Przegląd Geograficzny (2023) tom 95, zeszyt 1

Abstract

Where integrated territorial development is concerned, contemporary regional research and policy is putting increased emphasis on the functional approach, as compared with the administrative approach. Such a change of orientation denotes reference to a functional area (such as a city and its zone of influence) as an object around which analysis and planning can be focused. While relevant Polish discourse on the strategic and spatial-planning system revolves increasingly around the concept of Functional Urban Areas (FUAs, or MOFs in Polish), few studies have attempted to divide the entire territory of Poland into such FUAs. The work detailed in this paper has thus sought to fill the gap through the de novo development of a procedural tool for delimitation that is nevertheless informed by previous studies; as well as through presentation of the results of the method’s application.

The work thus commenced with a review and critical evaluation of Polish literature from the points of view of the conceptualization of Functional Urban Areas and methods used in their delimitation. We outline the use of related concepts involving the so-called Urban Agglomeration, City-region, Functional Urban Region, Metropolitan Area, Functional Urban Area, Local Labour-Market Area and Zone of Urban Influence (Table 1). We then focus on methods employed in researching Functional Urban Areas, identifying four important methodological dichotomies, i.e. (1) regions being defined zonally (by common characteristics) vs. nodally (by relations), and (2) regions developed deductively (by division) or inductively (by aggregation), as well as (3) the application of division that is either exhaustive (all units belong to a group) or non-exhaustive, and (4) classifications that are regional (involving spatially continuous regions) or else typological (Table 2). Summarising our review of the literature, we conclude that FUA delimitation needs to be based around nodal, inductive, exhaustive and regional division principles.

On that basis, our original method of achieving delimitation of FUAs first entailed definition of such a region as a territorially continuous area including a central city or other urban locality and at least one subordinate local-government unit (gmina in Polish) connected to it by virtue of population flows (commutes to work and bidirectional migration) and located within the isochrone of 1 (or for the largest cities – 1.5) hours of travel to the central locality. A modified highest flow linkages method was used to allocate each gmina to an FUA, with use made of a commuting-to-work matrix (calculating the mean from the 2011 and 2016 commuting matrices from Statistics Poland) and an inter-municipal migration matrix (aggregating the 2011-2020 migration matrices from Statistics Poland) as sources of information by which to assess functional relationships between gminas and potential central cities. The criterion of the maximum time separating a gmina and a central locality was then added in, a 1-hour isochrone being regarded as the limit of convenient single-day travel time to work, services or school, albeit extended to 1.5 hours for cities with more than 500,000 inhabitants. The Google Maps Distance Matrix API was used to determine distances, by reference to actual travel times accounting for road traffic. The delimitation procedure was completed as correction was applied to determine the spatial continuity of each FUA (Fig. 1).

This procedure generated 413 FUAs (Fig. 2), each of between 2 and 92 gminas, and with areas ranging from 14 and 8800 km2 and populations of between 7500 and 3.3 million. The largest FUAs relate to the largest regional capitals in Poland, while the smallest involve small towns in regional peripheries. The number of FUAs, their average size, and the list of cities that emerged as FUA central localities bear some similarity with Poland’s second- (county-) level administrative division based on the unit known as the powiat. However, the main feature distinguishing the division into FUAs from the administrative division actually applied in the country concerns the huge size-range of individual FUAs, which generally correlate with the sizes of their central localities. In contrast, powiats as actually established are of rather similar size, regardless of the dimensions of their capitals.

Indeed, the novelty of our means of delimiting Functional Urban Areas stems from its lack of regard for existing administrative boundaries at the level of the powiat or voivodeship (province-region), its exhaustive nature, the core reference to functional linkage, and the operability of the division into regions as founded in an integrated territorial approach. Our delimitation was developed to determine differences in spatial development, and to point to areas faced with specific challenges, including on account of their constituting internal peripheries. Internal peripherality is a complex, multifaceted phenomenon that intensifies the effects of various socio-economic processes resulting in the limitation of functional links.

The authors also intend for the proposed delimitation to serve as a point of reference for various types of analyses and studies, of both an academic and an applied nature. A serious problem for contemporary research is that established territorial units do not typically constitute “functional wholes” playing host to interrelated socio-economic activity. In contrast, our proposed means of delimitation allows for these by aggregating data from Polish gminas to the designated FUA level, and by providing authentic reference areas on which research can be focused.

Keywords: urban region, functional urban areas (FUA), nodal region, delimitation, functional linkages, place based approach

Paweł Churski [chur@amu.edu.pl], Faculty of Human Geography and Planning Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań Bogumiła Krygowskiego 10, 61-680 Poznań: Poland
Czesław Adamiak [czeslaw@umk.pl], Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu, Wydział Nauk o Ziemi i Gospodarki Przestrzennej
Barbara Szyda [bszyda@umk.pl], Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu, Wydział Nauk o Ziemi i Gospodarki Przestrzennej
Anna Dubownik [a_dubownik@umk.pl], Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu, Wydział Nauk o Ziemi i Gospodarki Przestrzennej
Maciej Pietrzykowski [maciej.pietrzykowski@ue.poznan.pl], Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Poznaniu, Instytut Gospodarki Międzynarodowej
Przemysław Śleszyński [psleszyn@twarda.pan.pl], Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization Polish Academy of Sciences, Twarda 51/55, 00‑818 Warszawa, Poland

Citation

APA: Churski, P., Adamiak, C., Szyda, B., Dubownik, A., Pietrzykowski, M., & Śleszyński, P. (2023). Nowa delimitacja miejskich obszarów funkcjonalnych w Polsce i jej zastosowanie w praktyce zintegrowanego podejścia terytorialnego (place based approach). Przegląd Geograficzny, 95(1), 29-55. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.2
MLA: Churski, Paweł, et al. "Nowa delimitacja miejskich obszarów funkcjonalnych w Polsce i jej zastosowanie w praktyce zintegrowanego podejścia terytorialnego (place based approach)". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, 2023, pp. 29-55. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.2
Chicago: Churski, Paweł, Adamiak, Czesław, Szyda, Barbara, Dubownik, Anna, Pietrzykowski, Maciej, and Śleszyński, Przemysław. "Nowa delimitacja miejskich obszarów funkcjonalnych w Polsce i jej zastosowanie w praktyce zintegrowanego podejścia terytorialnego (place based approach)". Przegląd Geograficzny 95, no. 1 (2023): 29-55. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.2
Harvard: Churski, P., Adamiak, C., Szyda, B., Dubownik, A., Pietrzykowski, M., & Śleszyński, P. 2023. "Nowa delimitacja miejskich obszarów funkcjonalnych w Polsce i jej zastosowanie w praktyce zintegrowanego podejścia terytorialnego (place based approach)". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 29-55. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.2

Abstract

The main objective of the study was to identify the main phenomena and processes related to voting behavior in selected Eastern European countries (Poland, Romania, Lithuania) after 1989.

The political and economic changes, which started some 30 years ago, triggered off the process of transformation of the post-communist countries from the socialist economy, centrally steered, towards the market economy – liberal and open to the global processes. This transformation was accompanied by the dynamic political and social phenomena, culminating with the entry of the majority of countries of Central-Eastern Europe to NATO and to the European Union.

After almost half century of slavery under various kinds and stages of the communist system, the societies of this part of the continent regained complete freedom and could at last decide of their own future. Democratisation of the personal and public life was expressed, in particular, through the freedom of formation of the political, social and economic entities.

One of the very important consequences of the collapse of the communist system was the introduction of free elections institution. Despite the decades of communist unification, it has revealed differences in terms of political sympathies. This variation also had its spatial dimension. One of them was the distinct differentiation in voting behavior between cities and rural areas. Differences are also visible within the latter. Societies affiliated to the socialized sector in agriculture differ from those where individual farming survived. Rural areas with a lower share of agricultural functions (suburbanization, semi-urbanization) also have its distinct character. Significant differences in voting behavior are also evident in the case of national minorities and other ethnic groups.

Variability occurred not only in space, but also in time. The change of influence of individual parties or political options from one election to another is a normal phenomenon. However, there are more durable changes that have a generational character. The researched period is clearly divided into two intervals. In all of the countries here considered it is possible to note similar, although regionally differentiated, tendencies. Thus, in all of them the period after 1989 can be divided up into two parts. The first of these parts, which can be called post-communist, was characterised by the dispute between the centre-right, mostly originating from the anti-communist opposition (the dissident movements), and the groupings, originating from the communist formations. The latter would come to power mainly owing to the support from the inhabitants of the rural areas. The second period is undoubtedly linked with the change of generations. People, who matured under communism, were replaced by those, who grew up during perestroika and democracy. The historical dispute between the communists and anti-communists ceased to be of primary importance. Current problems and new challenges turned out to be more significant. This brought about a reshuffling on the political scene in all of the countries considered. The parties of the post-communist left lost in importance (in Poland and in Lithuania) or underwent a deep transformation (Romania). The change took also place within the political centre-right and was most frequently linked with the reordering of the groupings existing until then and the emergence of the new ones.

This change, though, has not exerted a significant influence on the shape of the already developed spatial differentiation of the electoral behaviour within the rural areas. Most frequently, the support for some parties was replaced by the support for the other ones, in direct reference to the existing spatial differentiation. It can be therefore supposed that the political divisions got inscribed into the persisting spatial differences, having developed owing to the long-term processes. In view of this, the individual communities displayed different susceptibility to the rhetoric of the particular parties or candidates.The communities associated with farming, and especially with the large-scale socialised farming, remained under the strong influence of the post-communist parties. Those communities, which were associated with family farming or developed non-farming activities, were more prone to accept the arguments of the centre-right parties. It also appears that higher support for the post-communist left was observed among the communities from the areas having belonged in the past to the states less connected with the traditions of the western civilisation (like, e.g., Moldavia and Walachia in Romania, or the Western Lands and the former Congress Kingdom in Poland). This was, anyway, also very often associated with the greater susceptibility of these communities to the development of the socialised farming during the communist time. On the other hand, support for the centre-right was more easily generated in the communities, which were in the past more tightly linked with the western civilisation (e.g. Transylvania in Romania or Galicia in Poland), which, as a rule, remained less affected by the communist model of farming.

The nature of the differentiation considered is debatable. One can analyse the socio-economic (structural) conditioning, the influence of the separate civilisation models (methods of organising collective life), or simply the degree of developmental maturity of the given society. These factors can be, anyway, strongly mutually linked in many cases. The social capital (and the associated economic and cultural capital), often indicated by the scholars as an important differentiating factor, might also be treated as a derivative of the action of these factors. Irrespective of the essence of the observed differences, they are, beyond doubt, the effect of differences in the conditions shaping the circumstances of life and activity of the particular communities. Shaping, often over centuries, the separate characteristics of the particular areas and the populations, inhabiting them, these conditions caused, also in the more recent times, and even within the same political units, somewhat different directions of development of the local communities. This kind of differentiation, in turn, was expressed, as well, in the diversified political sensitivity and the associated electoral behaviour patterns. The reaches of the developing differentiation define in the particular countries considered a network of various kinds of informal boundaries, separating the different intensity of phenomena of varying nature. Within the rural areas of Poland and Romania an important role is played by the relict borders, the zones of influence of the large urban centres (of the urban lifestyle) and the ethnic borders (often following the relict borders). In the case of Lithuania, where pronounced relict borders are weaker and fewer, the differences in the voting behaviour are primarily due to the reasons of ethnic, socio-economic (the reach of influence of the urban centres), and in some cases also natural character (like, e.g. the natural conditions for farming activities).

Keywords: elections, electoral behaviour, spatial differentiation, informal borders, Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs), Poland, Romania, Lithuania

Mariusz Kowalski [mar.kow@twarda.pan.pl], Instytut Geografii i Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania im. S. Leszczyckiego PAN

Citation

APA: Kowalski, M. (2023). Trwałość przestrzennego zróżnicowania zachowań wyborczych w krajach Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej. Przegląd Geograficzny, 95(1), 57-83. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.3
MLA: Kowalski, Mariusz. "Trwałość przestrzennego zróżnicowania zachowań wyborczych w krajach Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, 2023, pp. 57-83. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.3
Chicago: Kowalski, Mariusz. "Trwałość przestrzennego zróżnicowania zachowań wyborczych w krajach Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej". Przegląd Geograficzny 95, no. 1 (2023): 57-83. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.3
Harvard: Kowalski, M. 2023. "Trwałość przestrzennego zróżnicowania zachowań wyborczych w krajach Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 57-83. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.3

Abstract

This article aims to explain where the cross‑border tourism cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region (BSR) can be observed, and its specifical aim is to answer the research question: What are the spatial characteristics of cooperation in cross-border tourism projects in the Baltic Sea Region? Using the methods of spatial analysis in GIS, statistical methods and analysis of project documents, synthetic research was carried out on the cooperation of beneficiaries of tourism projects under the Interreg IV A, B and C programs in the BSR. The spatial nature of this cooperation was presented in a descriptive and cartographic form, taking into account the locations of beneficiaries, budgets, roles in the project, concentration, connections and topics of their cooperation.

Although the empirical study presented below is limited only to tourism cooperation under the EU‑funded Interreg IV program in the BSR, it is one of the first studies on cross‑border cooperation between entities separated by a sea border in general, as well as one of the first synthetic studies on projects from different levels of European Union funding in the Interreg program (A, B and C), which cover a larger area of research.

Ultimately, within 13 Interreg IV programs within the BSR consisting of 1157 projects in total, 89 projects directly related to cross‑border tourism crossing sea borders were selected for the study, including 71 Interreg A, 12 Interreg B and 6 Interreg C projects. Within selected projects 834 beneficiaries collaborated and spent a total budget of almost €150 million (Tab. 1). Beneficiaries from Sweden, Denmark and Germany account for more than half of all beneficiaries of tourism projects in the region (Fig. 3.a). Beneficiaries are located in 330 places in the region all across the region, but there is a large variation in their distribution. Most of the beneficiaries are based in places located on the coast, which is also indicated by the analysis of the concentration of partners, taking into account the number of beneficiaries within a radius of 100 km (Fig. 6.). Three large concentrations of beneficiaries can be observed: two are located in the western part of the region: (1) the coast of the narrow Danish straits – Øresund, Great Belt and Little Belt (west coast of Sweden, coast of Denmark and northern Germany), (2) Kattegat and partly the Skagerrak strait (Sweden‑Denmark‑Norway), and (3) the regions of the capital cities of Helsinki and Tallinn, and the coast of the Archipelago Sea – the body of the Baltic Sea located south‑west of the Finnish town of Turku.

Cooperation is measured by number and distance of the relations between the beneficiaries. In the BSR the largest number of relations takes place within the distance of 200‑300 km, i.e. allowing to connect the opposite shores of the Baltic Sea (Fig. 9). Beneficiaries of tourist projects from the coast of the Danish straits form a separate system of relations, only to a small extent connected with other parts of the BSR, especially with beneficiaries from the eastern part of the region. From the western part of the region, only beneficiaries from Germany cooperate relatively intensively both with partners from Denmark and Sweden, as well as with partners from the eastern part of the BSR (Fig. 7 and 8). The most frequently chosen topics of cooperation in the BSR concerned expertise and research, promotional activities, knowledge transfer, technical development and the development and improvement of services. Although the distribution of beneficiaries according to the topics implemented was relatively even, beneficiaries who implemented projects related to networking and strengthening cooperation, development of the tourist product, creation of destinations and a tourist brand, as well as promotional activities and protection of cultural heritage were definitely concentrated in the western part of the region – on the coast around the Danish straits: Sound, Great Belt and Little Belt, as well as on the coast of the Kattegat (Fig. 10).

Comparison of the number of implemented projects related to tourism, the number of beneficiaries, the average amount of beneficiaries’ budgets and their concentration showed diametrical differences in the region between its western and eastern parts. It can therefore be said that the “Iron Curtain” is still visible, which in the second half of the 20th century divided the south‑eastern part of the Baltic Sea from its north‑western part. If we divide the countries of the BSR into the so‑called countries of “Old Europe” (Finland, Denmark, Germany, Norway and Sweden) and countries of “New Europe” (Belarus, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland and Russia), there are huge differences between these areas, suggesting that EU projects cause the leveling of differences between the “old” and “new” Europe, Implementation of tourism projects definitely dominates in the countries of “Old Europe” (77.3%), where the beneficiaries are usually located in smaller towns. The opposite is true in the “new” EU countries, where most of the tourism projects are implemented by beneficiaries from medium and large cities. The vast majority of the tourism projects’ leading partners also come from the countries of “Old Europe” (79.3%), and their budget is at the level of as much as 83.9% of the budgets of all the leading partners (cf. Tab. 2). These data suggest that EU co‑financed projects still fail to significantly bridge the differences between countries that did not cooperate for most of the 20th century.

Keywords: cross-border cooperation, spatial features of cooperation, tourism, Interreg programs, the Baltic Sea Region, bordering-debordering-rebordering concept

Denis Cerić [d.ceric@twarda.pan.pl], Institute of Geography and Spatial Organisation, Polish Academy of Sciences Twarda 51/55, 00-818 Warsaw: Poland

Citation

APA: Cerić, D. (2023). Przestrzenne cechy transgranicznej współpracy turystycznej w regionie Morza Bałtyckiego. Przegląd Geograficzny, 95(1), 85-112. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.4
MLA: Cerić, Denis. "Przestrzenne cechy transgranicznej współpracy turystycznej w regionie Morza Bałtyckiego". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, 2023, pp. 85-112. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.4
Chicago: Cerić, Denis. "Przestrzenne cechy transgranicznej współpracy turystycznej w regionie Morza Bałtyckiego". Przegląd Geograficzny 95, no. 1 (2023): 85-112. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.4
Harvard: Cerić, D. 2023. "Przestrzenne cechy transgranicznej współpracy turystycznej w regionie Morza Bałtyckiego". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 85-112. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.4

Zbigniew Taylor [z.taylor@twarda.pan.pl], Instytut Geografii i Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania im. S. Leszczyckiego PAN

Citation

APA: Taylor, Z. (2023). Anne Graham, Frédéric Dobruszkes (red.) - Air Transport - A Tourism Perspective. Przegląd Geograficzny, 95(1), 113-116. https://doi.org/
MLA: Taylor, Zbigniew. "Anne Graham, Frédéric Dobruszkes (red.) - Air Transport - A Tourism Perspective". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, 2023, pp. 113-116. https://doi.org/
Chicago: Taylor, Zbigniew. "Anne Graham, Frédéric Dobruszkes (red.) - Air Transport - A Tourism Perspective". Przegląd Geograficzny 95, no. 1 (2023): 113-116. https://doi.org/
Harvard: Taylor, Z. 2023. "Anne Graham, Frédéric Dobruszkes (red.) - Air Transport - A Tourism Perspective". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 113-116. https://doi.org/

Barbara Bożętka [origeo@interia.pl], Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu

Citation

APA: Bożętka, B. (2023). Egidio Ivetic – Adriatyk. Morze i jego cywilizacja. Przegląd Geograficzny, 95(1), 117-119. https://doi.org/
MLA: Bożętka, Barbara. "Egidio Ivetic – Adriatyk. Morze i jego cywilizacja". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, 2023, pp. 117-119. https://doi.org/
Chicago: Bożętka, Barbara. "Egidio Ivetic – Adriatyk. Morze i jego cywilizacja". Przegląd Geograficzny 95, no. 1 (2023): 117-119. https://doi.org/
Harvard: Bożętka, B. 2023. "Egidio Ivetic – Adriatyk. Morze i jego cywilizacja". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 117-119. https://doi.org/