Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A systematic review of motives for densification in Swedish planning practice
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Spatial Planning.
Chalmers University of Technology, SWE.
Chalmers University of Technology, SWE.
Slu Landscape, SWE.
2020 (English)In: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science / [ed] Wallbaum H.,Hollberg A.,Thuvander L.,Femenias P.,Kurkowska I.,Mjornell K.,Fudge C., IOP Publishing Ltd , 2020, Vol. 588, no 5, article id 052030Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

One of the current dominant strategies proposed for sustainable urban development is densification. While some advocate the very reasonable benefits of density, others emphasize the potential drawbacks. The main goal of this paper is to provide a systematic overview of the claimed benefits of densification in Swedish practice and relate this to the scientific evidence. For the systematic overview, comprehensive plans from 59 Swedish municipalities, covering plans from both highly urbanized areas as well as more rural regions, are included. The results show that in three out of four cases where density or densification is mentioned, no motive is given. For the other quarter, the most often used motivation is related to transport (19%), services (17%) and urban environmental qualities (14%). The least frequent motives used are related to health (8%) and ecology (2%). The motives in comprehensive plans are for the most part pointing to a positive impact of density on sustainable urban development (77%), which is not always supported by the empirical evidence that more often describe a negative correlation. Furthermore, many of the most frequently used motives in comprehensive plans have little scientific support, which puts new questions on the research agenda. © Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
IOP Publishing Ltd , 2020. Vol. 588, no 5, article id 052030
Series
IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (EES), ISSN 1755-1307, E-ISSN 1755-1315
Keywords [en]
Densification, Urban growth, Urban transportation, Dominant strategy, Highly urbanized areas, Negative correlation, Research agenda, Scientific evidence, Sustainable urban development, Systematic Review, Urban environmental quality, Sustainable development
National Category
Environmental Sciences Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-20861DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/588/5/052030Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85097230303OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-20861DiVA, id: diva2:1511334
Conference
World Sustainable Built Environment - Beyond 2020, WSBE 2020, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2 November 2020 through 4 November 2020
Funder
Swedish Research Council Formas, 2018-00281
Note

open access

Available from: 2020-12-18 Created: 2020-12-18 Last updated: 2023-03-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Haupt, Per

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Haupt, Per
By organisation
Department of Spatial Planning
Environmental SciencesSocial Sciences Interdisciplinary

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 308 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf