"A Size Too Big" Approach to Master Planning: Why Belarusian Cities Continue to Grow (at Least on Paper)
The decline of urban population is a relevant topic for Belarus, although at first glance it seems that the share of urban dwellers in the country's population is growing. There are groups of cities where the overall number of inhabitants has been going down from one census to another. At the same time, new master plans of these localities provide for an increased number of residents and of those urban areas as such. The article reveals the origins of this contradiction and provides examples specific to the Belarusian context. As a solution to the problem, it suggests resorting to the concept of "smart shrinkage".
What is happening to Belarusian cities in terms of demography? Results of the 2019 census
In September 2020, data resulting from the 2019 population census were published. Compared to the 2009 census, the country's population had officially shrunk by almost 90 thousand people. On a more general scale, the population of Belarus has decreased by 630 thousand people over the past two decades. If we consider demographic changes in the context of oblasts, the number of their residents has been decreasing at approximately the same rate (except for the Minsk Oblast and the city of Minsk). At the same time, when it comes to analyzing urban population dynamics, it turns out that the number of urban dwellers has dropped only in the Mogilev and Vitebsk regions (- 40.7 thousand and -46.4 thousand people, respectively). However, if we turn to more detailed statistics by rayons, it turns out that in the period from 1999 to 2019 urban population grew only in 15 of them (mainly the rayons that belong to the Brest and Gomel oblasts). Furthermore, in 22 regions of the country a slight increase in the overall population was recorded in the period from 2009 to 2019 (mainly in rayons of the Vitebsk, Grodno and Minsk oblasts). In turn, this means that 81 rayons of Belarus (out of 118) have experienced a steady decline in population over the past 20 years. At the same time, the overall share of the country's urban population is growing steadily (from 69.3% to 77.5% in 20 years) [1].
Starting from 2020, impacted by several factors that rolled over each other in waves, the population of the republic began to decline even faster. Key of these factors include high mortality rates in the COVID-19 pandemic and two waves of forced migration to other countries. The first wave was triggered by mass repression and police violence after the 2020 elections, the second one – by the consequences of Russia's aggression on Ukraine. According to the National Statistical Committee (Belstat), over the past three years the country's population has decreased by 209.7 thousand people [2], which is comparable to the population of the city of Bobruisk, the largest of the non-oblast centers (212.3 thousand people according to the 2019 census [3]). Nevertheless, these data may turn out to be excessively optimistic, since Belstat has kept secret the birth and death rate statistics for these years. As concerns migration of Belarusians to other countries after 2020, for example, Poland issued more than 297 thousand non-tourist visas (of which more than 32 thousand were humanitarian ones) in the period from August 2020 to April 2022 [4]. Moreover, according to Eurostat, in 2021, 149 thousand citizens of Belarus received first-time residence permits in EU countries [5]. Another indicator that provides evidence of forced emigration from Belarus is the number of Belarusian refugees officially registered by the UNHCR (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) in 2020-2021, which exceeded 19 thousand people [6].
On the one hand, this analysis testifies to the ongoing process of urbanization. On the other hand, it showcases the uneven nature of urbanization, whereby Minsk, oblast centers, certain large (for example, Baranovichi), and to a lesser extent medium-sized (for example, satellite) cities soak in growing numbers of the country's human resources.
Nevertheless, it is hard not to highlight the pivotal role of urban settlements in shaping the country's population patterns in the light of demographic processes observed. Obviously, urbanization processes will continue to intensify, while issues related to reasonable and balanced urban development will become more and more acute.
Projected Population as the Basis of Project Proposals Under the Master Plan
Master plans of cities developed "in order to determine priorities and the main directions of the development strategy", "to ensure proper use of territories and establish restrictions on their use, as well as to provide for development of social, industrial, transport, and engineering infrastructure" are mandatory urban planning documents and are developed for an estimated period, which, in turn, is split into two stages (usually 5-10 years) [7].
In the course of master plan development, large amounts of information are taken into account, including data from relevant administrations and departments of the City Executive Committee, design materials from previous master plans, urban planning documents of the highest level (schemes of complex territorial organization of rayons and oblasts) and lower levels (detailed planning schemes), wishes of the customer (City Executive Committee, Ministries) and urban residents (most often only in the format public discussion), as well as personal experience and the so-called creative vision of the architect. However, probably, one of the indicators that are central to the design process, is the projected population. It is the projected population that informs the terms of reference for the design. Furthermore, the project cost and the overall logic of the Master Plan depends on it (including decisions regarding housing construction, development of social, engineering, and transport infrastructure, and expansion of the city's territory).
When assessing the potential population size for the estimated period, a retrospective analysis of population dynamics is conducted. The latter is based on data from the National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus (Belstat) and results of the population census. The natural and migration movement of the population, its gender composition, and age structure are also taken into account.
As a result, two variants of projections are devised – inertial and target (optimistic) ones. The inertial projection of population size is developed based on trends (usually over the preceding 20-25 years) and extrapolation thereof onto the estimated validity period of the master plan (that is, for the following 5-10-15 years). Of course, with account of prevalence of death rates over birth rates and migration outflow of the population and other unfavorable factors, the inertial projection further emphasizes the negative trends toward population decline, but at the same time it is more realistic.
The target projection, in turn, is based on implementation of a system of state regulation measures in the field of demographic security, family protection, improving the nation's health and living standards. Calculations are based on policy pillars, which provide for reduction of mortality and natural loss of urban population, increase in birth rates, and regulation of internal migration in order to attract young, qualified personnel to cities.
It should be noted, however, that when choosing the projection option for urban population size, target projections are relied on most often, which tend to show stabilization, not decline of population even in extreme cases.
Reasons for Resorting to Target Projections for Master Plan Development
The main motif here is the unwillingness to admit depopulation primarily by the city authorities themselves. It is often explained by the blind belief that the problem is temporary, and demographic problems of even the most depressed region can be solved with the help of targeted policies and programs to support increased birth rates, while the natural processes of population aging are often not considered. However, in some cases things happen the other way round: the city administration recognizes the prolonged decline of the city population and abandons hope for further existence and development of the city.
Another factor behind choosing the optimistic forecast is the desire of the city administration to gain access to financial assistance programs financed from the oblast and national budgets. This, in turn, speaks of a systemic problem, because in practice cities showing population growth do have more chances to receive additional funding, which is especially important for small settlements whose budget base does not allow them to cope with financial difficulties on their own.
And in general, it should be recognized that the existing design methodology inherited from Soviet urban planning is focused precisely on development of an extensive nature, that is, the more built the better. Main provisions of the master plan primarily reflect such development parameters as population, housing stock, new construction, housing security, and the need for new residential areas. These technical and economic indicators, in turn, correspond to the demands of the departments of capital construction (UKS) and departments of architecture, construction, and urban planning under the city executive committees concerning recommended indicators of completion of housing (construction) in square meters per year. Ideally, these indicators should not fall below corresponding indicators over the past 10-15 years. Thus, it is the construction of new housing for new (or redistributed existing) residents that is seen as the main driver of the city's development. Such an approach can be justified either if positive dynamics in population numbers is observed, or if target forecasting is applied to establish population projections.
Nonetheless, population decline is characteristic of small (up to 20 thousand residents) and medium-size (up to 75 thousand residents) towns and cities of Belarus. Big (up to 250 thousand residents) and large cities (up to 700 thousand residents) manage to resist depopulation due to their versatility and attractiveness associated with it. Even if natural population growth is limited, their growth tends to continue due to migration flows at the regional level from nearby rural and urban settlements, thereby reformatting the population settlement system.
However, even some large cities are characterized by depopulation. This primarily concerns cities with a pronounced industrial focus: Bobruisk, Borisov, Novopolotsk, and Orsha. Despite this, optimistic development forecasts still inform master plans.
Table 1. Population of Bobruisk, compared.
Table 2. The population of Pinsk, compared.
I would like to further consider the case of Mogilev, focusing on the projected population size compared to real statistics based on the results of population censuses. It is worth noting that Mogilev has been steadily losing population in recent years, although similar trends are also evident in other oblast centers (except for Brest and Grodno) [2].
Master plans of Mogilev Statistics and census data do not keep up with the designers' forecasts.
The previous three master plans of Mogilev, including the currently approved one, were released in 2003, 2012, and 2016 respectively. At the same time, development of the 2003 master plan took almost 10 years due to the lack of adequate financing, which was largely characteristic of urban planning of the late 90s - early 2000s in Belarus. That master plan, on the one hand, was the most radical one from the point of view of proposed transformations: new transport rings, creation of a new public center on the left bank of the Debra River with the demolition of the existing estate complex, etc. On the other hand, it was most optimistic in terms of population growth (more than 30 thousand residents by 2020) and the associated territorial increase (by 36% by the estimated date), supposedly, powered by the construction of residential areas of apartment and estate development: Solominka, Nikolaevka, Sputnik, Kazimirovka, Gorodshchina, Prisno. The master plan, the development of which began in 1993, took into account population growth in retrospective, including results of the censuses of 1979 (290.4 thousand people) and 1989 (359.2 thousand people) [11, 12]. In 1999, the first population census was held in the independent Republic of Belarus, which recorded changes in dynamics: the city of Mogilev had fallen short of almost 2.7 thousand people. Decreased birth rate, increased mortality, and a drop in the nation's living standards caused by socio-economic upheavals resulting from the collapse of the Soviet Union affected the country's population growth trend. However, in the late 1990s - early 2000s, this was perceived more as a temporary phenomenon and was not given due attention in the calculations.
The scheme of the Mogilev 2012 master plan:
http://www.ljplus.ru/img4/v/i/viktuss/genplan.jpg
"The master plan of the 2012 edition also provided for a significant territorial increase along with an increase in the population. The existing population at that time (2012), according to official data, was even slightly smaller compared to the general plan of 2003 – 360.9 thousand instead of 362.6 thousand people. The 2009 population census made a significant adjustment to the statistics. However, the forecast indicators for population and urban territory growth remained approximately the same, with only a slight shift in the stages of master plan implementation: stage 1 – 2020, stage 2 – 2030.
In the 2012 master plan, special attention was given to saving agricultural land, in connection with which two variants of the feasibility study for the development of the city of Mogilev were developed. The first one allowed the use of territories located within the city limits for construction, withdrawal of the necessary amount of agricultural land adjacent to it, as well as the demolition and reconstruction of decrepit buildings inside the city, mainly in its center. The second option was developed on the territories planned for reconstruction with the demolition of the existing estate housing stock in the central and middle parts of the city. The city eventually remained within its built-up area. Even the lands located within the existing city boundaries were not built up according to the second option, even though detailed plans were developed for these territories. As a result of consideration and comparison of options, a more compact version of the development of Mogilev was adopted [12, p. 24]"
The scheme of the 2016 master plan of Mogilev:
https://urbanistic.by/2016/10/10/generalnyj-plan-goroda-mogilyova-korrektirovka/
"The Mogilev Master Plan of 2016 @reduced its appetites” due to the tacit ban on the use of agricultural lands. The territory was supposed to increase "only" by 11% compared to the previous general plans, where the same indicator equaled 36%. On the other hand, the period preceding completion of the second implementation stage was to be marked by a significant population increase, from 374.7 thousand (2015) to 402.0 thousand (2025). However, it should be considered that stages of implementation of the 2003 and 2012 master plans were designed for a longer term, that is, for 10 years each. At the same time, the 2016 master plan suggested solutions for short term city development with implementation stages limited tied to 2020 and 2025 respectively [13, p. 25]"
Table 3. Area within the city limits
Table 4. Population size
During the design process, several intermediate options were drafted. They were mainly based on extensive development of the city with access to agricultural land: the territory along the so-called Minsk entrance (western part of the city), the territory near the settlements of Nikolaevka-2, Nikolaevka-3, Krasnopolye-2 in the eastern part of the city, and the territory along the floodplain of the river Dnieper. Separately, the possibility of demolishing the estate complex in the central zone of Mogilev was considered, but preliminary calculations showed that this would increase the cost of construction by 60 percent.
As a result, the project factored in all the advantages and disadvantages of each of the options, as well as the desire of the city authorities to use previously developed, but not implemented detailed planning projects for various parts of the city. Moreover, the tacit ban on construction on agricultural land had an impact on the readiness of the city administration to demolish the private sector in the city center, however, without prior discussion with the owners of houses that were subject to demolition.
Nonetheless, it should be noted that the 2016 master plan turned out to be the most realistic one in terms of consideration of the real capabilities of the city, and more compact compared to its previous versions. At the same time, many ideas that had been inherited from the first post-war master plans lost their meaning, or implementation thereof posed a challenge in an unplanned economy. First of all, this applies to the formation of a ring system in the city's transport structure.
In addition to the abandoned "City of the Sun'' model (the name comes from Tommaso Componella's work titled "The City of the Sun", and in this context we mean a city with a clear urban planning structure), after 6 years another systemic problem became visible, again related to the projected population numbers. "Following publication of the results of the 2019 population census, it became clear that calculations based on the official statistics of 2015 were irrelevant. The projected population size in 2020 and the true census results differed by 32.8 thousand people. Subsequently, the data from 2010 to 2019 were adjusted based on the census results. The revision showed a discrepancy in the initial data on which design decisions underpinning the master plan were based. The discrepancy accounted for 19.4 thousand [13, p. 25-26]"
Table 5. Population of Mogilev, compared.
The Mogilev master plan illustrates vividly a long-overdue problem in urban planning. Namely, the methodology for developing master plans needs to be rethought, since it cannot rely solely on population growth and the development of new territories. While there is still no need to worry about the future of oblast centers and cities with 100,000+ inhabitants as multifunctional centers of regional and national levels, should we really turn a blind eye to the quite obvious decline in the population of small and medium-sized towns and cities of Belarus? However, the question whether there is an alternative to extensive development, and what approaches can be used in urban planning design, persists.
Smart shrinkage: An attempt to acknowledge the problem of population decline and learn to work with it for the benefit of the city and its residents
First of all, it should be noted that depopulation processes are characteristic not only of Belarus. A rough estimate suggests that about 40% of European small and medium-sized cities face the issue of population reduction, while a third of the total population of Europe lives in localities of this type [14].
Of course, reasons for the decline in urban population are very diverse and may vary from region to region. Suburbanization, which manifests itself in the expansion of suburban areas, accompanied by subsequent creation of agglomerations and a slowdown in the growth of the urban core, is still more characteristic of large American cities. Nevertheless, it also shows up on a reduced scale in Minsk and oblast centers of Belarus. For example, the processes of population aging and migration from small to large settlements (in search of work, educational opportunities, higher quality of services, and to improve the quality of life in general) are the main causes of depopulation of cities both in Europe and Belarus.
In Europe, active discussion and study of the phenomenon of shrinking cities began in the late 80s - early 90s of the 20th century, when many post-socialist countries faced deindustrialization and the outflow of population to more developed Western cities and countries. Since then, various approaches and methods have been developed that can be generically called smart or controlled shrinkage.
One way or another, the approaches used to address shrinking cities can be divided into two main categories: top-down and bottom-up.
The first category includes approaches initiated primarily by city administrations, which, in their turn, have "acknowledged" and "accepted" the population reduction. These include rather radical steps by the city authorities to manage the redistribution of urban residents from less populated areas /blocks/houses to the quite densely populated city center, followed by the possible demolition of unused housing. Due to the closure of mines in the 90s and the outflow of the population that followed, the Russian city of Vorkuta resorted to exactly this strategy [15]. The German city of Linefield is another interesting example. Following the reduction of the number of jobs offered in the city and the associated labor emigration, the number of empty apartments began to increase, which triggered marginalization of some areas of the city. The city adopted a deconcentration program, which provided for the reconstruction of existing 5-storey panel houses [16]. It should be noted that both of these examples relied on fairly substantial government funding for implementation of programs.
A house in Linefeld after renovation, photo taken from:
https://strelkamag.com/be/article/tri-sposob-modernizirovat-panelnyi-dom
The second category includes approaches related to cultural revival and reinterpretation of the heritage that the city possesses, as well as uncovering its tourism potential. Most often, the revival is impossible without inclusion of local residents in the dialogue (ideally, it should be initiated by them). Discovery of human potential, absence of long bureaucratic paths to solving issues, and cooperation of residents are the key advantages of this approach. As a result, the latter contribute to the formation of a civil society interested in the development of their home place.
Panorama of the village of Huskar, photo taken from:
https://espanarusa.com/be/news/article/635297
The SPRAVA festival and cultural projects connected with it can serve as an example of an initiative that revived the agro-town of Chareya in the Vitebsk Oblast. Another example could be Sony's initiative to repaint all the houses of the small and old Andalusian village of Huskar blue in order to promote the cartoon titled "Smurfs", which led to an unprecedented tourist hype and a corresponding improvement in living standards of local residents. Thus, such initiatives may seem insignificant and accidental only at first glance [17, 18].
The beach improved by the SPRAVA festival team, agro-town of Cherya, photo taken from: http://downshifter.by/sprava_fest
Of course, the above examples represent in a sense diametrically opposite approaches to working with settlements in a state of decline. The best results can still be achieved only through cooperation with city administrations, local residents, and the professional community (designers, architects, etc.).)
A good example in this sense is Leipzig, which used to be under Soviet jurisdiction, and after the unification of Germany in 1989 experienced serious problems with the outflow of population to more prosperous areas of the country. In the 2000s, with the support of the city authorities, local designers, architects, and residents created a civic organization that facilitated the conclusion of flexible contracts between property owners and tenants. The idea was that the tenant, through committing to maintain the infrastructure of the building in working order and carry out minor repairs, if necessary, was exempt from paying taxes and the rent as such for a long period of time. Such buildings were called Wächterhaus (house under supervision). In addition, the Leipzig authorities strongly supported initiatives that implied even temporary use of municipal and private property as venues for events and their transformation into urban public spaces [19].
A supervised house in Leipzig, photo taken from:
https://www.leipzig.de/bauen-und-wohnen/stadterneuerung-in-leipzig/stadterneuerungsproje k te/waechterhaeuser
Conclusions
Thus, despite the debate concerning the causes, indicators, and the very nature of depopulation processes, at the current stage most important, probably, is to acknowledge the very fact of a decrease in the number of urban residents in Belarusian, which must be followed by shaping a logic, a scenario for the development of settlements based on the needs and capabilities of their current population, not the hypothetical growth thereof.
Development of the latest master plans already marks the transition from forward-looking urban development ideas with large-scale infrastructure projects to more compact and realistic options. Shifting away from extensive methods of urban development will allow the transformation of master plans from paper architecture into more useful strategic documents. However, this requires both the involvement and political will of city administrations, as well as a dialogue platform for the most proactive residents who care about the future of their hometowns. Architects, urban planners, and all related specialists involved in the design process, will have to establish a new methodology to inform their work based on the experience of their foreign colleagues, with special attention to problems of small and medium-sized towns and cities.
Smart shrinkage, as one of the possible approaches, involves, firstly, a thorough examination of external and internal factors that led to the population decline, and, secondly, drafting an individual action plan for further development of the settlement, the main goal of which will be to improve the quality of life of the remaining residents.
References
Results of the 2019 Population Census in the Republic of Belarus. Statistical collection. Volume 2 [electronic resource] // National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus (Belstat). - Access mode: belstat.gov.by - Access date: 07.01.2022.
Belarus is Shrinking or What Is Happening to the Belarusian Demography in 2023 [electronic resource] // Center for New Ideas. - Access mode: newbelarus.vision - Access date: 16.04.2023.
Population by Cities and Districts [electronic resource] // The Main Statistical Office of the Mogilev Oblast. - Access mode: mogilev.belstat.gov.by - Access date: 08.01.2022.
Poland Has Issued Almost 300,000 Non-Tourist Visas to Belarusians Since August 2020 [electronic resource] // Belsat. - Access mode: belsat.eu - Access date: 16.04.2023.
Ukrainians, Moroccans & Belarusians Were Main Recipients for First Residence Permits in 2021 [electronic resource] // Schengen Visa. - Access mode: schengenvisainfo.com - Access date: 27.04.2023.
Belarus: New Laws Target Critics in Exile. Arbitrary Deprivation of Citizenship; Politically Motivated Trials in Absentia [electronic resource] // Human Rights Watch. – Mode of access: hrw.org - Access date: 16.04.2023.
The Law of the Republic of Belarus on Architectural, Urban Planning, and Construction Activities in the Republic of Belarus [electronic resource] // National Legal Internet Portal of the Republic of Belarus. - Access mode: pravo.by - Access date: 07.01.2022.
Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus No. 761 of October 24, 2018 On Amendments and Additions to the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus No. 185 of February 9, 2006 [electronic resource] / / - Access mode: ilex-private.ilex.by - Access date: 08.01.2022.
Population by Cities and Rayons [electronic resource] // The Main Statistical Office of the Brest region. - Access mode: brest.belstat.gov.by - Access date: 08.01.2022.
Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus No. 247 of April 21, 2020 On Approval of the Master Plan of Pinsk [electronic resource] / / - Access mode: ilex-private.ilex.by - Access date: 08.01.2022.
All-Union Population Census of 1979 The number of urban population of the Soviet Union republics (except the RSFSR), their territorial units, urban settlements and urban areas by gender [electronic resource] // Demoscope Weekly. - Access mode: demoscope.ru - Access date: 07.01.2022.
All-Union Population Census of 1989 The number of urban population of the Soviet Union republics (except the RSFSR), their territorial units, urban settlements and urban areas by gender [electronic resource] // Demoscope Weekly. - Access mode: demoscope.ru - Access date: 07.01.2022.
Petrukhin A. A. Does the City of Mogilev Need a Master Plan / / Architecture and Construction. 2021. №3. pp. 22-27.
Re-grow City: turning disadvantage into opportunity [electronic resource] // URBACT. – Mode of access: urbact.eu – Date of access: 09.01.2022.
Controlled Shrinkage. How Russian Cities Adapt to New Life Following Mass Population Departure. Explained on the Example of Vorkuta [electronic resource – / / - Access mode: lr.7x7-journal.ru - Access date: 06.01.2022.
Shrinkage of Cities is a Natural Process, and This is Its Main Challenge [electronic resource] / / - Access mode: ion.ranepa.ru - Access date: 06.01.2022.
"I am sure I will survive anywhere. But I would like to live here" The Newest History Of Belaya Tserkov [electronic resource] / / 34travel. - access mode: 34travel.me - Access date: 11.01.2022.
Huskar: The Blue Village or the City of Smurfs in Spain. [electronic resource] // Cameralabs. - Access mode: cameralabs.org - Access date: 11.01.2022.
The Wächterhaus concept [electronic resource] // From crisis to choice: re-imagining the future in shrinking cities. – Mode of access: urbact.eu - Access date: 09.01.2022.
