Search

In a highly relevant contribution, Santana et al. (2021) outlined the challenges for qualitative enquiries during the pandemic. We agree that overcoming these challenges is very important since qualitative research is vital for understanding both the impacts of COVID-19 on human communities around the globe and its significance for sustainable futures. However, we argue that a more fundamental approach is needed to address problems within scientific organisations, thinking and practices that directly affect qualitative research capabilities. In this comment, we focus on justice, research organisation, the ways social scientists position themselves and changed understandings of social worlds.

Depuis la réunification de l’Allemagne en 1990, plusieurs tendances démographiques ont modelé l’évolution de la population locale. L’interaction complexe et en constante évolution des facteurs décrits à l’échelle du pays s’accélère de manière inégale, au niveau local, sous forme de tendances concises. Les variations observables dans les modèles spatiaux d’évolution de la population locale, d’une part, et l’effet cumulé et variable de dynamiques locales sur ces modèles spatiaux, d’autre part, n’ont pas été retracés avec précision ces 30 dernières années, depuis la réunification allemande. L’objectif de cet article est de présenter une synthèse des tendances de l’évolution de la population et de mettre en lumière la façon dont leurs modèles et représentations spatiales ont évolué dans le temps et en intensité. L’ampleur des migrations internationales et internes depuis 2011, associée à un taux de natalité inférieur au seuil de renouvellement naturel et à un surplus de décès, entraîne des évolutions démographiques très différentes au niveau communal, qui se traduisent par quatre tendances : différences à petite échelle, boom urbain, différenciation entre zones suburbaines et consolidation des tendances démographiques. Les tendances démographiques doivent être comprises comme des processus imbriqués dans des évolutions bien plus complexes, impliquant également le développement économique, les systèmes de retraite ou les perspectives politiques.Mots-clés : changement spatial, localisation résidentielle, trajectoires, démographie, Allemagne

Although potential urban green space accessibility is being discussed widely, specific barriers that affect accessibility are often under-estimated. They do not equate to limited or uneven accessibility nor are they exclusively related to physical settings. Rather, the range of barriers and their complex interactions, including people’s perceptions, personal conditions, and institutional frameworks, make this topic less clear cut and difficult to put into practice for planning purposes. Given the importance of barriers when people make decisions, we present a conceptual framework to capture the cumulative and interactive effects of different barriers on realizing recreational benefits of urban green spaces. The framework classifies physical, personal, and institutional barriers and highlights their interactions based on three case studies: Stockholm, Leipzig, and Lodz. We argue that constraints to the accessibility of urban green spaces are not so much the interactions between various physical, personal, and institutional barriers, but more the significance that beneficiaries assign to them as perceived barrier effects. Studying barriers seeks to improve the knowledge about the non-use of urban green spaces and to enable us to draw conclusions about the actual accessibility of recreational benefits. Deduced from the conceptual framework, three pathways are contrasted for improving accessibility to the recreational benefits of urban green spaces: the environment, knowledge, and engagement. We argue that these pathways should not be a diffuse objective, but a sensitive and scale-dependent re-balance of individual, physical, and institutional factors for considering justice in environmental and green space planning and management. Our systematic conceptualization and classification of multidimensional barriers enables a more comprehensive understanding of individuals’ decisions in terms of accessing recreational benefits.

Today’s cities increasingly serve as the nexus between nature and people in times of strong urban growth and, in some cases, urban decline. There is no doubt that today’s most major and urgent challenges occur in cities. Among them are challenges such as rapid climate and environmental change, complex water and waste management issues, adverse health and well-being as well as changes in social cohesion, land use and migration patterns. The increasing concentration of people in cities and the fact that cities are strongly tied to non-urban areas in relation to economics, consumption and power reveals the considerable significance of cities in terms of global challenges. This poses new tasks for the cities of the future, which should be designed as sustainable and liveable to serve the health and well-being of the population, on the one hand, and to support biodiversity and healthy ecosystems, on the other. In this regard, nature-based solutions (NBS) can provide an entry point for addressing these challenges, as they involve integrating the ecological dimension within spatial planning policies and practices in cities. Defined by the European Commission as “actions […] and solutions to societal challenges […] which are inspired by, supported by, or copied from nature”, NBS simultaneously provide multiple environmental, social and economic co-benefits [1]. For example, they can improve both air quality and a location’s physical attractiveness and have positive impacts on public health and quality of life while also allowing for more biodiversity, or create green jobs through the greening of cities or planting of trees in former brownfields [2,3]. In comparison to ecosystem services aimed at the assessment and valuation of the immediate benefits to human well-being and the economy, NBS focus on the benefits to people and the environment itself. They allow for sustainable solutions that are able to respond to environmental changes and hazards both in the short and long term [4]. In this sense, NBS go beyond the traditional biodiversity conservation and management principles by “re-focusing” the debate on humans and specifically integrating societal factors such as human well-being, poverty reduction, socio-economic development and governance principles. Nowadays, NBS are on their way to becoming mainstream in national and international policies. A great number of ongoing European research projects endeavour to explore how NBS work in different urban contexts in relation to the political, social, cultural, institutional, environmental and economic background, and how to successfully implement NBS in Europe and worldwide. In most cases, these projects aim to analyse how the NBS concept could help link research and innovation in the areas of biodiversity, ecosystem services, economic demands and societal challenges. Researchers have explored what actions are needed to further support the knowledge base for NBS and presented key recommendations for identifying the drivers of NBS success and for overcoming barriers and bridging gaps to boost the promotion and uptake of NBS worldwide. This is reflected by an increasing number of relevant scientific publications [5,6,7,8]. Although scholarly work on NBS has since entered the transdisciplinary arena and urban practice reality, there are still many open questions and challenges awaiting a response. This includes, among others, methodological, planning and resilience issues, not to mention challenges related to the question of how NBS can respond to complex societal, political, economic and environmental challenges and how they may contribute to more socially sustainable and responsible futures. These questions are particularly relevant in cities because urban areas are often characterised by high inequality in terms of access to green space as well as demographic, socio-economic, environmental and power-related factors. As a result, the notion of “nature-based” usually describes heterogeneous phenomena that operate differently according to different contexts, even when they are based on the same or a similar conceptual model. It is acknowledged that when NBS are locally set up, they interact strongly with the local conditions such as the built environment, the local natural resources and ecosystems, the socio-demographic potential and the land use, in addition to the way urban policy and planning processes are organised and, not least, the makeup of the urban population, the society and its actors. Thus, by and large, if we want to better understand how NBS may operate successfully at the local level and which challenges have to be overcome, we require a great deal of knowledge about the interactions between the multiple contextual conditions and drivers of NBS and their impacts [3]. The interactions between NBS, cities and urban populations are complex and multidimensional. Conceptual knowledge is required to better understand urban transformations and their consequences for cities, which are, of course, highly complex systems. Models or principles are used to analyse the outcomes of different local responses, and tools serve to resolve specific problems. NBS implementation also enters the field of urban policymaking, governance and participation, for instance, when new models of cooperation are set up or when new local business associations or civic society groups are involved in strengthening sustainability or environmental stewardship [4,6,9,10,11]. The assessment report by Wild et al. [8] shows that the societal implications of NBS have become an increasingly important topic, and there are still many challenges for future research related to the acceptance of NBS, their methods of implementation and impacts or trade-offs with regard to social inequalities, diverging interests and conflicting goals. At the same time, the urban green scholarly debate has become more attentive to topics such as the interaction between urban ecosystem services or NBS and the unequal distribution of their benefits and burdens in cities [10,12,13], as well as the impact of power relations and imbalances [14]. Furthermore, within recent years, the connections between greening programmes/policies and issues of inclusiveness, justice and inequalities have also come into focus [15,16,17,18,19]. Set against this background, this Special Issue seeks to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge about the interactions between NBS and urban land, built environments, ecosystems and people in cities. In particular, it looks at those interactions through the lens of societal challenges which NBS are aimed to address. With the help of a number of conceptual and empirical studies on NBS development and implementation in different cities, we discuss the interactions between NBS and their urban context, the resulting benefits and trade-offs, as well as the consequences for policy, planning, maintenance, stewardship and governance. This Special Issue ofLandbrings together a collection of diverse papers that debate the societal implications of NBS in cities and their interactions with urban land, ecosystems, the built environment and people. In inviting papers, we were particularly interested in studies that could assist in answering some of the following questions: What types of NBS based on green and blue infrastructure (GBI) are being implemented in cities across the globe? Which properties of urban nature and/or urban ecosystems do they make use of, and how do NBS themselves influence urban ecosystems and ecosystem services flows in cities? What are the trade-offs of NBS compared to other ecosystem services and urban biodiversity? What are the typical types of land and land units where NBS are implemented? How do NBS and their implementation interrogate/interact with the social environment and issues of social cohesion and justice? What are land governance and policy schemes for NBS in cities? Do they differ from the prevailing land management and governance policies implemented so far in our cities? How does the implementation of NBS correspond to and interact with general directions and priorities of urban development? We have compiled a range of articles from research undertaken in different countries, continents and hemispheres (Netherlands, Germany, USA, Bangladesh, India and Australia) to show that the interconnections between NBS and urban societies are a global challenge and how contextual factors can impact NBS design, implementation, acceptance and effects. Looking more closely, we can see that a number of studies demonstrate the value of NBS from the perspective of urban GBI networks [3,20,21]. Several studies analysed linkages between urban green spaces, the ecosystem services they provide and public health and well-being through a range of benefits such as the mitigation of climate change, improvement of mental health and well-being through contact with nature, stormwater management and biodiversity conservation [20,21,22]. This Special Issue considers two sides of GBI development with NBS. On the one hand, we have included a range of papers that address the perspective of ecosystem services provision and its benefits, such as carbon storage and sequestration, pollution removal, food production, noise reduction and recreational and cultural values (see papers [21,22,23]), while other papers deal with the undesired effects and trade-offs of NBS implementation, such as green gentrification, negative effects on neighbourhoods/residential development and housing prices, as well as increases in social disparities and disintegration [24,25]. This underlines that, firstly, NBS are a complex response to the need for greener and more sustainable cities and include multiple impacts that bring about very different results for different actors, people, structures and spaces in the city. Secondly, the authors of most of these papers demand a more serious consideration of the multiple impacts of NBS (implementation), including existing trade-offs. The role of NBS for spatial planning and landscape-based visions in Dutch cities was analysed by Van Roiij et al. (2021) [23]. They applied a landscape-based and co-creation-based planning approach to regional spatial policy challenges, paving the way for a paradigm shift towards a future land management system that is resilient to external pressures. The value of co-creation in the process of successful NBS development and implementation is also highlighted in the paper by Dushkova and Haase (2020) [3]. The authors use the city of Leipzig (Germany) as an example to discuss the main drivers behind NBS, possible design options and the involved governance actors. By discussing these drivers and governance strategies, the authors introduce a framework for assessing the co-benefits, opportunities and challenges of NBS in urban areas. They also provide examples of best practices that demonstrate the multiple co-benefits provided by NBS. The types and quality of GBI-based NBS implemented in cities were studied by Lahoti et al. (2020) [22] and Ahmed et al. (2019) [20]. They analysed the existing spatial morphology to understand the potential for GBI development and its challenges. Using Dhaka (Bangladesh) as a case study, the paper by Ahmed et al. (2019) [20] explores how urban growth planning can be guided by a GBI network that combines blue, green and grey elements to provide a multifunctional urban form. The authors highlight the meaning of the spatial morphology for potential locations of NBS development and the types of solutions necessary for different typologies of urban densities. The proposed network takes on different forms at different scales and locations and offers different types of climate mitigation actions, controls and management options. The paper also provides some practical implications and challenges for implementing BGI at different urban scales. Ahmed et al. (2019) [20] consider the challenges addressed by GBI, such as flood mitigation and water sensitive design, while Shade and Kremer (2019) [26] focus on green infrastructure implementation as one of the important measures for climate adaptation. Using a combination of cellular automata, machine learning and Markov chain analysis, the authors demonstrate that land use and land cover modelling (such as the modelling conducted for Philadelphia, USA) is an important tool for city officials planning future land usage. The papers by Ali et al. (2020) [24] and Schwarz et al. (2021) [25] introduce green regeneration NBS as strategies for tackling land abandonment and improving the quality of life in disadvantaged neighbourhoods in shrinking cities. A public park was found to operate as a trigger for structural, social and symbolic upgrades in the formerly shrinking city of Leipzig, but only in combination with dynamic real estate market developments, which are the main drivers of change. Ali et al. (2020) [24] identify various facets of green gentrification. Schwarz et al. (2021) [25] critically examine the positive and negative immediate impacts of green space NBS on residents’ well-being, residential location choice and housing and land markets. The paper directly addresses questions posed by this Special Issue, arguing that social settings, such as property constellation and real estate agents, benefit from higher income clients’ preferences to live close to high-quality urban green spaces and thus foster the green gentrification process discussed in the Ali et al. (2020) [24] article. The paper by Rink and Schmidt (2021) [27] adds to this topic by describing the use of pocket forests and larger urban forests on inner-city brownfields as multifunctional NBS for shrinking cities. Even though urban forests do not constitute an independent or new type of NBS, they create new ecosystems from existing abandoned, brownfield or neglected areas. These forests were found to be multifunctional in terms of urban climate alleviation and air quality improvement, as they simultaneously enhance the value of adjacent neighbourhood areas while creating new recreational opportunities and supporting local biodiversity. Moreover, the afforestation of brownfields was revealed as the cheapest way to create greenery, which not only fulfils the main objectives but also was accepted and used by the local population. Taken together, the articles in this Special Issue indicate that NBS provide clear benefits for urban societies responding to social–environmental challenges. NBS can help achieve strategic planning goals such as climate adaptation, biodiversity conservation and the improvement of recreational facilities and public health. In terms of costs, NBS such as lawns or afforestation were found to be the cheapest ways to create urban greenery. At the same time, the papers report that NBS often involve trade-offs. For instance, greening can cause changes and new imbalances in the real estate market that limit the aforementioned recreational benefits, particularly for low-income households. Thus, and in line with recent arguments in urban social–ecological–technological studies [28,29], the societal implications we are examining in this Special Issue are ambivalent in the best sense. An interdisciplinary approach is vital for land-related studies, and the contributions to this Special Issue represent a robust and broad panorama of disciplines, approaches and research traditions. Perhaps this is the best evidence for the fact that NBS, both as real-world tools and an area of research, have become increasingly relevant for the transformation of cities towards greater sustainability. At the same time, their implementation is increasingly controversial and critically debated, for instance, with res

[Einleitung] Seit einigen Jahren ist in Deutschland eine deutliche Ausdifferenzierung der regionalen Bevölkerungs-entwicklung zu beobachten. Das in den 1990er und 2000er Jahren prägende Muster praktisch flächendeckender Einwohnerverluste in den ländlichen Räumen Ostdeutschlands und eines Nebeneinanders von Wachstums- und Schrumpfungsräumen im Westen hat sich seit 2011 gewandelt und ausdifferenziert. Vor diesem Hintergrund möchte der Beitrag die wesentlichen demographischen Trends in Deutschland nach 2011 herausarbeiten und deren Implikationen für die Raumentwicklung diskutieren. Während die natürliche Bevölkerungsentwicklung seit den 1970er Jahren einen konstant negativen Trend aufweist, stellen Wanderungsprozesse den dynamischen Faktor der Bevölkerungsentwicklung dar. Abbildung 1 zeigt, dass nach der starken Ost-West-Wanderung von 1991 bis 1993 die Binnenwanderungsrate in den späten 1990er und frühen 2000er Jahren (Leibert und Schaarwächter, 2019) rückläufig war. Auch die Zahl der internationalen Zuwanderer war durch den nachlassenden Zuzug von Spätaussiedler/innen und die Einführung der Drittstaatenregelung 1993, welche ehemalige Kriegsgebiete wie Serbien zu sicheren Herkunftsländern erklärte, ab 1997 auf einem konstant niedrigen Niveau. Infolge der Wirtschafts- und Finanzkrise ("Eurokrise") ab 2008, der Einführung der EU-Freizügigkeitsregelung 2012 sowie internationaler Konflikte und der damit einhergehenden sogenannten "Flüchtlingskrise" ab 2015 hat die Zahl der internationalen Zuwanderer seit 2011 rasant zugenommen (Körner-Blätgen und Sturm, 2015; BBSR, 2015). Damit zusammenhängend steigt auch die Binnenwanderungsrate seit 2011 wieder an (BBSR, 2013), denn Bewohner/innen der Erstaufnahmeeinrichtungen werden auf die Landkreise und kreisfreien Städte über Verteilungsschlüssel verteilt und anerkannte Asylbewerber/innen wandern in Großstädte mit ethnischen Netzwerken weiter. [...]

Supplemental material for Combining tacit knowledge elicitation with the SilverKnETs tool and random forests – The example of residential housing choices in Leipzig by Sebastian Scheuer, Dagmar Haase, Nadja Kabisch, Manuel Wolff, Dagmar Haase, Annegret Haase, Nadja Kabisch, Manuel Wolff, Nina Schwarz and Katrin Großmann in Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science

This book is one of the outcomes of the DIVERCITIES project. It focuses on the question of how to create social cohesion, social mobility and economic performance in today’s hyper-diversified cities. The project’s central hypothesis is that urban diversity is an asset; it can inspire creativity, innovation and make cities more liveable and harmonious. To ensure a more intelligent use of diversity’s potential, a re-thinking of public policies and governance models is needed.

Since the 1990s, reurbanisation has become an increasingly frequent trajectory for urban development. Many formerly shrinking cities have been able to stabilise their population or even see new growth. Especially prominent in regions like Germany and the UK, but also observed across the whole continent, a lively debate on reurbanisation has developed as a reality of today’s, and a potential trajectory for tomorrow’s, cities in Europe. Postsocialist Europe has not so far been central in the reurbanisation debate, either empirically or theoretically. Subsequently, the postsocialist experience is missing in the discourse and the existing body of evidence. There is, however, some evidence that Czech and Polish cities are also seeing signs of new inner-city growth and a trend towards core city stabilisation. Against this background, the paper scrutinises the issues of reurbanisation and new growth after the shrinking of postsocialist cities. The paper uses the approach of a contrastive comparison between cities in eastern Germany, where reurbanisation has developed as the predominant trajectory for many large cities, and for cities in Poland and the Czech Republic, where this trend is considerably less prominent. It analyses the development of reurbanisation in these cities and their urban regions over the last few decades, its characteristics and the determinants triggering or impeding it. The paper includes data on a national scale as well as from relevant case studies of cities and their urban regions. It argues, among other things, that there is no “postsocialist model” with regard to influencing factors for reurbanisation. Eastern Germany, due to its specific postsocialist situation and transformation trajectory, can be viewed as an “outlier” or “hybrid” which exhibits characteristics typical of postsocialist and western welfare contexts and which is seeing especially dynamic reurbanisation after a phase of extreme shrinkage. Although there are clear signs of inner-city reurbanisation in Polish and Czech cities as well, it seems relatively unlikely that this process will reach the same high levels as in East German cities within the coming years. * This article belongs to a special issue on reurbanisation., Comparative Population Studies, Vol 42 (2017)

Analysis of how urban diversity and policies and arrangements affect different population groups living in Leipzig in terms of social cohesion and social mobility.

Analysis of local governance arrangements and initiatives in Leipzig, Germany that target social cohesion, social mobility and economic performance.

Critical analysis of existing urban policy programmes and discourses in Leipzig, Germany. Includes overview of political systems and governance structures, key shifts in national discourses, and approaches to policy over migration, citizenship, and diversity.

This report describes the process of shrinkage as it has occurred within the city of Leipzig. It examines the reasons, dynamics and patterns of change as well as the consequences for different fields of urban development and planning. The period covered in the report runs from the 1980s to the present day; in particular cases, longer or shorter time periods are considered. Over this time, Leipzig has moved from a (more or less rapidly) shrinking city until the late 1990s to a point where ist population stabilized and even returned to a slight growth during the last few years. Today, Leipzig is no longer a shrinking city. When one looks only at the total population numbers, Leipzig represents one of a few large cities in eastern Germany that have undergone reurbanization processes (Haase, A. et al. 2010). However, urban shrinkage continues to be an important topic for the city. The city is still facing the consequences of long-term shrinkage and will have to cope with it during the years to come. At the same time, shrinkage still affects some parts of the city and will also do so in the future. Moreover, Leipzig awaits a new wave of shrinkage due to ageing and a decrease in households after 2015.

This report describes the process of shrinkage as it has occurred within the city of Halle. It examines the reasons, dynamics and patterns of change as well as the consequences for different fields of urban development and planning. The period covered in the report runs from the 1980s to the present day; in particular cases, longer or shorter time periods are considered. While Halle’s new part, Halle-Neustadt, saw a rapid growth of population during the 1960s and 1970s, the old city of Halle underwent population losses throughout the whole time of the GDR. During the 1980s, both parts (at that time two different cities in administrative terms) were stagnating, the old parts of the city suffered from decay. Since 1990, Halle (including Halle-Neustadt) has seen a continuous and rapid process of population loss that hit the city after the systemic change and German reunification. Today, Halle still represents a shrinking city and expects further population losses for the decades to come. The most visible sign of decline are housing vacancies in different parts of the city, even of renovated stock. At the same time, the city has to cope with the consequences of hitherto shrinkage processes. Although migration balances with the hinterland recently show, in contrast to former years, a slight plus for the city, Halle has not yet been able to stabilize its population.

Der Beitrag untersucht die Bedeutung, Entwicklung und Potenziale von Reurbanisierungsprozessen in innenstadtnahen Wohnquartieren verschiedener europäischer Städte. Reurbanisierung wird konzeptualisiert als Prozess der Stabilisierung der inneren Stadt, im Verlaufe dessen sowohl bereits ansässige Bewohner gehalten als auch Zuzügler gewonnen werden, die sich bewusst und explizit für ein urbanes Leben entscheiden. Zentral für das hier vorgestellte Reurbanisierungskonzept ist eine qualitative Dimension des demographischen Wandels, die auf die Ebene der Haushalte Bezug nimmt. Haushaltstypen, die im Zuge des Zweiten demographischen Übergangs gesamtgesellschaftlich an Bedeutung gewinnen - Alleinlebende, junge Paarhaushalte ohne Kinder, Wohngemeinschaften, Alleinerziehende- spielen in den Prozessen innerstädtischen Wandels eine besondere Rolle. Die innere Stadt entspricht mit ihrem Angebot an Wohn- und Gelegenheitsstrukturen den Bedürfnissen dieser Haushalte in besonderem Maße und verfügt über das Potenzial, für diese Haushalte auch längerfristig ein geeigneter Wohnstandort zu bleiben. Trotz unterschiedlicher institutioneller Rahmenbedingungen auf nationaler Ebene und lokaler Besonderheiten sind entsprechende Entwicklungen in den vergangenen Jahren in vielen europäischen Städten zu beobachten. Das wichtigste Ergebnis der im Folgenden vorgestellten Untersuchungen in Leipzig (Deutschland), Bologna (Italien), León (Spanien) und Ljubljana (Slowenien) ist, dass Reurbanisierungsprozesse zwar in ihrer quantitativen Ausprägung differieren, ihre Trägerhaushalte in verschiedenen europäischen Städten und Wohnquartieren aber ähnlich sind. (Autorenreferat) The article focuses on the impact, development and potentials of reurbanisation of inner-city areas in different European cities. Reurbanisation is conceptualised as the process of stabilisation of the inner city by means of both making residents stay and attracting new inhabitants who deliberately decide for an urban location and an urban style of life. The concept of reurbanisation draws on the genuine links between urban development and a small-scale, qualitative dimension of demographic change. Especially household types that gain more importance within the framework of the Second demographic transition, as for example one-person households, cohabiting couples without children, unrelated adults sharing a flat and single parents, are in the focus of the contribution. The inner city with its diverse housing stock and amenities to a high extent meets the needs of these household types and may even become a long-term housing location for them. Despite of different institutional conditions on the national and local scales, the above mentioned developments are to be observed in many European cities. The findings presented here for Leipzig (Germany), Bologna (Italy), León (Spain) and Ljubljana (Slovenia) show by evidence that reurbanisation, whilst varying in its quantitative dimension, exhibits similar qualitative features and driving forces in different European contexts. (author's abstract)

Die grenzüberschreitende Kooperation zwischen Polen und seinen Nachbarstaaten im Osten bietet Potenziale sowohl zur Stabilisierung der Grenzregionen als auch zur Lösung grenzübergreifender Probleme. So trägt der Grenzhandel bis heute in nicht unbeträchtlichem Maße zur Stabilisierung der Einkommenssituation zahlreicher Menschen in den Grenzregionen bei. Er hat lokal die Rolle eines wichtigen sozialen und wirtschaftlichen Regulativs übernommen. Kontakte zwischen der Bevölkerung bauen Barrieren ab und verändern größtenteils in positiver Weise das Bild des Nachbarn. Die Enttabuisierung historischer Konflikte erleichtert die Normalisierung der Nachbarschaftsbeziehungen insbesondere im polnisch-ukrainischen Grenzraum. Noch bleiben aufgrund rechtlicher Unterschiede, wirtschaftlicher Defizite der Grenzregionen und durch die wachsenden Transformations- und Wohlstandsunterschiede zwischen Polen und seinen Nachbarstaaten im Osten viele Potenziale zur grenzüberschreitenden Zusammenarbeit ungenutzt. Darüber hinaus ist die gegenseitige Annäherung ein langwieriger und komplizierter Prozess, der nach Jahrzehnten der Abschottung nicht in wenigen Jahren zu bewältigen ist. Noch beschränkt sich der Austausch – abgesehen der Grenzhandel und familiäre Kontakte – auf einen kleinen Kreis regionaler Eliten. Die aktive Einbeziehung der Bevölkerung vor allem in institutionalisierte Kooperationsbeziehungen, beispielsweise im Rahmen der Euroregionen, muss nun folgen. Die Einführung der Schengenbestimmungen sollte nicht zu einer Einschränkung der alltäglichen Kooperation zwischen den Grenzregionen führen, ist letztgenannte doch ein wesentlicher Garant einer erfolgreichen Bewältigung der EU-Osterweiterung., The cross-border cooperation between Poland and its neighbouring states in the East offers potential for the stabilisation of the border regions and for the solution of cross-border problems. For example, cross-border trade still contributes significantly to the stabilisation of the income situation of numerous people in the border regions. In local terms, it has assumed the role of an important social and economic regulator. Contacts within the popula tion tear down barriers and change impressions of one’s neighbours, most commonly in a positive sense. The removal of taboos from historical conflict facilitates a normalisation of relations between neighbours, in particular in the border regions between Poland and Ukraine. However, differences in the legal systems, economic deficits in the border regions and widening gaps in the levels of prosperity and transformation between Poland and its neighbouring states in the East mean that considerable potential for cross-border c ooperation are left unused. In addition, convergence is a laborious and complicated process, which, after decades of insular existence, cannot be overcome in just a few years. The networks are still limited to a small group of the elite in the region – apart from border trade and family contacts. Active inclusion of the population, especially in institutional cooperation, for example within the framework of the Euroregions, must now follow. The introduction of the Shengen Agreement should not lead to a restriction on every day cooperation between the border regions, as the latter is an important guarantor for a successful completion of EU expansion in the East.

Infolge der politischen und gesellschaftlichen Umwälzungen im östlichen Europa und den damit einher gehenden Grenzveränderungen gerieten die Gebiete an der polnischen Ostgrenze in eine völlig neue Situation. Neben der Bewältigung des seit der Grenzöffnung zwischen Polen und seinen östlichen Nachbarn stark angewachsenen grenzüberschreitenden Verkehrs gilt es in den letzten Jahren auch, neue bilaterale Beziehungen zwischen den jeweiligen Nachbarstaaten aufzubauen. Das Anliegen des Beitrages ist es vor diesem Hintergrund, Perspektiven und Probleme der gegenwärtigen Lage im Grenzgebiet zwischen dem südöstlichen Polen (Wojewodschaft Vorkarpaten) bilden sowie der Oblast Lwiw auf ukrainischer Seite aufzuzeigen. Dabei stehen nach einer kurzen Skizzierung des historischen und politischen Rahmens die Ausprägungen und Folgen der sozioökonomischen Transformation, die Möglichkeiten und Formen grenzüberschreitender Kontakte und Kooperation sowie die ethnische und religiöse Dimension des polnisch-ukrainischen Verhältnisses im Mittelpunkt. Zur Entwicklung der polnisch-ukrainischen Nachbarschaft in den hier betrachteten Grenzregionen nach dem Systemumbruch lassen sich zusammenfassend folgende Entwicklungen festhalten: Aufgrund des sehr unterschiedlichen Verlaufes der wirtschaftlichen wie auch der gesellschaftlichen Transformation auf beiden Seiten der Grenze wachsen gegenwärtig die sozio-ökonomischen Unterschiede zwischen den Grenzgebieten, was sich in einem zunehmenden Wohlstands- und Lohngefälle niederschlägt. Auf der polnischen Seite verläuft die Entwicklung trotz der noch bevorstehenden Reformen der Landwirtschaft tendenziell in Richtung einer wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Stabilisierung, auf der ukrainischen Seite dagegen konnte die krisenhafte Entwicklung in den letzten Jahren nicht gebremst werden und sie besitzt aufgrund der makroökonomischen Rahmenbedingungen in der Ukraine derzeit kaum nennenswerte Perspektiven für eine Entspannung der Lage. Während der Lebensstandard der Bevölkerung in Südostpolen in den letzten Jahren sichtbar gestiegen ist, muss für die Oblast Lwiw eine zunehmende Verarmung großer Bevölkerungsteile konstatiert werden. Der visafreie Grenzverkehr bildet die Grundlage für einen Neuaufbau der Nachbarbeziehungen zwischen den Grenzgebieten, welche neben ihrer wirtschaftlichen auch eine wichtige soziale Funktion besitzen (Kontakte der Bevölkerung, Abbau von Ängsten und Stereotypen, Entstehung eines neues Bildes über die Nachbarn, Verständnis für die Probleme der anderen). Die offene Grenze sorgt darüber hinaus für eine Abmilderung der peripheren Lage der Regionen durch die Gewinnung einer "neuen Zentralität" für die grenzüberschreitende Kommunikation sowie die transregionale Kooperation. In den letzten Jahren haben sich vielfältige gren züberschreitende Beziehungen zwischen Südostpolen und der Oblast Lwiw entwickelt, von denen beide Seiten profitieren, in erster Linie durch den Grenzhandel und die Erwerbsmigration so wie auf polnischer Seite die regionale Wirtschaftsentwicklung infolge der Handelsbeziehungen und des Einkaufstourismus. Zu neuen Problemen, welche im Zuge der Grenzöffnung auftreten, zählen vor allem die illegale Zuwanderung sowie die grenzübergreifende, organisierte Wirtschaftskriminalität. Nicht zu unterschätzen dürfte überdies in den nächsten Jahren die "Schere" infolge der wachsenden Wohlstandsunterschiede zwischen den Grenzgebieten sein, seit der Grenzöffnung ständig transparent sind. Auf politischer und kultureller Ebene bemüht man sich um Versöhnung und Kooperation, wie zuletzt auch die gemeinsame "Erklärung über Verständigung und Versöhnung" gezeigt hat. Die rechtliche Lage der Minderheiten auf beiden Seiten hat sich verbessert und sie erhalten zunehmend eine "Brückenfunktion" in den nachbarschaftlichen Beziehungen auf regionaler Ebene. Gleichwohl jedoch werden auch jahrzehntelang tabuisierte zwischenethnische Probleme transparent und virulent, wobei gegenwärtig die Lage auf der polnischen Seite als komplizierter einzuschätzen ist.

Analysis of how urban diversity and policies and arrangements with respect to urban diversity affect different population groups living in cities in terms of economic performance and to clarify who (which social groups) profit and how they profit.