Recreational mapping and planning for enlargement of the green structure in greater Copenhagen

Abstract Since 1947, the development of greater Copenhagen has followed a plan that divided the city into a centre and five urban ‘fingers’. The ‘Finger Plan’ has constituted an important part of the planning framework, albeit informally. Under this plan, four green wedges and three green rings, located between the urban ‘fingers’, form a multifunctional recreational landscape of high value to the citizens. In 2006, the Greater Copenhagen Authority put forward a proposal for the enlargement of the existing green wedges and the addition of a new fourth green ring. In order to achieve this plan, detailed mapping of recreational opportunities was needed. Based on existing planning approaches combined with theoretical and empirical studies on preferences, use, and composition of green spaces, a method for monitoring and analyzing recreational experiences using seven specific categories was adapted and further developed to Danish conditions and applied to land use categories in greater Copenhagen. Areas that comprised one or more recreational experience values were designated by use of GIS techniques and map-based indicators for each of the seven ‘experience classes’ (wilderness; feeling of the forest; panoramic views, water, and scenery; biodiversity and land form; cultural history; activity and challenge; service and gathering). For incorporation into the regional and municipal planning policy, the seven experience classes were transformed into GIS, creating a decision support system for use at municipal and regional levels in order to facilitate future planning of the recreational landscape in greater Copenhagen. The method proved capable of pointing out important areas for recreational development in the enlarged but not yet developed areas. Further, the division of the recreational potential into seven classes makes possible site-specific development that utilizes existing potential.

[1]  N. Koch,et al.  Twenty-five Years of Forest Recreation Research in Denmark and its Influence on Forest Policy , 2004 .

[2]  F. Hansen,et al.  The fall and rise of metropolitan government in Copenhagen , 2002 .

[3]  F. S. Jensen,et al.  Forest recreation in Denmark from the 1970s to the 1990s [including 4 manuscripts] , 1999 .

[4]  Geert De Blust,et al.  Europe's Living Landscapes , 2007 .

[5]  R. Millward,et al.  The Experience of Landscape , 1988 .

[6]  Joan Iverson Nassauer,et al.  Monitoring the success of metropolitan wetland restorations: Cultural sustainability and ecological function , 2004, Wetlands.

[7]  Gary Fry,et al.  Health effects of viewing landscapes - Landscape types in environmental psychology , 2007 .

[8]  Dazhong Wen Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions , 1997 .

[9]  R. Kaplan,et al.  The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective , 1989 .

[10]  P. Grahn Landscapes in our minds: people's choice of recreative places in towns. , 1991 .

[11]  Stephan Pauleit,et al.  Benefits and uses of urban forests and trees , 2005 .

[12]  A. Reenberg,et al.  Land system changes in the context of urbanisation: Examples from the peri-urban area of Greater Copenhagen , 2006 .

[13]  B. L. Driver,et al.  Measuring Leisure Motivation: A Meta-Analysis of the Recreation Experience Preference Scales , 1996 .

[14]  Matthias Buchecker,et al.  Aesthetic preferences versus ecological objectives in river restorations , 2008 .

[15]  A. S. Olafsson,et al.  Green space planning and land use: An assessment of urban regional and green structure planning in Greater Copenhagen , 2006 .

[16]  George H. Stankey,et al.  The ROS planning system: Evolution, basic concepts, and research needed , 1987 .

[17]  Simon Bell,et al.  Landscape: Pattern, Perception and Process , 1999 .

[18]  D. S. Davis,et al.  Tracking restoration in natural and urban field settings. , 2003 .

[19]  J. Schipperijn,et al.  Tools for mapping social values of urban woodlands and other green areas , 2007 .

[20]  R. Kaplan,et al.  People needs in the urban landscape : Analysis of Landscape And Urban Planning contributions , 2008 .

[21]  P. A. Hansen,et al.  Integration strategies and barriers to co‐operation in cross‐border regions: Case study of the Øresund region , 2007 .

[22]  Emotional, Physical/Functional and Symbolic Aspects of an Urban Forest in Denmark to Nearby Residents , 2004 .

[23]  P. Grahn,et al.  Landscape planning and stress , 2003 .

[24]  G. Blust,et al.  Europe's Living Landscapes: Essays Exploring our Identity in the Countryside , 2007 .

[25]  H. Staats,et al.  Preference for Nature in Urbanized Societies: Stress, Restoration, and the Pursuit of Sustainability , 2007 .

[26]  T. Nielsen,et al.  Nearby nature and green areas encourage outdoor activitiesand decrease mental stress. , 2006 .

[27]  H. Vejre,et al.  Chapter 19: The Copenhagen Finger Plan: Keeping a green space structure by a simple planning metaphor , 2007 .