Agreen belt is a policy, and land-use zone designation used inland-use planning to retain areas of largely undeveloped,wild, or agriculturalland surrounding or neighboringurban areas. Similar concepts aregreenways orgreen wedges, which have a linear character and may run through an urban area instead of around it. In essence, a green belt is an invisible line designating a border around a certain area, preventing development of the area and allowingwildlife to return and be established.
The more general term in the United States isgreen space orgreenspace, which may be a very small area such as apark.
Better land use of areas within the bordering cities.
The effectiveness of green belts differs depending on location and country. They can often be eroded byurban rural fringe uses and sometimes, development 'jumps' over the green belt area, resulting in the creation of "satellite towns" which, although separated from the city by the green belt, function more like suburbs than independent communities.
In the 7th century,Muhammad established a green belt aroundMedina. He did this by prohibiting any further removal of trees in a 12-mile-long strip around the city.[5] In 1580Elizabeth I of England banned new buildings in a 3-mile wide belt around theCity of London in an attempt to stop the spread of plague. However, this was not widely enforced and it was possible to buy dispensations which reduced the effectiveness of the proclamation.[6]
In modern times, the term emerged from continental Europe where broad boulevards were increasingly used to separate new development from the centers of historic towns; most notably theRingstraße inVienna. Green belt policy was then pioneered in theUnited Kingdom confronted with ongoingrural flight. The term itself was first used in relation to the growth of London byOctavia Hill in 1875.[7][8] Various proposals were put forward from 1890 onwards but the first to garner widespread support was put forward by theLondon Society in its "Development Plan of Greater London" 1919. Alongside theCPRE they lobbied for a continuous belt (of up to two miles wide) to prevent urban sprawl, beyond which new development could occur.
The dynamicAdelaide Park Lands, measuring approximately 7.6 km2, surround, unbroken, the city center ofAdelaide. On the fringe of the eastern suburbs, an expansive natural green belt in theAdelaide Hills acts as a growth boundary for Adelaide and cools the city in the hottest months.
The concept of "green belt" has evolved in recent years to encompass not only "Greenspace" but also "Greenstructure" which comprises all urban and peri-urban green spaces, an important aspect of sustainable development in the 21st century. TheEuropean Commission'sCOST Action C11(COST – European Cooperation in Science and Technology) is undertaking"Case studies in Greenstructure Planning" involving 15 European countries.
When established around an economically prosperous city, homes in a green belt may have been motivated by or result in considerable premiums. They may also be more economically resilient as popular among the retired and less attractive for short-term renting of modest homes.[12] Where in the city itself demand exceeds supply in housing, green belt homes compete directly with much city housing wherever such green belt homes are well-connected to the city.[12] Further, they in all cases attract a future-guaranteed premium for protection of their views, recreational space and for the preservation/conservation value itself.[12] Most also benefit from higher rates of urbangardening andfarming, particularly when done in acommunity setting, which has positive effects onnutrition,fitness,self-esteem, and happiness, providing a benefit for both physical and mental health, in all cases easily provided or accessed in a green belt.[13] Government planners also seek to protect the green belt as its local farmers are engaged inperi-urban agriculture which augmentscarbon sequestration, reduces theurban heat island effect, and provides ahabitat fororganisms.[14] Peri-urban agriculture may also helprecycle urbangreywater and other products ofwastewater, helping to conserve water and reduce waste.[15]
The housing market contrasts with more uncertainty andeconomic liberalism inside and immediately outside of the belt:[12] green belt homes have by definition nearby protected landscapes.[12] Local residents in affluent parts of a green belt, as in parts of the city, can be assured of preserving any localizedbourgeoisstatus quo present and so assuming the green belt is not from the outset an area of moresocial housing proportionately than the city, it naturally tends toward greater economic wealth. In a protracted housing shortage, the reduction of the green belt is one of the possible solutions. All such solutions may be resisted however by privatelandlords who profit from a scarcity of housing, for example by lobbying to restrain new housing across the city. The stated motivation and benefits of the green belt might be well-intentioned (public health, social gardening and agriculture, environment), but inadequately realized relative to other solutions.
Critics includeMark Pennington and the economics-heavy think tanks such as theInstitute of Economic Affairs who would see a reduction in many green belts. Such studies focus on the widely inherent limitations of green belts. In most examples, only a small fraction of the population uses the green belt for leisure purposes. The IEA study claims that a green belt is not strongly causally linked to clean air and water. Rather, they view the ultimate result of the decision to green-belt a city as one to prevent housing demand within the zone to be met with supply,[16] thus exacerbating high housing prices and stifling competitive forces in general.
Another area of criticism comes from the fact that, since a green belt does not extend indefinitely outside a city, it spurs the growth of areas much further away from the city core than if it had not existed, thereby actuallyincreasingurban sprawl.[17] Examples commonly cited are theOttawa suburbs ofKanata andOrleans, both of which are outsidethe city's green belt and are currently undergoing explosive growth. This leads to other problems, as residents of these areas have a longer commute to workplaces in the city and worse access topublic transport. It also means people have to commute through the green belt, an area not designed to cope with high levels of transportation. Not only is the merit of a green belt subverted, but the green belt may heighten the problem and make the city unsustainable.
There are many examples whereby the actual effect of green belts is to act as a land reserve for future freeways and other highways. Examples include sections ofOntario Highway 407 north ofToronto and theHunt Club Road andRichmond Road south of Ottawa. Whether they are originally planned as such, or the result of a newer administration taking advantage of land that was left available by its predecessors is debatable.
Green belts were established in England in 1955 to simply prevent the physical growth of large built-up areas; to prevent neighboring cities and towns from merging.[18] In the UK, green belt around the major conurbations has been criticized as one of the main protectionist bars to building housing, the others being other planning restrictions (Local Plans andrestrictive covenants) and developers'land banking. Local Plans and land banking are to be relaxed for home building in the 2015–2030 period by law and the green belt will be reduced by some local authorities as each local authority must now consider it among the available shortlisted options in drawing development plans to meet higher housing targets. Critics argue that the green belts defeat their stated objective of saving the countryside and open spaces. Such criticism falls short when considering the other, broader benefits such asperi-urban agriculture which includes gardening and carries many benefits, especially to the retired[citation needed]. It also ignores the strategic aims of theAttlee Ministry in 1946, just as in France, of shifting capital away from the capital city (addressing regional disparity) and avoiding intra-urban gridlock.
The restrictions of the Green Belt were particularly in the 1940s–1980s mitigated with planned, government-supported, new towns under theNew Towns Act 1946 andNew Towns Act 1981. These saw establishment beyond the green belts of new homes,infrastructure, businesses, and other facilities. Without large-scale sustainable development,infill development seesurban green space lost. A chronic housing shortage with inadequate new settlements and/or extension of those outside of the green belt and/or no green belt reduction has seen manybrownfield sites, often well-suited to industry and commerce, lost in existing conurbations.[19]
TheNillumbik Shire Council which is located approximately 30 km (19 miles) north-east ofMelbourne is considered as "The Green Wedge Shire" because of the agreement with theVictorian Government which prevents high-density infrastructure from being built.
TheSão Paulo City Green Belt Biosphere Reserve – GBBR, an integral part of theAtlantic Forest Biosphere Reserve, was created in 1994 stemming from a people's movement that collected 150 thousand signatures. It extends throughout 73 municipalities includingSão Paulo metro and theSantos area. With approximately 17,000 km², it is inhabited by about 23 million people, corresponding to more than 10% of the country's total population in an area equivalent to 0.2% of the Brazilian territory. There are over 6,000 km² of forests and other Atlantic Forest ecosystems at the Reserve, one of the planet's most threatened biomes. In addition to a spectacular biological diversity, the GBBR's ecosystems render valuableecosystem services.
British Columbia'sAgricultural Land Reserve protects agricultural land throughout the province from urban development, including its mountainous terrain and areas aroundVancouver. This protection is strict and urban development of agricultural land is only allowed if no reasonable alternative exists. However, it does not protect non-agricultural land, particularly hillsides, leading to substantial, and highly visible, leapfrog-type hillside sprawl.
Quebec'sCommission de protection du territoire agricole du Québec keeps territory (the agricultural zones) that is favorable for the practice and the development of agricultural activities. In so doing, the commission safeguards the agricultural territory and helps make its protection a local priority. The agricultural zones cover an area of 63 000 square kilometers in 952 local municipalities.
TheGreater Santo Domingo has a Greenbelt (Santo Domingo Greenbelt) project surrounding the wholeDistrito Nacional. It is composed of the National Botanical Garden, Mirador Del Norte, Mirador del Este, and other parks surrounding the area from its outermunicipios. The overall objective of this Greenbelt is for it to protect the water and natural reserves of Santo Domingo, as well as to regulate the expansion of settlements.[4] However, it has largely been affected by uncontrolled urbanization, but other parts remain unaffected.[21][4] With the aid of seventeen soldiers and some support from local municipalities, CONAU has been able to ensure the daily management and protection of the greenbelt.[4]
When analyzing this Greenbelt, it is important to bring up the role the United States (US) has played in its creation and maintenance. The American national park model is what influenced the conservation efforts in the Dominican Republic.[22]
In the plan and boundary designation of the national park of Del Este, the coastal waters were not included.[22] This meant that the local community could fish and use the waters as they desired, which did not please American non-profit organizations (NGOs) that were working with the national park to plan and carry out the conservation of endangered species and beach clean-ups. However, the lack of inclusion of the local community and economy into the national park's agenda meant that locals were left to find their own ways of feeding themselves and making money, as the creation of the park destroyed the fishing community that had previously thrived in the area.[22]
Tehran's greenbelt has always been an issue in Iran's regional politics. Under a decades-long megaproject, the length of the green belt of Tehran increased from 29 square kilometers in 1979 to 530 square kilometers in 2017, and the number of parks in urban and suburban areas also increased from 75 in 1979 to 2,211 in 2017 in total. Such actions and additional afforestation increased the humidity level and chance of precipitation in the city, which cools the summer's temperatures down by up to 4 °C. The Tehran municipal government announced a goal of lengthening the green belt by 10 square kilometers each year.[23][24]
Dunedin Town Belt flanks the hills above the central city
In New Zealand, the term Town Belt is most commonly used for an urban green belt.
Dunedin Town Belt is one of the world's oldest green belts, having been planned at the time of the city's rapid growth during theOtago gold rush of the 1860s. It surrounds the city center on three sides (the fourth side being the city's harbor).
Bangkok's Bang Krachao Green Area located inside the curve ofChao Phraya River is considered a green area with authority control over urbanization. Today it is a popular spot for tourism and cycling. The area is located within the border of Bangkok Province andSamut Sakorn Province.
In 1965, the Korean Planners Association developed the Capital Region Urban Plan that incorporated a Greenbelt and satellite towns along the development corridor between Seoul and Incheon after being influenced by the Greater London Plan of 1944.[3]
The official Greenbelt was first introduced as a "Limited Development Area" in 1971 with the then-new City Planning Law to prevent urban sprawl around Seoul. Green belts are currently designated aroundSeoul,Busan, and other metropolitan areas around the country.[3]
Other objectives include controlling northern parts for national security, eliminating illegal suburban shantytowns around Seoul, controlling land speculation, protecting agricultural land, and for environmental and natural resource protection.[3]
The rapid urbanization and economic growth of South Korea after the Korean War expedited the need for land use legislation. However, the boundaries of the greenbelt were hastily drawn and did not include public input or preexisting villages in the area.[26]
The greenbelt reduced housing and property prices within the greenbelt causing landowners to lose economic capital that could be gained from developing the land. However, there are many benefits of the greenbelt in terms of nature preservation, better air quality, and the push for increased efficiency of infrastructure and public services in the urban areas.[26]
More than 20 cities in theSan Francisco Bay Area have UGBs (seeGreenbelt Alliance, a Bay Area organization that has been involved in establishing these boundaries).
Ann Arbor, Michigan is acquiring conservation easements on agricultural land around the city without the establishment of an urban growth boundary. While the city's initial plan did not include the participation of surrounding townships, at least four townships have participated directly or have initiated their own efforts to protect agricultural land surrounding the city.[needs update]
TheEmerald Necklace inBoston is halfway between a green belt and a greenway, nearly ringing central Boston. The final link in the chain, the Dorchesterway, was never constructed.
^Iqbal, Munawwar (2005).Islamic Perspectives on Sustainable Development. p. 27. Published jointly by Palgrave Macmillan, University of Bahrain, and Islamic Research and Training Institute.
^Halliday, Stephen (2004).Underground to Everywhere. Sutton Publishing Limited. p. 118.ISBN978-0-7509-3843-3.
^How Much Open Space is Enough?"St. Paul Pioneer Press (MN) – April 22, 2007 – A1 MAIN
^Caves, R. W. (2004).Encyclopedia of the City. Routledge. p. 318.
^ Political Barriers To Housebuilding In Britain: A Critical Case Study Of Protectionism & Its Industrial-Commercial Effects, Industrial Systems Research/ Google Books, revised electronic edition 2013. Chapter two: "Greenbelt Barriers To Urban Expansion", EbookISBN9780906321645[1]
^Canada’s first GreenbeltFixing Boundaries: An International Review Of Greenbelt Boundaries. p. 27. Published jointly by Greg MacDonald, Ryerson University.
Media related toGreen belts (protected areas) at Wikimedia Commons
