speculations how to mitigate the effects of urbanization on biodiversity. Some pathways are explored.

First, we show that nature can not be switched on and off at will and there is always a natural expression in – and of – our urban landscapes. Looking at urbanization at a global scale the world acknowledges biodiversity hotspots to coincide with the expected fastest growing cities of the Earth. The best proven way in these situations might still be to traditionally plan for strict nature reserves.

Infrastructures of different kinds in the urban landscape are the main agents in fragmenting habitats, hence remediation strategies such as ecological infrastructure and ecological connecting are briefly explored as the second pathway. This green infrastructure can act as an additional strategy for the conservation pathway and as an auxiliary for all other situations.

The third pathway is the landscape architecture’ best bet: making parks. Next to being favourite public spaces and the lungs of a city, parks can act as stepping stones in the green infrastructure.

The fourth pathway, and the core of this chapter, aims to (re)shape the configuration of our urban landscapes. Here we muse the thought that the classic urban utopian models, the garden city, the lobe city and broad-acre city, all three stand for a specific way of interaction between urbanization and landscape. Making contrast, seeking contact and entering into a new contract between city and nature, we will interrogate the significance for the present day situation in helping to reweave the urban landscapes into a more nature inclusive way. International examples are touched upon, while three metropolitan Amsterdam cases show that the strong points of all three models can be brought into action in a single urban landscape, thus making a vital contribution to nature-driven urbanism.

Keywords

Biodiversity hotspots Landscape architecture Urban nature Urban density Occupation strategy Rewilding Configuration of Urban Landscapes Amsterdam metropolitan area Paris Mumbai Houston 

References

  1. Allen D, Schepers F et al (2017) Rewilding Europe, making Europe a wilder place, annual review 2017, NijmegenGoogle Scholar
  2. Amsterdams Bureau Stadsecologie (1996) Sijsjes en Drijfsijsjes. Fontaine Publishers, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  3. Angel S, Parent J, Civco DL, Blei AM (2012) Atlas of urban expansion. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. Betsky A (2006) Landscapers: building with the land. Thames and Hudson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Branzi A (2006) Weak and diffuse modernity: the world of projects at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Skira editori, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  6. De Graaf R (2017) Four walls and a roof – the complex nature of a simple profession. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. de Jong, T.M. (2012) Stedelijke verscheidenheid in Zoetermeer (Urban Biodiversity in the town of Zoetermeer) http://www.taekemdejong.nl/Publications/2012/Stedelijke%20verscheidenheid2.pdf
  8. Denters T (1994) Van muurbloem tot straatmadelief, wilde planten in en rond. KNNV Publishers, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  9. Diamond JM (1975) The island dilemma: lessons of modern biogeographic studies for the design of natural reserves. Biol Conserv 7:129–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eberstadt R, Möhring B, Petersen R (1910) Gross-Berlin: ein Programm für die Planung der neuzeitlichen Grossstadt. Ernst Wasmuth a.-g, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  11. Ellis E (2011) Antropogenic transformation of the terrestrial biosphere. Proc R Soc Math Phys Eng Sci 369(1938):1010–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Farr D (2007) Sustainable urbanism: urban design with nature. WileyGoogle Scholar
  13. Florida R (2002) The rise of the creative class. Basic books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Forgaci C (2018) Integrated urban river corridors. Spatial design for social-ecological resilience in Bucharest and beyond. PhD-thesis, TU-DelftGoogle Scholar
  15. Forman D (2004) Rewilding North America, a vision for the conservation in the 21st century. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. Forman RTT (2008) Urban regions: ecology and planning beyond the City. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Foster C (2016) Being a beast, an intimate and radical look at nature. Profile Books Ltd., LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Hajer M (2014) The challenge of the century; the need for a complete overhaul of urban planning. In: Brugmans G, Strien J (eds) IABR-2014 urban-by-nature. IABR, Rotterdam, pp 160–163Google Scholar
  19. Howard E (ed) (1902) Garden cities of tomorrow (2nd edition of To-morrow: a peaceful path to real reform 1898). S. Sonnenschein & Co, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Jones C (2014) Spatial distribution of U.S. household carbon footprints reveals suburbanization undermines greenhouse gas benefits of urban population density. Environ Sci Technol 48(2):895–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kellet J, Caravani A (2013) Financing disaster risk reduction; A 20 year study of international aid, GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery. World Bank, Washington, DC/Brussels,TokyoGoogle Scholar
  22. Koolhaas R, Mau B (1995) S,M,L,XL, OMA. The Monicelli Press, New York, pp 959–971Google Scholar
  23. Kornaropoulou S, Van der Salm J, Sijmons D (2017) Making City. Aravutköy, Istanbul. In: Ranzato M (ed) Water vs urban scape. Exploring integrated water-urban arrangements. Jovis Publishers, Berlin, pp 97–114Google Scholar
  24. Kuzniecow Bacchin T, Ashley R, Sijmons D, van Timmeren A, Zevenbergen C (2014) Green-blue multifunctional infrastructure: an urban landscape system design new approach.  https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2061.504. Conference paper: 13th international conference on urban drainage at: Sarawak, Malaysia
  25. Li C, et al (2017) India is overtaken China as the World’s Largest Emitter of Antropogenic Sulphur Dioxide. Sci Rep 7. Article number: 14304Google Scholar
  26. LSE Cities (2011) Where people live. London School of Economics, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Luiten E, Sijmons D (1998) Contrast, contact en contract. In: Feddes F (ed) Oorden van Onthouding, new nature in urbanising Netherlands. NAi Publishers, Rotterdam, pp 169–174Google Scholar
  28. MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1963) An equilibrium theory of insular zoogeography. Evolution 17(4):373–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Marcinkoski C (2015) The city that never was. Princeton Architectural Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J, Behrens WW III (1972) Limits to growth, a report for the Club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. Universe Books, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Melchers M (2016) Van Elburg tot IJburg. Uitgeverij IJburg, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  32. Melchers M, Timmermans G (1991) Haring in het IJ. Stadsuitgeverij, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  33. Melchers M, Timmermans G (1998) Paardenbijters en Mensentreiters. Fontaine Publishers, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  34. Monocle, Top 25 liveable cities (2018, June 22) The liveable City index 2010 17 June 2010 and top 25 most liveable Cities, 17 June 2009Google Scholar
  35. Nair A (2016) Mumbai’s urban leopards, http://nayankhanolkar.com/mumbais-urban-leopards/
  36. Nylander W (1866) Les lichens du Jardin du Luxembourg. Bull Soc Fr 13(S):364–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Odum HT (1982) Pulsing, power and hierarchy. In: Mitsch WJ, Ragade RK, Bosserman RW, Dillon JA (eds) Energetics and systems. Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, p 33e59Google Scholar
  38. Odum HT (1983) Systems ecology: an introduction. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  39. Ovink H, Boeijenga J (2018) Too big: rebuild by design: a transformative approach to Climate Change. NAi010 Publishers, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  40. Owen D (2009) The Green Metropolis: what the city can teach the country about true sustainability. Riverhead Publishers, New York CityGoogle Scholar
  41. Pelt J-M (1977) L’Homme re-naturé, vers la societé ecologique. Editions Seuil, ParisGoogle Scholar
  42. Rossano F (2017) Flood-scapes. Contemporary landscape strategies in times of climate change. PhD thesis, ETH ZürichGoogle Scholar
  43. Saeijs HLF, Baptist HJM (1980) Coastal engineering and European wintering wetland birds. Biol Conserv 17(1):63–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. SCAPE (2014) Living breakwaters, rebuild by design competition. In: Ovink, H. and Boeijenga, J. (2018) Too Big, Rebuild by Design: a Transformative Approach to Climate Change. Rotterdam: NAi-010 PublishersGoogle Scholar
  45. Scott JC (2017) Against the grain. A deep history of the earliest states. Yale University Press, New Haven/LondonGoogle Scholar
  46. Sieverts T (1997) Zwischenstadt. Zwischen Ort und Welt, Raum und Zeit, Stadt und Land. Vieweg, Braunschweig, 1997Google Scholar
  47. Sijmons D (2014a) Waking up in the anthropocene. In: Brugmans G, Strien J (eds) IABR-2014 urban-by-nature. IABR, Rotterdam, pp 13–20Google Scholar
  48. Sijmons D (2014b) Urban metabolism. In: IABR—2014 urban-by-nature. IABR, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  49. Sijmons D (2016) When research by design takes politics on a sabbatical detour. In: Brugmans G, Strien J (eds) The next economy. Catalog IABR, Rotterdam, pp 132–137Google Scholar
  50. Sijmons D, Feddes Y, Luiten E (2017) Room for the river; safe and attractive landscapes. Blauwdruk Publishers, WageningenGoogle Scholar
  51. Sukopp H, Blume HP, Kunick W (1979) The soil, flora and vegetation of Berlin’s wastelands. In: Laurie IC (ed) Nature in cities. Wiley, Chichester, pp 115–132Google Scholar
  52. Thwaites T (2016) GoatMan, how I took a holiday from being human. Princeton Architectural Press, HudsonGoogle Scholar
  53. UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2017) World population prospects: the 2017 revision. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  54. UNEP (1992) UN Conference on the Environment, Rio “earth summit”, June 1992Google Scholar
  55. UN-Habitat (2012) United Nations Human Settlement Programme (UN-HABITAT), NairobiGoogle Scholar
  56. Van Eesteren C, en Van Lohuizen TK (1934) Algemeen Uitbreidingsplan (AUP) van Amsterdam. Municipality of AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  57. Vera FWM (2009) Large-scale nature development – the Oostvaardersplassen. British Wildlife 20(5):28–36Google Scholar
  58. Wagner M (1915) Das sanitäre Grün der Städte, ein Beitrag zur Freiflächentheorie. Dissertation. BerlinGoogle Scholar
  59. Weller RJ, Hoch C, Huang C (2017) Atlas for the end of the world, University of Pennsilvania. http://atlas-for-the-end-of-the-world.com/world_maps/world_maps_hotspots17.html
  60. Wright FL (1932) The disappearing city. W.F. Payson, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dirk Sijmons
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.TU-DelftDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.H+N+S Landscape ArchitectsAmersfoortThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations