|
Acknowledgement |
6 |
|
|
Contents |
7 |
|
|
Urban and Regional Resilience – A New Catchwordor a Consistent Concept for Research andPractice? |
14 |
|
|
Resilience – Understanding Better How to Deal with Change? |
14 |
|
|
Resilience – More than just a Dazzling Term? |
16 |
|
|
Dealing with Change in Germany – Steps towards MoreResilience? |
19 |
|
|
References |
23 |
|
|
Urban Resilience and New Institutional Theory –A Happy Couple for Urban and Regional Studies? |
27 |
|
|
1. Understanding Differences in Response to Urban Change |
27 |
|
|
2. Understandings of Resilience |
28 |
|
|
3. Urban Governance, New Institutionalism, and UrbanResilience |
30 |
|
|
4. Urban Areas as Complex Adaptive Systems |
31 |
|
|
5. Conclusions |
33 |
|
|
References |
35 |
|
|
Given the Complexity of Large Cities, Can UrbanResilience be Attained at All? |
37 |
|
|
1. Introduction |
37 |
|
|
2. Complexity of Large Cities |
37 |
|
|
2.1 Characteristics of Complex Cities |
37 |
|
|
2.2 Two Examples: Hamburg and Istanbul |
38 |
|
|
3. Urban Resilience against the Background of variousConcepts of Resilience |
39 |
|
|
4. Urban Resilience in Complex Large Cities |
40 |
|
|
5. Conclusion and Outlook |
42 |
|
|
References |
44 |
|
|
Rebuild the City! Towards Resource-efficient UrbanStructures through the Use of Energy Concepts,Adaptation to Climate Change, and Land UseManagement |
46 |
|
|
1. The Challenge of Resource-efficient Urban Development |
46 |
|
|
2. Energy-efficient Urban Development and Renewal |
49 |
|
|
3. Urban Development Adapted to Climate Change |
51 |
|
|
4. Resource-efficient Land Use Management with SiteRecycling Management |
54 |
|
|
5. Conclusion |
56 |
|
|
References |
58 |
|
|
Urban Restructuring – Making ‘More’ from ‘Less’ |
60 |
|
|
1. Restructuring of Cities – A Long-term Task |
60 |
|
|
1.1 Rescuing the Older Neighborhoods – An Urban DevelopmentChallenge in East and West |
60 |
|
|
1.2 Urban Restructuring in the New Federal States – Demolition andEnhancing Neighborhoods as a Dual Strategy |
61 |
|
|
1.3 Urban Restructuring in the Old Federal States – From UrbanRenewal to Urban Restructuring |
61 |
|
|
1.4 Pilot Projects in Western Germany – A Reflection of Industries ina Global Crisis |
62 |
|
|
1.5 New Challenges for Eastern and Western Germany |
63 |
|
|
2. Interim Use |
63 |
|
|
2.1 Interim Use as a Planning Strategy |
63 |
|
|
2.2 Diversity of Sites and of Types of Interim Uses |
64 |
|
|
2.3 Obstacles and Limitations to Interim Uses |
65 |
|
|
3. Renaturation |
65 |
|
|
3.1 Renaturation as a Forward Strategy |
65 |
|
|
3.2 Revision of Traditional Patterns of Thinking |
66 |
|
|
3.3 Renaturation as a Logical Response to Shrinking |
67 |
|
|
3.4 Renaturation – With Tenacity and a Strategic Concept |
67 |
|
|
4. Conclusion |
68 |
|
|
References |
69 |
|
|
Accomodating Creative Knowledge Workers?Empirical Evidence from Metropoles in Central andEastern Europe |
70 |
|
|
1. Challenging the Creative Paradigm in Central and EasternEuropean Metropoles – An Outline |
70 |
|
|
2. Definitions and Theoretical Assumptions |
70 |
|
|
2.1 Defining Creative Industries |
71 |
|
|
2.2 Creativity and its Pitfalls |
71 |
|
|
2.3 The Geographies and Localities of the Creative Industries |
72 |
|
|
3. Central and Eastern European Metropolitan Areas inTransition: Converging and Diverging Developments inRiga, Budapest, Poznan, and Leipzig |
73 |
|
|
4. The Location Decisions of Creative and KnowledgeWorkers: Survey Results |
74 |
|
|
5. Accommodating Creative Knowledge Workers? ConcludingStatements |
76 |
|
|
References |
78 |
|
|
A Strategy for Dealing with Change: RegionalDevelopment in Switzerland in the Context ofSocial Capital |
80 |
|
|
1. Introduction |
80 |
|
|
2. The Implementation of Sustainability |
81 |
|
|
3. Social Learning as a Tool |
83 |
|
|
4. Learning Regions as a Path for Dealing with Change |
84 |
|
|
5. An Empirical Survey of the Swiss Case |
85 |
|
|
6. Conclusion |
87 |
|
|
References |
88 |
|
|
Path Dependency and Resilience – The Example ofLandscape Regions |
90 |
|
|
1. Problem Statement |
90 |
|
|
2. The Benefit of Linking Path Dependency and Resilience |
90 |
|
|
2.1 The Epistemic Value of Theoretical Approaches to PathDependency |
90 |
|
|
2.2 Investigating the Relationship between Path Dependency andResilience |
92 |
|
|
3. Landscape Regions as an Example |
93 |
|
|
3.1 The Effects of Physical and Institutional Path Dependencies onthe Resilience of the Oderbruch as a Polder Landscape |
94 |
|
|
3.2 The Social Construction of Resilience Using the Example ofAttempts to Correct the Development Path in the Barnim Region |
95 |
|
|
4. A Comparative Interpretation and Conclusion |
96 |
|
|
References |
98 |
|
|
Resilience and Resistance of Buildings and BuiltStructures to Flood Impacts – Approaches toAnalysis and Evaluation |
100 |
|
|
1. Introduction |
100 |
|
|
2. Overall Methodology |
101 |
|
|
2.1 The Vulnerability of Building Types |
101 |
|
|
2.2 The Vulnerability Analysis Approach |
102 |
|
|
3. Vulnerability Mitigation Measures |
104 |
|
|
3.1 The Classification and Description of Measures |
104 |
|
|
3.2 The Selection, Ex-ante Analysis, and Comparison of Measures |
106 |
|
|
4. The Evaluation of Vulnerability Mitigation Measures |
107 |
|
|
5. Conclusions |
109 |
|
|
References |
110 |
|
|
Planning for Risk Reduction and Organizing forResilience in the Context of Natural Hazards |
112 |
|
|
1. Introduction |
112 |
|
|
2. Comparing Planning for Risk Reduction and Organizing forResilience in Groups |
113 |
|
|
3. Planning for Risk Reduction and Organizing for Resiliencein Organizations |
118 |
|
|
4. Conclusion |
120 |
|
|
References |
121 |
|
|
Vulnerability and Resilience: A Topic for SpatialResearch from a Social Science Perspective |
123 |
|
|
1. Introduction |
123 |
|
|
2. Vulnerability and Resilience as a Pair of Terms |
124 |
|
|
3. Content-related Focus and Research Questions from thePerspective of Social Science-based Spatial Research |
125 |
|
|
4. Outlook |
128 |
|
|
References |
129 |
|
|
Adaptability of Regional Planning in LowerSaxony to Climate Change |
130 |
|
|
1. Climate Change – Dealing with Uncertainty as a Task forSpatial Planning |
130 |
|
|
2. Adapting to Climate Change – Possibilities and Limitationsof Regional Planning in Lower Saxony |
131 |
|
|
3. Adapting to Climate Change – The Necessity of IntegratedApproaches |
132 |
|
|
References |
134 |
|
|
Dealing with Climate Change – The Opportunitiesand Conflicts of Integrating Mitigation andAdaptation |
135 |
|
|
1. Introduction |
135 |
|
|
2. Examples of Synergies and Conflicts |
136 |
|
|
3. Conclusions |
137 |
|
|
Regional Climate Adaptation Research – TheImplementation of an Integrative RegionalApproach in the Dresden Model Region |
138 |
|
|
1. The Necessity of Regional Climate Adaptation Research |
138 |
|
|
2. REGKLAM – An Integrated Regional Project ConcerningAdaptation to Climate Change |
139 |
|
|
3. REGKLAM – Work in a Regional Network |
141 |
|
|
References |
143 |
|
|
River Landscapes – Reference Areas for RegionallySpecific Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change |
144 |
|
|
1. Introduction |
144 |
|
|
2. Linking Precautionary Flood Protection and PreventingLow Water Levels with the Development of RegionalCultural Landscapes |
144 |
|
|
3. Experiences from Regional Case Studies in Germany |
145 |
|
|
4. Climate Change as a Long-term Challenge for Spatial Planningand Water Management – Recommendations |
147 |
|
|
References |
148 |
|
|
Strategic Planning – Approaches to Coping withthe Crisis of Shrinking Cities |
149 |
|
|
1. The Crisis of Shrinking Cites in Eastern Germany |
149 |
|
|
2. Wanted: Strategies for Coping with Structural Change |
149 |
|
|
3. Empirical Results in Five Medium-sized Eastern GermanCities |
150 |
|
|
3.1 Long-term and City-wide Visions of Development |
150 |
|
|
3.2 Short-term and Area-based Projects |
151 |
|
|
3.3 Cooperation among Actors and Modes of Governance |
152 |
|
|
Typologies of the Built Environment and theExample of Urban Vulnerability Assessment |
153 |
|
|
1. Theoretical Considerations |
153 |
|
|
2. An Example |
155 |
|
|
References |
156 |
|
|
Appendix List of Authors |
157 |
|
|
Andreas Blum |
157 |
|
|
Joachim Burdack |
157 |
|
|
Sonja Deppisch |
157 |
|
|
Fabian Dosch |
158 |
|
|
Sebastian Ebert |
158 |
|
|
Susen Fischer |
158 |
|
|
Enke Franck |
158 |
|
|
Manfred Fuhrich |
159 |
|
|
Ludger Gailing |
159 |
|
|
Evi Goderbauer |
159 |
|
|
Sebastian Golz |
160 |
|
|
Karin Gruhler |
160 |
|
|
Gérard Hutter |
160 |
|
|
Heiderose Kilper |
161 |
|
|
Manfred Kühn |
161 |
|
|
Thilo Lang |
161 |
|
|
Bastian Lange |
162 |
|
|
Bernhard Müller |
162 |
|
|
Thomas Naumann |
162 |
|
|
Johannes Nikolowski |
163 |
|
|
Alfred Olfert |
163 |
|
|
Jana Planek |
163 |
|
|
Lars Porsche |
163 |
|
|
Andreas Röhring |
164 |
|
|
Mareike Schaerffer |
164 |
|
|
Reinhard Schinke |
164 |
|
|
Stephan Schmidt |
165 |
|
|
Frank Sondershaus |
165 |
|
|
Torsten Thurmann |
165 |
|
|
Andreas Vetter |
166 |
|
|
Appendix Portrait of the Editors’ Institutions |
167 |
|
|
Academy for Spatial Research and Planning (ARL) |
167 |
|
|
Federal Institute for Research on Building, Urban Affairs andSpatial Development (BBSR) |
167 |
|
|
Leibniz Institute for Regional Geography (IfL) |
168 |
|
|
Leibniz Institute of Ecological and Regional Development(IOER) |
168 |
|
|
Leibniz Institute for Regional Development and StructuralPlanning (IRS) |
169 |
|