The Scaling of Sustainable Urban Form: A Case of Scale-related Issues and Sustainable Planning in Malmö, Sweden

Abstract

In this article, I investigate “spatial scale” as an aspect that needs to be more carefully addressed in the discussion and planning of “sustainable urban forms”. Focusing on the Malmö–Lund region in Sweden, I discuss problems of scale as related to the new take on sustainability in Malmö planning documents, especially the update of the Malmö comprehensive plan from 2005. The article is divided into three sections. First, I discuss the concept and problem of spatial scale, contextualizing it in theory as well as in recent discussions on urban transformations. Second, I briefly discuss the discourse of sustainable urban forms, pointing out some scale-related issues that need to be more carefully addressed. In the third and main section of the article, I investigate plans and projects for urban development in Malmö, focusing and elaborating on spatial scale and discussing the findings in terms of three kinds of scale stabilization: in terms of territory, size and hierarchy. The article concludes with a call for further work for the possibilities of a more dynamic and multi-scalar approach in urban planning.

Acknowledgements

This article has benefitted from encouragement, criticism and comments from Katarina Nylund, Guy Baeten, Bengt Holmberg, Eva Kristensson and Nora Räthzel. The supportive suggestions of the anonymous referees are gratefully acknowledged. The work reported in this article was financed by the Swedish research council FORMAS.

Notes

Sustainability and scale have been addressed on much larger scales elsewhere, e.g. discussing how political issues can be set at a global scale, depoliticizing or repudiating the activities taking place on a national or local scale (Baeten, 2000). Although the effects of the built environment might indeed take us to a global level (and a network context) I constrain myself in this article to the regional level. See also Marcotullio and McGranahan (2007) on scaling urban environmental challenges on both local and global levels.

For diagrams on how different building types relate to the number of storeys, floor space index and density ratio, see Rådberg and Johansson (1997, p. 75) and Berghauser Pont and Haupt (2007).

Typical statements include, e.g.: “the city that affords a good life is also a sustainable city” (Staden som erbjuder ett gott liv är också den hållbara staden) (Malmö, Hållbarhet 2005, p. 12), or “High architectural quality is a good starting point for designing sustainable buildings” (s13). Such statements do not say much, and the little they say could easily be criticized, e.g. by asking: is a good life always sustainable? (my guess is not, if you do not set good = sustainable, in which case the sentence becomes nonsense).