IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i9p1550-d913239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Green Infrastructure Planning Approach: Improving Territorial Cohesion through Urban-Rural Landscape in Vojvodina, Serbia

Author

Listed:
  • Luka Bajić

    (Faculty of Agriculture, University of Novi Sad, Trg Dositeja Obradovića 8, 21102 Novi Sad, Serbia)

  • Nevena Vasiljević

    (Faculty of Forestry, University of Belgrade, Kneza Višeslava 1, 11030 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Dragana Čavlović

    (Faculty of Forestry, University of Belgrade, Kneza Višeslava 1, 11030 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Boris Radić

    (Faculty of Forestry, University of Belgrade, Kneza Višeslava 1, 11030 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Suzana Gavrilović

    (Faculty of Forestry, University of Belgrade, Kneza Višeslava 1, 11030 Belgrade, Serbia)

Abstract

Spatial and urban planning are directed towards achieving territorial cohesion as one of the sustainable development goals. Considering the hybrid concept of green infrastructure, this paper aims to provide an “ecological model” of achieving territorial cohesion in spatial and urban planning. Based on the connectivity level analysis between green infrastructure elements (green infrastructure hubs, nodes, gateways and dots), application of the GI concept guides the development of spatial planning scenarios. The application of Voronoi diagrams and landscape graph-based principles contribute to defining the shortest distances between green infrastructure elements, which resulted in the definition of the significance of structural and functional arrangement of green infrastructure dots in the matrix of the urban rural continuum in the territory of the urban-rural landscape of three case studies in Vojvodina, Serbia (Novi Sad, Subotica, Zrenjanin). As a result of this study, green infrastructure dots showed a great potential of application at the local level by developing them through landscape design with creative and artistic elements in order to achieve higher level of cohesion through visual attractivity, multifunctionality and recreation. The level of connectivity between elements of green infrastructure should be considered as an indicator of the sustainable spatial development goals achievement, in the field of nature conservation and territorial and social cohesion.

Suggested Citation

  • Luka Bajić & Nevena Vasiljević & Dragana Čavlović & Boris Radić & Suzana Gavrilović, 2022. "A Green Infrastructure Planning Approach: Improving Territorial Cohesion through Urban-Rural Landscape in Vojvodina, Serbia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-21, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:9:p:1550-:d:913239
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/9/1550/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/9/1550/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christian Albert & Christina Von Haaren, 2017. "Implications of Applying the Green Infrastructure Concept in Landscape Planning for Ecosystem Services in Peri-Urban Areas: An Expert Survey and Case Study," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(3), pages 227-242, May.
    2. Pedro Sánchez-Zamora & Rosa Gallardo-Cobos, 2020. "Territorial Cohesion in Rural Areas: An Analysis of Determinants in the Post-Economic Crisis Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Aleksandra Gajić & Nikola Krunić & Branko Protić, 2021. "Classification of Rural Areas in Serbia: Framework and Implications for Spatial Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-15, February.
    4. Renato Monteiro & José C. Ferreira & Paula Antunes, 2020. "Green Infrastructure Planning Principles: An Integrated Literature Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Gutman, Pablo, 2007. "Ecosystem services: Foundations for a new rural-urban compact," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 383-387, May.
    6. Catarina Patoilo Teixeira & Cláudia Oliveira Fernandes & Jack Ahern, 2021. "Novel Urban Ecosystems: Opportunities from and to Landscape Architecture," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-12, August.
    7. Renato Monteiro & José Carlos Ferreira & Paula Antunes, 2022. "Green Infrastructure Planning Principles: Identification of Priorities Using Analytic Hierarchy Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhiyuan Yang & Dong Yang & Jingjie Geng & Fengxia Tian, 2022. "Evaluation of Suitability and Spatial Distribution of Rural Settlements in the Karst Mountainous Area of China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-21, November.
    2. Sandra Mitrović & Nevena Vasiljević & Bojana Pjanović & Tijana Dabović, 2023. "Assessing Urban Resilience with Geodesign: A Case Study of Urban Landscape Planning in Belgrade, Serbia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-22, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McGrath, F.L. & Carrasco, L.R. & Leimona, B., 2017. "How auctions to allocate payments for ecosystem services contracts impact social equity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 44-55.
    2. Xifan Chen & Lihua Xu & Rusong Zhu & Qiwei Ma & Yijun Shi & Zhangwei Lu, 2022. "Changes and Characteristics of Green Infrastructure Network Based on Spatio-Temporal Priority," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-17, June.
    3. Sanja Gašparović & Ana Sopina & Anton Zeneral, 2022. "Impacts of Zagreb’s Urban Development on Dynamic Changes in Stream Landscapes from Mid-Twentieth Century," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-25, May.
    4. Rachel M. Shellabarger & Rachel C. Voss & Monika Egerer & Shun-Nan Chiang, 2019. "Challenging the urban–rural dichotomy in agri-food systems," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(1), pages 91-103, March.
    5. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    6. Alexandra Titz & Sosten S. Chiotha, 2019. "Pathways for Sustainable and Inclusive Cities in Southern and Eastern Africa through Urban Green Infrastructure?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-27, May.
    7. Ustaoglu, E. & Sisman, S. & Aydınoglu, A.C., 2021. "Determining agricultural suitable land in peri-urban geography using GIS and Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) techniques," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 455(C).
    8. Leonidas Sotirios Kyrgiakos & Georgios Kleftodimos & George Vlontzos & Panos M. Pardalos, 2023. "A systematic literature review of data envelopment analysis implementation in agriculture under the prism of sustainability," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1-38, March.
    9. Jiayi Zhou & Kangning Xiong & Qi Wang & Jiuhan Tang & Li Lin, 2022. "A Review of Ecological Assets and Ecological Products Supply: Implications for the Karst Rocky Desertification Control," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-20, August.
    10. Monika Stanny & Łukasz Komorowski & Andrzej Rosner, 2021. "The Socio-Economic Heterogeneity of Rural Areas: Towards a Rural Typology of Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-23, August.
    11. Kinga Kimic & Albert Fekete, 2022. "The Ratio of Biologically Vital Areas as a Measure of the Sustainability of Urban Parks Using the Example of Budapest, Hungary," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-16, May.
    12. Yeeun Shin & Suyeon Kim & Sang-Woo Lee & Kyungjin An, 2020. "Identifying the Planning Priorities for Green Infrastructure within Urban Environments Using Analytic Hierarchy Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-13, July.
    13. Cattaneo, Andrea & Adukia, Anjali & Brown, David L. & Christiaensen, Luc & Evans, David K. & Haakenstad, Annie & McMenomy, Theresa & Partridge, Mark & Vaz, Sara & Weiss, Daniel J., 2022. "Economic and social development along the urban–rural continuum: New opportunities to inform policy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    14. Francesco Pinna & Valeria Saiu, 2021. "Greenways as Integrated Systems: A Proposal for Planning and Design Guidelines Based on Case Studies Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    15. Iwona Kantor-Pietraga & Robert Krzysztofik & Maksymilian Solarski, 2023. "Planning Recreation around Water Bodies in Two Hard Coal Post-Mining Areas in Southern Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-25, July.
    16. Luederitz, Christopher & Brink, Ebba & Gralla, Fabienne & Hermelingmeier, Verena & Meyer, Moritz & Niven, Lisa & Panzer, Lars & Partelow, Stefan & Rau, Anna-Lena & Sasaki, Ryuei & Abson, David J. & La, 2015. "A review of urban ecosystem services: six key challenges for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 98-112.
    17. Maria Ignatieva & Diana Dushkova & Daniel Jan Martin & Fahimeh Mofrad & Katherine Stewart & Michael Hughes, 2023. "From One to Many Natures: Integrating Divergent Urban Nature Visions to Support Nature-Based Solutions in Australia and Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-29, March.
    18. Cécile Hérivaux & Philippe Le Coent, 2021. "Introducing Nature into Cities or Preserving Existing Peri-Urban Ecosystems? Analysis of Preferences in a Rapidly Urbanizing Catchment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-34, January.
    19. Fastelli, Laura & Rovai, Massimo & Andreoli, Maria, 2018. "A Spatial Integrated Database for the Enhancement of the Agricultural Custodianship Role (SIDECAR)—Some preliminary tests using Tuscany as a case-study Region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 791-802.
    20. Schneider, Philipp & Walz, Ariane & Albert, Christian & Lipp, Torsten, 2021. "Ecosystem-based adaptation in cities: Use of formal and informal planning instruments," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:9:p:1550-:d:913239. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.