Discussion Papers 2009.
Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins 29-39. p.
ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AMONG
FACTORS BEHIND NEW SPATIAL PATTERNS?
MAREK DEGÓRSKI
Introduction
In the perceptions of many, the environment and landscape have been, and still
often are, minor parts of the socio-economic system, whose management is fre-
quently in conflict with regional development, both in spatial and purely economic
terms. Investigation of the link between being green and being successful economi-
cally has thus been a core topic from the spatial management point of view (Walley
– Whitehead, 1994; Schaltegger – Figge, 1997; Degórski, 2007, 2008a). It is now
ever more common for scientists and those involved in the planning of regional
development to seek out structural solutions that allow a pro-environmental policy
to be pursued en route to economic success, where the latter is expressed, not
merely in terms of amounts of resources used, but also in regard to optimised spa-
tial management. Today’s environment is having a value attached to it – inter alia
through assessment of its potential to generate energy, to supply biotic resources
and to satisfy people by way of its possession of valuable landscape features
(Degórski, 2008b). In short, it is being treated as an important factor behind re-
gional economic development, joining with the economic and social factors in de-
termining directions that development is to take, ways in which it is to be achieved,
means of implementation and consequences.
The aim of this paper is thus to offer a new view on the environment and its role
as regards local and regional development, as well as to assess environmental con-
ditions as factors potentially underpinning new spatial patterns.
The environment as a factor behind regional development
Since the level of public awareness of the environment is growing in many coun-
tries (and especially those that are most highly-developed), ever greater weight is
being attached to the role the natural environment plays as an integral part of the
megasystem of the geographical environment, where this is deemed to encompass
both the socioeconomic and physical systems. Those two systems are mutually
interlinked by way of interaction, which is to say that each is to the other as an
object is to its surroundings (Degórski, 2005). In the context of the structure and

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns?
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special

MAREK
30
DEGÓRSKI
functioning of geographical space we also perceive the multifunctional nature of
the natural environment, and the significant role it plays in shaping both human
quality of life and health. Since these functions are not merely natural or ecological
in character, but also have clear economic and social sides (not least in terms of
supply of natural and mineral resources, the absorption of pollutant emissions and
accumulations of waste and the provisioning of opportunities for rest and recrea-
tion thanks to the resources of habitat and landscape present), it is more and more
usual for them to be deemed an element in the development of a given region or
whole country (Łaguna, 2004; Degórski, 2007).
Because society’s view of the environment’s role has been evolving in many
countries, opportunities for further improvement in people’s living conditions are
now deemed to lie, not merely in economic and social development, but also in
care for the natural environment, this being manifested first and foremost in opti-
misation of the use and management of its potential (Dupont et al. 1998; Berbeka,
2005; Murphy, 2006). A part of this involves the incorporation into regional policy
of the idea (at least) of sustainable development, with an awareness that the latter’s
implementation demands the attendant introduction and pursuit of a series of logis-
tical activities and socioeconomic solutions (WCED, 1987). Where engaged in,
such activity very often proves a factor capable of activating economic develop-
ment in the given region, this reflecting the need for new investment if the produc-
tion of pro-environmental facilities is to be engaged in, infrastructure in water,
wastewater and waste management built or modernized, and new solutions applied
in power supply and transport. There is thus an inevitable development of such
economic sectors as construction, commerce, transport and services.
It is most easy to note the need for action to optimise the quality of the natural
environment and the capital-intensiveness thereof in countries most seriously be-
hind when it comes to introducing sustainable development principles. The CEECs
offer a very good example here. Prior to their EU pre-accession and accession peri-
ods, these countries pursued a characteristically liberal policy as regards care for
the natural environment, particularly when it came to the limiting or minimising of
the negative impact of anthropopressure on the functioning of the natural system.
The inclusion of these states into EC structures required their adoption of regula-
tions in force in the Union, including as regards the protection and management of
the environment in line with sustainable development principles. Adjustments of
the basic standards as regards environmental quality have been requiring huge fi-
nancial outlays. As of the end of 2003, the necessary funding to achieve goals
arising from the environmental acquis was found to amount to between almost
12% of the GDPs achieved by Lithuania and Slovenia and some 71% of the GDP
generated by Estonia (Degórski, 2007).

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns?
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special

ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AMONG FACTORS BEHIND…
31
The concept of the relation between outlays on the environment
and economic effects
The complexity of the environment-society-economy system is such that the search
is on for attractors, i.e. equilibrium points attracting each trajectory of a given dy-
namic system, notwithstanding the fact that non-linearity of socio-natural relations
is a factor in certain conditions creating systems characterised by metastability
(Domański, 2008). The potential of the natural environment may thus be regarded
as one of the more important functional elements to the ecological and social sys-
tem (Glasson, 2000; Morris – Therivel, 2000; Degórska – Degórski, 2003), being
the generator of its development and thus capable of giving the measurable and
definable economic effects that shape new patterns in multifunctional geographical
space (Degórski, 2003, 2007).
Today the environmental economy is associated with a diversity of views on the
economic impacts of pro-environmental investments, particularly those associated
with the protection of the environment and the landscape and the effort to maintain
or raise an area’s attractiveness. In line with the model for the attainment of eco-
nomic success as set against outlays on the protection and optimal utilisation of
environmental resources (as developed by Schaltegger – Synnestvedt, 2002), there
are three possibilities through which relations between outlays and obtained effects
are likely to be shaped. Each of the presented solutions has its advocates and oppo-
nents. However, precise analysis of the solutions proposed by the aforementioned
authors makes it clear that all of them are possible, the actual economic effect ob-
tained being dependent on a series of conditioning factors both endogenous and
exogenous (Figure 1).
The courses to the curves show very clearly that increased outlays on integrated
protection of the environment and the landscape do not automatically bring meas-
urable attendant benefits for the economy. Indeed, there are cases in which, not-
withstanding the increasing of outlays (line C-B-A), the final effect is the same,
which is to say that the curve is found at the point of departure for economic suc-
cess (ESo). Frequently, however, pro-environmental investment does bring meas-
urable economic success and generates measurable benefits (as curves achieve
point ES). Some environmental economists thus assume a straight line relationship
whereby profits increase directly with outlays on optimising the protection and
utilisation of the environment’s potential (dashed line).
There is of course no straight translation from outlays deployed to profits ob-
tained in the context of the protection and utilisation of the potential of the envi-
ronment. All types of activity in the defined spatial unit must meet three main con-
ditions, i.e.

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns?
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special

MAREK
32
DEGÓRSKI
  possess a very precise valuation of environmental potential – first and fore-
most as that relates to natural resources and the landscape, and hence allows
for precisely defined protection of its most valuable fragments;
  have a defined development strategy that takes account of the optimal utilisa-
tion of natural potential, making reference to the sustainable development
concept providing for the rational management of natural space;
  see account taken – in general policy for a region’s development – of the
separate sectoral policies, where these include such an environmental policy
as will allow assumed economic goals to be achieved, while pro-environ-
mental solutions are retained and able to impact upon the quality of life.
Figure 1
Possible relations between between corporate environment protection and
economic success

Source: According: Schalteggera and Synnestvedta, 2002.
In the highly-developed countries, ever more attention is being paid to quality
of life, this reflecting the role of a high-quality of the environment and aesthetically
valuable landscape features when it comes to the development of the residential
function, as well as the quality of food produced, high-quality drinking water and
clean air. The achievement of ever higher standards of living requires that deci-
sionmakers pay more and more attention to the spatial order, and to the sorting out
of the relationships ongoing between rural and urban space.
In constructing a model for outlays on the environment as against economic
success, it is necessary to determine also the so-called maximum incremental social

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns?
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special

ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AMONG FACTORS BEHIND…
33
tolerance irreversible costs (MISTIC) index, since this provides for an assessment
of the level of readiness in society (not least in its organizations introducing green
solutions, if often only at great expense).
The urban-rural relationship
One of the main factors influencing the shaping of structures in geographical space
is the development of areas of both urban and rural settlement, as well as of the
spatial and functional linkages between them. The sprawling of urbanised areas
leads to the anthropisation of the environment and the fragmentation of natural
space, and thereby to a weakening of both the cohesion of natural-system linkages
and the environment’s biotic potential. In Poland, areas that have undergone
marked anthropogenic transformation currently account for some 4.8% of the
country, while the rate of increase is at present of 0.1% per decade on average.
From among the directions as regards the re-designation of agricultural and forest
land for non-agricultural purposes, there is a particularly noticeable increase in the
share of designated orchard land (from 26.4% in 1990 to 47.7% in 2006). Other
trends to changes in land function tend to fluctuate much more (e.g. when it comes
to transport and/or industrial functions).
Within spatial development and the functional relationship ongoing between
rural and urban areas it is possible to distinguish three main stages of interaction
between the two categories of spatial structure (Figure 2). The first is characteristic
for the state of both rural and urban structures taking shape – in which there is not
yet any spatial limitation on development, while the linkage between countryside
and town is mainly in the nature of a producer-client relationship. In the history of
world economic development, these features were characteristic of the stage at
which towns and villages were first located. Today it is confined to areas of low
population density and weak economic development. With time, there is spatial
development of urbanised areas as both towns and villages develop. There arises a
greater functional dependence between city and countryside, as well as an overall
development of areas settled. The result of this is ever more far-reaching fragmen-
tation of the natural environment, and its anthropisation. The further development
of settled areas both rural and urban leads to the ever-greater spatial integration of
the two. This stage of development thus witnesses a blurring of the boundaries
between settlement units, clear cases of urban sprawl, and hence very much en-
hanced pressure imposed by human beings on the natural environment. The shap-
ing of a new spatial structure requires that planners take great heed of the need for
spatial order. For even in such anthropogenically transformed environmental con-
ditions, order remains a factor of significance creating a new pattern in space and
determining the value of land. If we take care to ensure a high-quality environment

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns?
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special

MAREK
34
DEGÓRSKI
that maintains high sanitary standard and retains valuable landscape features, then
the capital invested in undertakings of the above kind can be expected to bring a
measurable economic effect.
Figure 2
Relationship between rural and urban areas
integrated
p

tionshi
e
la
b
a
n r
l-ur
u
ra
unlimited
linked
R
Time

Source: Author’s own construction.
Energy supply
A further conditioning arising out of the environment’s potential and capable of
influencing the structure of geographical space and the landscape concerns the
energy potential it is associated with. That potential is expressed in terms of the
non-renewable and renewable energetic raw materials. It is very much upon the
breakdown to the use of the different resources and the ways in which they are won
that the quality of the environment and attractiveness of the landscape depend to a
very great degree. Today, for example, there are many local communities asking
themselves about the aesthetic environmental costs of wind farms or the creation of
other new spatial structures (Niecikowski – Kistowski, 2008). However, the most
important issue from the point of view of the functioning of the environment is the
breakdown for the use of the different fuels, these ranging across from the fossil
fuels to the renewable energy sources (Figure 3).
The process by which energy-consumption structures evolve displays clear pe-
riods of stabilisation and marked variability. The latter are induced by such exter-
nal determinants as rising demand, the discovery of new energy sources and con-
cern for the environment.

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns?
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special

MAREK
36
DEGÓRSKI
of TOE/GDP) was characteristic of Denmark (c. 100). At the same time, the aver-
age calculated for the Fifteen was of c. 200 points. In comparison, Poland’s figure
is of more than 450, while that for the 10 new Member States acceding in 2004
taken together was of more than 700 points.
Following its 2007 enlargement to 27 countries, the EU with its 500M+ inhabi-
tants was making use of around 18% of the world’s energy. The dominant fuel in
EU countries is oil (40% of total consumption), though the fastest-growing source
is natural gas, for which the EU now accounts for over 25% of all consumption.
Natural gas usage has increased through both higher overall demand for energy and
a decline in the relative role played by coal consumption from 20% in 1991 to 16%
in 2007 (Austvik, 2007; Eurostat, 2008) Nuclear energy output has been quite sta-
ble, accounting for around 13% of total energy consumption. HEP offers a further
4%, while renewable sources taken together (wind, geothermal, solar, biofuels,
etc.) account for just 2%. What this shows is that the fossil fuels (oil, gas and coal)
continue to account for almost 83% of the energy consumed in the EU countries.
This in turn necessitates a further, far-reaching transformation in the use made of
the different raw materials, in order that an optimal solution from the points of both
the environment and the economy can be arrived at. Obviously, changes of this
kind will bring attendant evolution of the spatial structure, as well as the creation of
new patterns in line with optimisation of the use made of the environment’s poten-
tial, including as regards renewables.
Ecosystems services
As human populations grow, so do the resource demands imposed on ecosystems,
and the impacts of our global footprint. Our human use of natural resources began
from the moment of our appearance on Earth and has never stopped growing since.
However, the increase in the level of anthropopressure being imposed upon the
environment is not linear in nature, but goes through stages of stabilisation, as well
as of very much reintensified pressure. An example of a period of very strong an-
thropopressure on the environment was of course provided by the Industrial Revo-
lution. The 20th century also witnessed humanity’s very severe exertion of pressure
on the environment, this reflecting the geometric increase in the human population
and the attendant needs to produce food, to obtain sources of energy and to find
space to meet the needs of the settlement network. The pressure in question trans-
formed ecosystems greatly, though it also made people aware that the latter of
themselves possess a certain potential from which benefit can be drawn.
Specifically, humankind benefits from a multitude of resources and processes
that are supplied by natural ecosystems. Collectively, these benefits are known as
ecosystem services, and include products like clean drinking water and processes

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns?
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special

MAREK
38
DEGÓRSKI
Conclusions
The presentation here of selected issues associated with the shaping of interrela-
tionships between the natural environment, society, the economy and culture, and
capable of conditioning spatial development, makes it very clear that the system of
the natural environment is a fully-fledged player in the shaping of new spatial pat-
terns and in the setting of directions to spatial development and regional economic
development. It has now come to be important for the economic aspect to planning
and accounting vis-à-vis spatial policy to take account of the potential of the natu-
ral environment, as well as optimisation of the latter’s use. This is particularly the
case when it comes to functional conceptualisations of socio-economic systems.
Society’s demographic development plus growing pressure on the environment
resulting in ever greater fragmentation plus impairment of natural resistance to
external factors ensure that there is an increasing demand for areas in which the
landscape has only been transformed to a limited extent. In line with the increase in
the number of inhabitants, the exhaustion of mineral resources and the reduction in
the area of arable land, we are witnessing increases, not only in the prices of non-
renewable mineral resources, but also in the prices of food – especially organic
food (i.e. that produced traditionally, without the agents intensifying production).
In this context, the environment is emerging as one of the basic determinants
shaping the structure and development of space.
References
Austvik, O. 2007: Energy challenges for Europe. Structural Change in Europe. 5. pp. 52–54.
Berbeka, K. 2005: Konsekwencje wdrażania dyrektyw ekologicznych UE dla konsumpcji gospodarstw
domowych w Polsce [Consequences of implementation of EU directives for consumptions in
households]. Kraków, Wyd. AE w Krakowie.
Degórska, B. – Degórski, M. 2003: The environmental dimension of European space according to the
concept of trajectory. Europa. 8. pp. 37–44.
Degórski, M. 2003: Some aspects of multifunctional landscape character in the interdisciplinary
environmental study. In: Helming, K. – Wiggering, H. (eds.): Sustainable development of
Multifunctional Landscapes. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Springer–Verlag. pp. 53–65.
Degórski, M. 2005: Środowisko przyrodnicze a środowisko geograficzne [Natural environment
versus geographical environment]. In: Maik, W. – K. Rembowska, K. – Suliborski, A. (eds.):
Geografia jako nauka o przestrzeni, środowisku i krajobrazie. Podstawowe Idee i Koncepcje w
Geografii. 1. pp. 116–129.
Degórski, M. 2006: Podstawy teoretyczne systemowego ujęcia badań środowiska przyrodniczego i
geograficznego oraz ich znaczenie dla rozwiązań aplikacyjnych [Theoretical assumption of
system’s understanding of environment study and its meaning for practical solutions]. Problemy
Ekologii Krajobrazu. 1. pp. 37–48.
Degórski, M. 2007: Environmental conditions as a driving force of regional development in Poland,
In: Kovács, A. D. (ed.): Regionality and/or Locality. Discussion Papers Special. Pécs, Center for
Regional Studies of Hungarian Academy of Sciences. pp. 67–80.

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns?
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special

ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AMONG FACTORS BEHIND…
39
Degórski, M. 2008a: Environmental dimension of transboundary spatial development – driving
forces in the ecological regionalism. In:  M. Leibenath, – E. Korcelli-Olejniczak, – R.
Knippschild, (eds.), Cross-border Governance and Sustainable Spatial Development, Mind the
Gaps! Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Central and Eastern European Development  Studies,
Springer–Verlag pp. 161–173.
Degórski, M. 2008b: Polityka ekologiczna w zarządzaniu regionem (Ecological policy in regional
management). In: Stryjakiewicz, T., Czyż, T. (eds.): O nowy kształt badań regionalnych w
geografii i gospodarce przestrzennej. Biuletyn KPZK, 237. Polska Akademia Nauk, 237, pp. 50–
72.
Domański, R. 2006: Gospodarka przestrzenna, podstawy teoretyczne [Spatial management,
theoretical bases]. Warszawa, PWN.
Domański, R. 2008: Przyczynek do modelowania rozwoju zrównoważonego w długim okresie,
[Contribution to the modeling of sustainable development in long term]. In: Stryjakiewicz, T. –
Czyż, T. (eds.): O nowy kształt badań regionalnych w geografii i gospodarce przestrzennej,
Biuletyn KPZK. 237. Polska Akademia Nauk. 237. pp. 203–224.
Dupont, R. – Baxter T. – Theodore L. 1998: Environmental management, problems and solutions.
Boca Raton, Boston, London, New York, Washington DC, Lewis Publishers.
Ehrlich, P. R. – Ehrlich, A. H. 1981: Extinction, Ballantine, New York. Environmental Signals,
2004:  A European Environment Agency update on selected issue. Copenhagen, European
Environment Agency.
Eurostat 2008: Eurostat Yearbook. Brussels, European Commission.
Glasson, J. 2000: Socio-economic impacts. In: Socio-economic impact assessment (SIA). London,
New York, Spon Press, pp. 20–41.
Holdren, J. P. – Ehrlich P. R. 1974: Human population and the global environment. American
Scientist. 62. pp. 282–292.
Łaguna, T. 2004: Ekonomiczne podstawy zarządzania  środowiskiem i zasobami naturalnymi
[Economical bases for the environmental management and natural resources]. Ekonomiczne i
Ekologiczne  Aspekty Gospodarki Przestrzennej. Olsztyn.
Meyer, B. – Degórski, M. 2007: Integration of multifunctional goals into land use – the planning
perspective. In: Mander, U. – Wiggering, H. – Helming, K. (eds.): Multifunctional land use,
meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York,
Springer, pp. 153–166.
Morris, P. – Therivel, R. 2000: Methods of environmental impact assessment. London, New York,
Spon Press.
Murphy, A. 2006: Enhancing Geography's Role in Public Debate. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers. 1. pp. 1–13.
Myers,  N.  1997:  The  worlds  forests  and  their  ecosystem  services.  In:  Daily,  G.  (ed.):    Nature’s
Services:  Societal  Dependence  on  Natural  Ecosystems.  Washington  DC,  Island  Press,  pp.    215–
235.
Myers, N. 1983: Wealth of Wild Species. Boulder, CO, Westview Press.
Prescott-Allen, R. – Prescott-Allen C. 1990: How many plants feed the world? Conservation Biology
4. pp. 365–374.
Schaltegger, S. – Figge, F. 1997: Environmental shareholder value, economic success with corporate
environmental management. Eco-Management and Auditing. 7. pp. 29–42.
Schaltegger, S. – Synnestvedt, T. 2002: The link between green and economic success: environmental
management as the crucial trigger between environmental and economic performance. Journal of
Environmental Management. 65. pp. 339–346.
Walley, N. – Whitehead, R. 1994: It is not easy being green. Harvard Business Review. 72. p. 46 –52.
WCED, 1987: Sustainable Development, Brundtland Report. World Commission on Environment
and Development.