Discussion Papers 2007.
Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization.
The Case of Central Europe. 77-104. p.
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas
and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the
Czech Republic
Metropolitan areas, cities and their economic and urban development
Metropolises and metropolitan areas
The  settlement  structure  of  the  Czech  Republic  is  very  fragmented  with  cities
surrounded  by  a  large  number  of  small  settlements  with  administratively
independent  municipal  governments.  In  2001,  the  country  consisted  of  6,258
municipalities (obec) and 14 regions (kraj) both with elected representations. The
capital  city  of  Prague  and  other  so-called  statutory  towns  can  be  further
subdivided into boroughs. 60 per cent of Czech municipalities have less than 500
inhabitants and further 20 per cent population between 500 and 1,000. 90 per cent
of municipalities have population below 2,000. There are four major cities with
population over 150,000 inhabitants: Prague (1169 thousands inhabitants), Brno
(376),  Ostrava  (317)  and  Plze   (165).  A  cluster  of  six  cities  with  population
between  90–105  thousand  inhabitants  follows:  Olomouc  (103),  Liberec  (99),
eské Bud jovice (97), Hradec Králové (97), Ústí nad Labem (95) and Pardubice
(91).  All  these  cities  are  regional  capitals.  The  remaining  regional  capitals  are
smaller:  Zlín (81), Karlovy Vary (53) and Jihlava (51). There are other 9 cities
with population between 50-90 thousands inhabitants.
Metropolitan  regions  do  not  exist  as  independent  administrative  units  in  the
Czech Republic. No official list of and spatial delimitation of metropolitan areas
exists  even  for  statistical  purposes.  Usually,  Prague  is  considered  to  be  a
metropolis of international significance. In some analyses, the second largest city
of  Brno  is  seen  as  metropolis.  These  cities  have  their  metropolitan  areas.  Other
cities have their city regions.
Therefore here we consider Prague and Brno as the country’s two cities that
have  their  metropolitan  areas.  With  a  population  of  1.2  million,  Prague  is  the
country’s  largest  city  and  its  capital.  It  is  a  dominant  centre  in  the  Czech
settlement and regional systems, not only because of its population size, but also
because  it  accommodates  most  of  the  government  institutions  and  economic
control and command functions. Prague is the gateway to the country for foreign
investors (Drbohlav–Sýkora, 1997). It is situated in the middle of Bohemia, the
western part of the Czech Republic. Brno is the country’s second largest city; it is
sometimes considered as the “capital” of Moravia, the eastern part of the country.

77

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
With  nearly  400,000  inhabitants,  as  a  settlement  centre  it  ranks  second  in  the
national urban hierarchy. Brno is the seat of the Supreme Court; the city hosts the
most  important  trade  fairs  in  the  country  and  is  a  major  centre  of  university
education.
Metropolitan areas consist of core cities (one municipality) and a large number
of  smaller  municipalities  ranging  from  villages  of  a  few  hundred  inhabitants  to
small  towns  with  a  population  in  tens  of  thousands.  There  is  no  official  or
universally  accepted  method  of  spatial  delimitation  of  metropolitan  areas.  The
most  often  used  delimitation  of  metropolitan  areas  uses  amalgamation  of  core
cities  and  surrounding  districts.  This  approach  allows  for  the  utilisation  of  data
available at district level. However, the districts were abolished and they do not
exist  anymore  as  administrative  spatial  units.  Furthermore,  for  some  analyses  a
more  detailed  delimitation  is  more  useful.  Basic  data  are  presented  for  the
delimitation using districts.
The Prague Metropolitan Area (PMA) covers an area of 1666 sq. km and has
1.35  million  inhabitants  living  in  the  city  of  Prague  and  the  two  surrounding
districts  of  Prague-East  and  Prague-West.  The  Brno  Metropolitan  Area  (BMA;
1338 sq. km) consists of the two districts of Brno-City and Brno-Countryside with
a total population of 535,000 people (Figure 34, Table 5).
The  metropolitan  areas  can  be  divided  into  four  main  zones:  (1)  centre;  (2)
inner city; (3) first (inner) suburban zone; (4) second (outer) suburban zone. This
subdivision  of  metropolitan  areas  respects  urban  morphology  and  takes  into
account  the  boundaries  of  local  government  territorial  units.  Both  Prague  and
Brno are municipalities. Therefore, from the point of view of local government,
their  rights  and  responsibilities  are  on  the  same  level  as  those  of  the  small
municipalities around them. They are, however, municipalities of a special kind
and  can  be  divided  (at  their  own  discretion)  into  boroughs,  each  with  its  own
elected  local  government.  The  spatial  delimitation  of  metropolitan  zones  uses
borough  and  municipal  boundaries.  The  suburban  zone  is  described  as  the  area
outside  the  compact  city  and  within  the  metropolitan  area.  The  administrative
boundary of a Czech city extends far beyond its compact built-up area and thus
the city’s administrative territory contains part of the suburban zone. Therefore,
the  suburban  zone  in  a  metropolitan  area  consists  of  a  zone  within  the
administrative boundary of the core city together with areas outside it. The city
administrative  boundary  is  the  division  line  between  the  first and second or the
inner and outer suburban zones. The second (outer) suburban zone is defined as
the districts around the core city (or municipalities within these districts). In the
case of Prague, there are two districts Prague-West and Prague-East; in the case
of Brno, there is the Brno-Countryside district (Figure 35).

78

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
consisting of municipalities with the share of 30 (alternatively 25) and more per-
cent  of  commuters  from  economically  active  population  (EA)  in  given  munici-
pality to the core city. The municipalities fulfilling the criteria usually do not form
a  spatially  contiguous  area.  Therefore,  the  principle  of  territorial  coherence  is
applied adding those municipalities that are inside and leaving those that are out-
side of the geographically compact area. This method allows for a precise analysis
of certain urban and metropolitan processes such as suburbanization and for com-
parison  of  metropolitan  areas.  However,  some  data,  especially  about  economic
development are not available for such territory. As the method involves discre-
tionary decision of a researcher about inclusion or exclusion of some municipali-
ties at the edges of metropolitan area, the actual delimitations for a concrete met-
ropolitan area may differ. In the later analysis of sociospatial inequalities one of
such delimitations is used. The total population within this delimitation of Prague
Metropolitan Region was 1 357 168 in 2001. It shows that the difference from the
rough delimitation using district boundaries in terms of total population size is not
significant. The major difference is in larger territory and inclusion of small mu-
nicipalities which residents are dependent on Prague job market where they com-
mute for work.
Concerning  metropolitan  management,  Prague  metropolitan  region  extends
over the territory that includes the City of Prague (that is at the same time Region
Prague)  and  surrounding  hinterland  that  is  part  of  administrative  region  Central
Bohemia, which is in this case also identical with cohesion region Central Bohe-
mia. The territory of Prague metropolitan region thus stretches over whole (Pra-
gue) or part (Central Bohemia) of two NUTS 3 administrative as well as over two
NUTS  2  cohesion  regions  and  is  under  jurisdiction  of  governments  responsible
for these territories. No institutional arrangement for joined metropolitan govern-
ment  exists  at  present  time.  In  past  15  years  several  policy  and  planning  docu-
ments  have  been  prepared  and  some  approved  or  are  under  preparation  or  revi-
sion.  The  strategic  and  physical  plans  (that  were  approved  and  have  impact  on
metropolitan development) deal separately with Prague, Central Bohemia or indi-
vidual municipalities. Brno metropolitan region extends over the part of territory
of NUTS 3 administrative region South Moravia, which is part of NUTS 2 cohe-
sion region South-East. No institutional arrangement for joined metropolitan gov-
ernment  exists.  However,  at  present  new  Master  Plan  for  the  City  of  Brno  and
Regional  Plan  are  under  preparation  with  attempts  to  coordinate  their  mutual
aims.

81

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
Conditions of urban development17
The  urban  development  can  be  characterized  by  population  data.  However,
provided we want to explain urban change we have to turn to interpret economic
development  and  its  uneven  spatial  impacts  on  regions  and  cities.  Concerning
demographic  change,  it  has  been  characterized  by  the  decline  in  the  total
population and an ageing population caused by very low fertility and by shifts in
the  structure  of  households  with  a  growing  share  of  single  member  households
and  a  declining  share  of  couples  with  children.  These  changes  have  been
especially pronounced in major cities (Table 6–8).
Urban  change  is  mainly  associated  with  the  geographic  redistribution  of
population.  While  major  cities  loose  population  through  migration,  small
municipalities  gain  it.  A  large  part  of  out-migration  is  towards  suburban  areas,
especially  around  Prague  and  Brno  ( ermák,  2004).  There  is  a  remarkable
regional  differentiation  in  housing  construction  with  booming  suburban  areas,
namely around the capital city of Prague, where the wealthiest Czech population
is  now  building  new  homes.  However,  the  transformation  in  settlement  pattern
has been rather conditioned by economic change in comparison to demographic
change.  Therefore,  our  attention  now  turns  to  economic  restructuring  and  its
effects on urban development.
Table 6
The development of population in selected major cities and towns (1970–2001)

Number of inhabitants (Census)
Population
Change in percent
1970
1980
1991
2001*
1980/  1991/  2001/
1970  1980  1991
Czech Republic
9,807,696   10,291,927   10,302,215   10,230,060
4.9
0.1
-0.7
Prague
1,140,654   1,182,186   1,214,174   1,169,106
3.6
2.7
-3.7
Brno
344,218
371,463
388,296
376,172
7.9
4.5
-3.1
Ostrava
297,171
322,073
327,371
316,744
8.4
1.6
-3.2
Plze
152,560
170,701
173,008
165,259   11.9
1.4
-4.5
*including inhabitants with long term residency permit.
Notes: the population is calculated for the territorial delimitation in 2001.
Source: Sýkora, 2005; Census 2001, Czech Statistical Office.

17This section is based on Sýkora, L. (2005) The Czech Republic. In: Baan, A., van Kempen, R.,
Vermeulen,  M.,  eds.,  Urban  Issues  and  Urban  Policies in the New EU Countries. Ashgate. and
Sýkora, L. (2006) Urban Development, Policy and Planning in the Czech Republic and Prague. In:
Altrock, U., Günter, S., Huning, S., Peters, D., eds., Spatial Planning and Urban Development in
the New EU Member States: From Adjustment to Reinvention. Ashgate.

82

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
The  capital  city  of  Prague  has  strengthened  its  position  as  a  prime  national
centre and has assumed the role of a gateway, linking the national with interna-
tional  economy  (Drbohlav–Sýkora,  1997;  Dostál–Hampl,  2002).  The  inflow  of
foreign direct investment and the growth in advanced services confirmed Prague
as the country command and control centre. The city is also a major national lo-
gistic hub with a huge pool of relatively wealthy consumers. The growth in ad-
vanced producer services greatly influenced the structure of jobs, as well as salary
levels (Table 9), and the booming property development, which makes the capital
city quite different from the rest of country. The capital city of Prague is the only
city where a sufficient number of new jobs were generated to replace the losses
from  deindustrialization.  There  are  even  structural  shortages  of  labour  and  low
paid jobs, and in a number of instances these jobs are taken by labour migrants
from Eastern Europe.
Table 9  Comparison of an average wage in cities with the average wage
in the Czech Republic (100)
Year
Praha
Brno
Ostrava
Plze
1991
108
99
112
103
1993
123
99
112
102
1995
129
103
112
110
1997
132
103
109
108
1999
138
103
105
107
2001
142
103
104
106
Source: Czech Statistical Office.
In  the  Czech  Republic,  there  is  no  other  city  that  would  assume  the  role  of
gateway between the international and the local economy. This affects especially
the second largest city Brno and its metropolitan area, where employment in tra-
ditional  manufacturing  quickly  declined.  Brno  aspired to play a more important
role than merely being a manufacturing centre. The city, for instance, initiated the
establishment of a Czech Technology Park and intended to develop a huge devel-
opment project of so-called South Centre. Masaryk University in Brno accepts the
highest number of new students from all Czech universities. However, in reality
the major growth in Brno has been in retail, i.e. the sector that offers only lower
level salaries. The city government finally started to attract production capacities
to the newly established industrial zone and the city also succeeded to develop as
an important logistic/distribution/warehousing hub.
New  labour  opportunities  in  other  cities  were  associated  mainly  with  the
growth  of  individual  entrepreneurship,  growth  in  retail  sector  and  state  admini-

85

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
stration. This however, has not been sufficient to cover the decline in industrial
jobs. Therefore, all cities, except Prague attempted to attract new foreign invest-
ments to supply jobs in manufacturing. In some other cities, there has been strong
reindustrialization. Consequently the establishment of new production capacities
supplied new jobs that were substituting for decline of employment in traditional
manufacturing production. As these cities could not compete for service jobs they
attempted  to  attract  foreign  direct  investments  (FDI)  into  manufacturing  by  of-
fering cheap land equipped with necessary technical and transport infrastructure
for construction of enterprises, and a cheap and skilled labour force. Despite in-
creasing overall unemployment, the rates in these cities and towns are below na-
tional average (Table 10).
Table 10
The unemployment rate, %
Year
Czech
Prague
Brno
Ostrava
Plze
Republic
1998
7.5
2.3
6.0
12.0
6.7
1999
9.4
3.5
8.1
15.9
8.3
2000
8.8
3.4
7.9
16.6
7.3
2001
8.9
3.4
8.6
16.2
7.2
2002
9.8
3.7
10.0
17.2
7.4
Source: Czech Statistical Office.
Some  cities  have  not  succeeded  in  the  competition  for  new  investments  and
now exhibit decline and unemployment. Their situation is usually a combination
of severe decline of industries inherited from Communism and a low current de-
sirability for new investors due to the bad quality of the physical and social envi-
ronment,  and  geographic  distance  from  the  western  frontier  (in  the  case  of  Os-
trava this is further strengthened by the non-existing highway connection to North
Moravia). Cities and towns in old industrial regions in North Bohemia and North
Moravia  formerly  associated  with  mining,  metallurgy  and  chemical  production
are  those  that  have  been  most  severely  hit  by  de-industrialization  and  have  not
succeeded to attract new major investments. Their current situation is shaped by
economic problems that produce unemployment as high as 20 per cent and more.
The  economic  decline  in  these  cities  is  not  only the question of cities itself but
whole regions with a high concentration of heavy industries. The support for eco-
nomic growth in these areas remains an important task for national economic and
regional policy.
Each city and each local labour market has been impacted by a combination of
several  forces  including  inherited  economic  structure,  contemporary  attractive-

86

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
ness  for  foreign  investors  and  activity  of  local  governments  in  attracting  them.
While  all  cities  have  been  affected  by  deindustrialization,  only  some  benefited
from the new developments. In general, Prague quickly adapted as the centre of
advanced  services,  some  other  cities  benefited  from  reindustrialization  and
growth in consumer services. However, there are also cites that were exposed to
the  severe  consequences  of  deindustrialization  that  have  not  been  balanced  by
growth in other sectors of the local economy. The differentiated external condi-
tions have been decisive for urban development in particular cities.
Urban spatial reorganization and associated urban social problems
Major urban changes occurred within the internal space of cities. On the supply
side  the  urban  restructuring  has  been  conditioned  by  the  government  directed
reforms, especially privatization and price and rent deregulation, which have cre-
ated conditions for the establishment of urban property markets. The demand side
has been largely differentiated between cities. In Prague, the newly emerged ac-
tors in private sector, mainly foreign firms, fuelled the operation of land markets
and  started  to  reorganize  land  use  and  reshape  the  historically  developed  urban
structure.  This  has  also  happened  in  other  towns  and  cities,  but  these  develop-
ments have been smaller in the extent of changes and have taken other forms. For
instance,  new  office  buildings  of  international  standard  have  been  developed
nearly exclusively in Prague (Sýkora, 2007), while shopping centres have mush-
roomed over the whole country.
Czech cities are characterized by small urban cores of medieval origin, large
inner  cities  originating  with  the  industrial  revolution  of  the  second  half  of  19th
century, further developing through the first half of the 20th century, and vast ar-
eas  of  new  industrial  and  residential  estates  from  Communist  times.  The  urban
growth after 1989 concentrated in the most attractive locations of the city centre,
some adjacent nodes and zones in inner city, and in numerous suburban locations.
The  main  transformations  in  the  spatial  pattern  of  former  communist  cities  and
their metropolitan areas included (1) the reinvention, commercialization and ex-
pansion  of  city  centres,  (2)  the  dynamic  revitalization  of  some  areas  within  the
overall stagnation in inner cities, and (3) the radical transformation of outer cities
and urban hinterland through commercial and residential suburbanization (Sýkora,
1999a; Sýkora et al. 2000). The city centres and suburban areas have been territo-
ries with the most radical urban change. Most of the 1990s were characterized by
huge  investment  inflow  to  city  centres  causing  their  commercialization  and  de-
cline in residential function, albeit substantial physical upgrading. Since the late
1990s,  decentralization  occurred  with  investments  flowing  to  both  out-of-centre
and  suburban  locations.  Central  and  inner  city  urban  restructuring  involved  the

87

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
replacement of existing activities with new and economically more efficient uses
and took the form of commercialization, gentrification, construction of new con-
dominiums,  brownfield  regeneration,  the  establishment  of  new  secondary  com-
mercial centres and out-of-centre office clusters (Sýkora, 2005, 2007; Temelová,
2004). Since the late 1990s, suburbanization has become the most dynamic proc-
ess changing the landscapes of metropolitan regions. It brings a complete refor-
mulation  of  metropolitan  morphology,  land  use  patterns  and  socio-spatial  struc-
ture (Sýkora–Ou ední ek, 2007).
Post-communist  transformations  brought  uneven  spatial  development  within
cities, redifferentiation of land use patterns and an increase in socio-spatial segre-
gation (Sýkora, 1999b) thus changing the formerly rather homogeneous space of
socialist cities. The uneven character of post–1989 urban restructuring was caused
not  only  by  decline  of  some  urban  zones  and  areas,  but  also  by  the  investment
flowing  only  to  some  parts  of  the  built  environment,  while  many  areas  were
omitted. Both decline and growth are causing a number of urban problems.
Since the beginning of the 1990s, the central parts of cities have been experi-
encing the strong pressure of new investments. While these investments contrib-
uted  to  physical  upgrading  and  brought  more  economically  efficient  land  use,
they also contributed to the densification in central city morphology. The higher
density  and  intensity  of  use  contributed  mainly  to  increased  use  of  the  central
parts  of  cities  including  rapid  growth  in  car  traffic  and  consequent  congestion
(especially critical has been the situation in Prague). The disappearance of green
spaces in inner yards is another effect of this process. Furthermore, as Czech cit-
ies have medieval cores there were numerous conflicts between investors and the
protection of historic buildings and urban landscapes. Commercialization, i.e. the
increase in the share of commercially used floor-space led to the rapid decline of
residential  land  use  in  inner  cities  and  the  out-migration  of  residents.  Conse-
quently,  there  are  now  blocks  of  central  city  properties  without  any  residential
function – a problem known from western cities.
There are two particular zones within Czech cities that are currently threatened
by  downgrading.  These  are  old  industrial  districts  and  post  Second  World  War
housing estates. Inner urban industrial areas are affected by economic restructur-
ing  and  are  becoming  obsolete.  Old  buildings,  contaminated  land,  and  complex
ownership  patterns  complicate  the  regeneration  of  these  areas.  Furthermore,  in
many  cities  and  locations  there  is  virtually  no  interest  in  their  redevelopment.
Brownfields  left  by  deindustrialization,  and  in  some  cities  such  as  Olomouc  by
demilitarization, are becoming one of the major problems areas for many Czech
towns and cities. Up to now there have been rather scarce examples of the reuse
of  former  industrial  areas,  namely  associated  with  the  redevelopment  driven  by
commercial  functions  in  locations  near  city  centres,  such  as  Smíchov  in  Prague
(Temelová 2004), or specific functions, such as the construction of new multipur-

88

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
pose sport and cultural hall Sazka Arena in Prague Vyso any associated with the
World Hockey Championship 2004.
Another  problem  area  are  housing  estates  of  large  multifamily  houses  con-
structed with the use of prefabricated technology during the 1960s–1980s for tens
of  thousands  of  inhabitants. Their life span and technical conditions call for re-
generation; otherwise this will lead to physical and social decline. Due to the ex-
tent  of  housing  estates  and  current  out-migration  of  more  wealthy  people  from
them,  their  areas  may  present  one  of  the  largest  concentrations  of  physical  and
social  problems  in  coming  decades.  This  may  concern  in  particular  those  cities
whose labour markets are strongly affected by economic decline. The population
affected  by  unemployment  usually  concentrates  in  housing  estates.  Rent  arrears
and limited financial resources of the owners contribute to low level of mainte-
nance,  disrepair  and  physical  dilapidation.  Even  in  booming  cities,  there  is  an
ongoing remarkable differentiation between housing estates. The residential areas
that are well located on public transportation and near green areas are perceived
as good living addresses and attract new investments into apartment houses, of-
fices and retail facilities. However there are also residential districts with a higher
concentration of manual workers and with worse accessibility by public transport,
and they show significant signs of decline.
The major growth in postcommunist metropolitan areas is concentrated in the
suburban  zone.  The  future  of  brownfields,  housing  estates  and  suburbs  is  inter-
linked  together.  If  brownfields  and  housing  estates  are  omitted  and  get  on  the
spiral of ongoing decline, firms and wealthier people are more likely to leave for
suburbs, while inner cities will be characterized by dilapidation and decline.
Suburbanisation itself can become a major problem. The compact character of
the former socialist city is being changed through rapid commercial and residen-
tial suburbanisation that takes the form of unregulated sprawl. New construction
of suburban residential districts is fragmented into numerous locations in metro-
politan areas around central cities. Noncontiguous, leap-frog suburban sprawl has
more negative economic, social and environmental consequences than more con-
centrated forms of suburbanisation. The societal costs of sprawl are well-known
from  North  America  and  Western  Europe  and  now  threaten  sustainable  metro-
politan development in the Czech Republic. This concerns not only residences but
also  new  commercial  facilities.  For  instance,  suburbanization  of  retail  facilities
has completely reshaped the pattern of commuting for shopping. While in 1990s,
most retail was concentrated in central city shopping areas and in secondary cen-
tres  within  cities,  at  present  a  large  share  of  shopping  is  realised  in  suburban
hypermarkets and shopping malls, where people travel by car from the inner city.
A very specific example is the city of Brno, where most new shopping facilities
were built south of town while most of new suburban residential districts are in
naturally  valuable  areas  north  of  town.  Consequently,  people  commute  to  shop

89

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
through the inner city contributing to traffic congestion. Another major impact of
suburbanization  is  in  the  field  of  spatial  mismatch  in  the  distribution  of  jobs  in
metropolitan areas. Suburban jobs are namely in retail, warehousing and distribu-
tion  with  low  paid  employees  taken  by  people  from  inner  city  and  surrounding
region.  On  the  other  hand  suburban  areas  are  now  becoming  home  of  wealthy
population that commute to their office jobs in central and inner cities. Therefore,
there is developing spatial mismatch between the location of jobs and residences,
contributing  to  increased  travel  in  metropolitan  areas  and  consequent  effects  on
the quality of environment and life. The outcomes of rapidly developing subur-
banisation in terms of spatial distribution of people and their activities in metro-
politan  areas  form  conditions  that  will  influence  the  life  of  society  for  several
generations.  Therefore,  patterns  of  urbanisation  in  metropolitan  areas  shall  be-
come important targets of urban and metropolitan planning and policies that in-
tend to keep a more compact urban form.
The postcommunist cities are also being impacted by increasing segregation.
With growing income inequalities and established housing property markets, local
housing  markets  are  divided  into  segments  that  are  expressed  spatially  (Sýkora,
1999). Wealthy households usually concentrate in city centres, high status inner
city neighbourhoods (both apartment housing and villa neighbourhoods and gar-
den  towns)  and  increasingly  move  to  new  clusters  of  inner  city  condominiums
and especially to newly built districts of suburban housing. Less wealthy house-
holds concentrate in inner city zones of dilapidation usually associated with de-
clining industries and brownfield formation, and in some post Second World War
housing estates especially those originally built and allocated as enterprise hous-
ing where larger share of blue collar workers concentrate. A specific urban social
problem is the segregation of parts of the Roma population in some cities, where
they  are  intentionally  allocated  to  local  government  housing  in  poor  condition.
Some local government purposefully built shelters for municipal tenants that do
not pay rent and move them into this type of very simple housing that is usually
segregated  on  the  edge  of  urban  areas.  The  processes  of  the  separation  of  the
wealthy citizens and the segregation of poor populations contribute to a changing
spatial distribution of population according to social status, growing socio-spatial
disparities, and can contribute to the weakening of social cohesion in our cities.
The  segregation  processes  are  relatively  slow;  however,  once  started  it  will  be
difficult  to  later  solve  its  undesirable  consequences.  Cities  with  high  social  dis-
parities and social conflicts are not desirable places to locate new investments and
thus social problems can threaten their economic viability and further add to the
vicious circle of socio-economic decline.

90

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
Socio-spatial inequalities in metropolises
This part first touches on the issue of the level of socio-spatial inequality as it is
the key aspect to understand post-socialist urban change. Secondly it provides the
information about the distribution of social groups in urban space and especially
those changes that are crucial for the understanding of the current situation in the
level of socio-spatial inequality.
Inequality in the level of spatial distribution of social groups
We can start the discussion of socio-spatial inequalities with the main issue that
characterizes the urban change in post-socialist period. The inequality in the spa-
tial  distribution  of  population  (according  to  its  various  characteristics)  in  cities
and their metropolitan areas has decreased for most of these characteristics during
the 1990s. This could be expected in the case of demographic characteristics such
as age or family size. During communism housing construction was usually con-
centrated in certain areas in which housing was allocated to a narrow cohort. This
formed an uneven distribution of demographic groups across urban space. With
the sharp decline of housing construction in the 1990s and decentralized market
housing  supply  the  concentrated housing provision does not play anymore such
important role in the spatial distribution of mostly young households starting their
life carrier. More surprising is that the socio-spatial inequality according to char-
acteristics of socio-economic status diminishes as well. And this is a situation that
was  not  expected.  Contrary,  the  expectation  was  that  capitalism  will  generate
growing income and consequently social disparities and these will find its expres-
sion in growing socio-spatial inequalities. However this has not happened and the
whole issue deserves very close attention and analytical scrutiny. The sociospatial
inequalities increased only for social groups defined by their ethnicity or nation-
ality.  This  is  not much associated with ethnic groups that lived in post-socialist
cities during Communism, but with immigrants on both ends of socio-economic
status: wealthy managers and specialists of origin from developed countries and
less wealthy migrants mostly form former socialist countries of Eastern Europe as
well as Asia. However, the high spatial inequality in the distribution of population
according to ethnic status is insignificant when measuring the level of exposure
and  isolation.  The  indexes  of  isolation  are  extremely  low  showing  that  these
groups are not due to their small numbers isolated in urban space.
Not  surprisingly,  the  highest  socio-spatial  inequality  measured  by  index  of
segregation concerns the spatial distribution of population according to their eth-
nicity  or  nationality.  In  Prague  metropolitan  region,  the  indexes  of  segregation
range  from  58%  for  Romanies  (Gypsies)  to  31%  for  Ukrainians  (measured  for
1307 small territorial units within Prague Metropolitan Region). High socio-spa-

91

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
the transformation in housing system, especially the growing impact of property
market  operation  on  housing  in  terms  of  increasing  differentiation  of  housing
supply.  Increasing  social  disparities  within  population  and  growing  differences
within the geographical pattern of housing stock should theoretically contribute to
the  increase  in  socio-spatial  disparities.  Differentiated  household  incomes  and
differentiated prices and rents in the housing sector have created basic precondi-
tions for the development of processes of socio-spatial (re)differentiation.
The  socio-spatial  inequalities  can  increase  (or  decrease)  through  the  social
and/or  spatial  mobility  of  population.  If  there  is  growing  social  inequality  pro-
duced by upward social mobility of high social status population and downgrad-
ing  of  lower  social  status  population,  the  socio-spatial  inequality  will  increase.
The  contrast  in  spatial  pattern  is  strengthened,  but  the  spatial  distribution  of
population groups according to their social status is not changed.
Socio-spatial inequality can also be increased or decreased through migration
of  population.  If  relatively  wealthy  people  living  in  less  wealthy  areas  move  to
more wealthy neighbourhoods and les wealthy people move to poorer neighbour-
hoods, the socio-spatial inequality will increase. The mutual combination of so-
cial inequality and this type of migration can generate sharp socio-spatial dispari-
ties in urban space, but without the change in spatial distribution of wealthy and
poor population.
However, migration can also transform spatial patterns in terms of the distri-
bution  of  various  groups  of  population  according  to  their  social  status  in  urban
space.  This  is  the  case  of  gentrification  of  formerly  socially  weaker  neighbour-
hoods,  suburbanization  of  formerly  socially  weak  urban  hinterland  by  new
wealthy population and on the other side and in contrast to this, there is immigra-
tion of socially weaker households to communist housing estates, which have had
above average social status that is now declining. The mechanisms where migra-
tion is changing the former social status of urban areas can temporarily contribute
to the decline in social inequalities measured by indexes of segregation as it con-
tributes first to the social mix of population within these areas bringing their aver-
age social status closer to city or metropolitan average. However, it is likely that
in the course of time, the social profile of such socially transforming neighbour-
hoods or areas will change to the other end and thus the processes of socio-spatial
differentiation will finally contribute to growing socio-spatial inequalities.
Precisely  the  mechanism  described  here  is  the  key  for  understanding  of  the
contemporary urban socio-spatial change in post-socialist cities. Interestingly and
importantly, this decline in socio-spatial inequality is produced by processes that
are by their nature segregation processes. And it is a key paradox of post-socialist
urban change that segregation processes are contributing to diminishing of socio-
spatial inequality. However, this is only a temporary situation as once suburbani-
zation, gentrification or immigration to housing estates moves the social status of

94

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
these areas on the city average, the socio-spatial inequality will start to increase
and a more “normal or usual” relation between processes of residential segrega-
tion  and  growth  of  socio-spatial  inequality  will  start  to  play  decisive  and  more
obvious role in reshaping urban social geography of post-socialist metropolises.
Socio-spatial patterns: areas of concentration/overrepresentation
of particular social groups
Now we can come to the description of socio-spatial patterns, i.e. distribution of
social  groups  within  urban  and metropolitan space and changes in this distribu-
tion. Let’s start with “foreigners” or in other words population with other nation-
ality than Czech, Moravian, Silesian, Slovak o Romany. The most important na-
tionalities, whose proportion has been rapidly growing during the 1990s and at the
same time they account for a significant quantity are Russians, Ukrainians, Viet-
namies and citizens of EU15 as identified in Census 2001. Their indexes of seg-
regation  in  Prague  metropolitan  region  are  provided  above.  The  Figure  below
shows  their  spatial  distribution  in  terms  of  territorial  units  with  their  dispropor-
tionate concentration, i.e. units where the location quotient of these groups is at
least 3 (i.e. at last 3 times higher concentration in comparison with national aver-
age) and at the same time there are living at least 25 people of the given national-
ity. The map of the Czech Republic shows that Prague is the major (however not
exclusive) concentration of foreigners. If we consider citizens of EU15 they con-
centrate nearly exclusively in Prague and close vicinity – the only exception is an
exclusive district of wealthy population in Hluboká nad Vltavou. EU15 citizens
live in areas of high social status especially in Prague city centre and the north-
west  sector  that  is  traditionally  high  social  status  area.  Russians  predominate  in
Prague and some towns namely Karlovy Vary, their traditional Czech destination.
In  Prague,  they  live  especially  in  housing  estates,  often  purchasing  newly  built
apartments in condominiums. Their spatial location often coincides with areas of
higher social status. Ukrainians are more evenly dispersed through the territory of
the  Czech  Republic  which  is  associated  with  their  dominant  economic  involve-
ment as manual workers. In Prague, their higher concentrations are in areas with
cheaper  rental  housing  in  inner  city  and  some  housing  estates.  Vietnamies  con-
centrate  in  cities  and  especially  along  German  border,  which  is  associated  with
their dominant economic activity as vendors supplying cheap Asian products to
their  customers  from  Germany  (it  is  easier  to  establish  small  business  in  the
Czech Republic, cost are lower and there has also been until recently lower effort
to  tackle  the  sales  of  “illegal”  products.  In  Prague,  Vietnamies  concentrate  in
housing  estates  closer  to  major  marketplace  dominated  by  Vietnam  vendors.  In
general, Vietnamies are segregated in their economic activities. However, they do
not tend to cluster their residences. Their increased concentration in some areas is

95

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
given by the availability and affordability of housing rather than by their desire to
live close to other Vietnamies.
The  localities  with high social status were identified using indicators of uni-
versity  education  and  PC  and  internet  access  at  home.  They  include  traditional
neighbourhoods of high social status population such as villa quarters from 1920s
and 1930s in inner cities and some early high status suburbs in urban hinterland.
The other major group of these localities consists of places with concentrated new
housing construction. These are often completely new residential places including
districts  of  inner  city  condominiums  with  apartments  for  sale  and  more  impor-
tantly  areas  of  mostly  suburban  single-family  housing.  The  majority  of  these
places is located in Prague and its hinterland. There are some in Brno and usually
single place in some other mid size towns. Some of the new suburban places have
some features of closed or even gated communities including both physical obsta-
cles and/or surveillance systems.
There are two basic types of low social status localities. First are urban usually
inner city areas with tenement housing -pre 2nd World War as well as Communist
housing  estates  that  usually  coincides  with  concentration  of  Roma  population.
Second are small settlements in rural and peripheral areas. While the urban places
are  the  outcome  of  segregation  and  represent  urban  socio-spatial  inequalities,
peripheral  locations  are  consequences  of  urbanization  and  rural  depopulation
strengthened  by  regional  labour  market  inequalities  and  are  outcomes  of  urban-
rural and regional inequalities (Figure 38–41).
The areas with over-representation of Roma population often coincide with lo-
calities  with  population  of  lower  socio-economic  status,  described  above.  How-
ever, they also include localities with higher than low socio-economic status. The
census data unfortunately do not show the Roma ethnicity but those Roma who
determined  themselves  having  Roma  nationality  in  the  Census.  As  most  Roma
population  rather  determined  Czech,  Moravian  or  Slovak  nationality  the  data
show only fragment of actual Roma population. Concerning metropolitan areas of
Prague and Brno, localities exist in both of them with the overrepresentation of
Roma  population  –  these  are  zones  in inner city neighbourhoods with old tene-
ment housing stock dating back often even to 19th century.

96

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
Socio-spatial patterns: intra-metropolitan socio-spatial inequality
The internal socio-spatial pattern and socio-spatial inequality within metropolitan
area of Prague must be seen in the context of the whole country. Cities have in
general older population than country average. However, there are rural and pe-
ripheral  areas  with  higher  share  of  old  population.  Nevertheless  as  these  are
smaller numbers than in cities, urban areas concentrate largest absolute numbers
of  older  population.  Concerning  the  socio-economic  status  of  population,  data
about income are not available. The best information indicating socio-economic
status (if we work with aggregate data) is provided by the characteristics of edu-
cation as there is high correlation between education and income. University edu-
cated people are concentrated in large cities, namely in Prague and Brno. Inter-
estingly, if we assume correlation between age and education, and over-represen-
tation  of  elderly  and  at  the  same  time  under-representation  of  people  with  only
basic education in inner cities, even urban elderly belong to educated population
with likely higher incomes as well as capabilities to deal with changing economic,
social and cultural context of post-socialist transformation. There is a low rate of
unemployment in the cities of Prague and Brno and their metropolitan regions as
well as in some other areas in contrast with regions affected by industrial decline
and high levels of unemployment. This corresponds with low levels of the social
benefits provision especially in Prague and its vicinity. Taking the indicators of
socio-economic status into consideration and placing Prague and its metropolitan
area  into  national  context,  we  can  say,  that  Prague  region  is  in  socio-economic
terms  the  most-wealthy  area  in  the  Czech  Republic  with  concentration  of  large
quantity of population with the highest-socio economic status in comparison with
national average.
The  major  process  that  is  changing  the  intra-metropolitan  socio-spatial  ine-
quality is migration of high social-status population into suburban areas strength-
ening the socio-economic status in these areas, while weakening socio-economic
status  in  areas,  which  this  population  leaves  (Figure  42).  This  process  has  not
changed  between  1991  and  2001.  However,  it  did  decrease  the  differences  be-
tween spatial units within the metropolitan area, as show the segregation indices
presented  above.  In  general,  it  also  decreased  the  difference  between  socio-
economic status of inhabitants in inner city and urban hinterland. At 2001, there
still  was  large  over-representation  of  high-social  status  population  in  inner  city
and  under-representation  in  suburban  zone.  However,  provided  that  current
processes of residential suburbanization and housing estates decline continue, the
general pattern of spatial distribution of higher and lower socio-economic status
population  will  change  with  high  socio-economic  status  population  living  in
suburbs and selected neighbourhoods in city centre and inner city, and low socio-
economic  status  population  concentrating  in  selected  less  desired  inner  city
neighbourhoods  and  housing  estates.  Whether  this  will  happen  and  the  current

99

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
Social upgrading has been especially strong in the case of neighbourhoods that
have exhibited high social status prior to communist period and declined during
communism. Since 1989, the social status of these neighbourhoods has increased
through the social mobility of its indigenous population, through gentrification of
renovated  properties  and  in-filled  new  condominiums.  From  the  geographical
point of view, this includes the central city, some inner city areas and north-west
sector of Prague, whose traditional position within the social geography of Prague
has been strengthened. Social upgrading has been very selective and concentrated,
affecting only some inner city areas. However, most of inner city population lives
in  neighbourhoods  characterized  by  stagnation  or  decline.  The  communist
housing estates, which concentrate about two fifths of Prague’s population, have
not  been  subject  to  major  social  changes  yet.  However,  their  relative  position
within urban social geography has declined. Furthermore, there are signs of their
differentiation. While at some housing estates new apartment houses for relatively
affluent  population  are  being  constructed,  residential  districts  with  higher
concentration of manual workers and with worse accessibility by public transport
show signs of both social and physical decline.
The outer city and suburban areas have undergone important transformations.
Provided  that  suburbanization  of  affluent  people  continues,  the  socio-economic
status  of  population  in  the  suburban  zone will continue to increase relatively to
other  urban  zones  in  Prague  and  can  move  above  metropolitan  average.  In  this
case, the socio-spatial pattern of former socialist city is being reshaped and can be
in  some  time  completely  reversed.  I  anticipate,  that  in  future  the  most  affluent
people will live in the city centre, some inner city neighbourhoods especially in
the north-west segment of Prague, and in suburban areas, while population with
lower-social status will occupy large zones of the inner city and housing estates
from communist times. However, the built environment and social geography of
Prague is very heterogeneous on the micro-scale, and this will certainly affect the
impact of above mentioned macro-trends on the urban socio-spatial restructuring.
Metropolitan inequalities and competitiveness
Major  and  especially  capital  cities  are  characterized  by  a  very  dynamic  social
development. They are places where key decisions are made and where the most
progressive  human  activities  are  concentrated.  Cities  are  also  places  where  new
trends in thinking, technologies and fashion are introduced and materialized. Ur-
ban development in important cities, including major post-socialist metropolises
such  as  Prague,  has  received  new  impetus  with  the  transition  towards  market
economy and consequently developed linkages with global economy. The global
economy is characterized by the concentration of command and control functions

101

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
in a small number of metropolitan areas. Not all cities that have flourished in the
previous  period  have  the  opportunity  to  keep  up  the  pace  in  the  contemporary
super league of the major world centers. The top cities naturally attract transna-
tional  corporations,  international  organizations  and  important  events  as  well  as
real estate developers and investors. Many other cities fight for their place at the
sunshine.  Their  natural  attractiveness  is  not  sufficient  any  longer  to  keep  pace
with  the  frontrunners.  Public  officials  and  major  companies  in  such  cities  are
joining their forces to support city development and compete for investments in
global economic arena. The attractiveness of certain cities for major investors and
thus their competitiveness is not only influenced by economic parameters, but by
the overall quality of the urban environment. The latter is not a mere matter of the
general societal development in a country, but also a matter of a whole range of
factors,  which  can  be  directly  influenced  by  the  politics  of  the  city  such  as  the
quality  of  built  environment  and  infrastructure.  Sophisticated  strategies  of  city
presentation and promotion, i.e. city marketing can create a positive image of a
city  as  desirable  location  for  investment,  business  and  everyday  life.  Investors
prefer cities that care about their long-term development and present themselves
to the outside world.
Where Prague stands in this respect? It has been very success full in terms of
economic  progress  and  strengthening  its  position  within  country  as  well  as  in
Europe. The city per capita GDP in 2003 was 156% of the EU per capita average
of GDP, unemployment keeps at low rates and there is higher demand than supply
of labour. The economy of the city is dominated by services that account ca for
80%  of  GDP  and  75%  of  employment  in  Prague.  Prague  has  a  highly  skilled
workforce  and  educated  population  (nearly  20  %  of  population  has  university
education),  concentrates  major  universities  and  research  institutions.  Prague  has
been  highly  attractive  for  foreign  investors.  According  to  the  European  Cities
Monitor,  a  survey  of  business  attractiveness  in  Europe’s  top  30  cities  since  the
1990s,  the  city  of  Prague has steadily strengthened its position from rank 23 in
1990 to 13 in 2005.
Even  cities,  which  successfully  attract  investments  and  where  development
takes place, like Prague, may not win in the long run. New investments are usu-
ally  allocated  to  certain  areas,  while  other  places  decline.  An  internally  divided
city  with  growing  disparities  and  conflicts  can  become  a  place  that  offers  good
business opportunities but not a quality residential environment. The objective of
cities should be to direct investments in urban area in such a way that would en-
sure harmonic and balanced development of many city parts so it would contrib-
ute positively to a majority of firms and inhabitants. The priority of city political
representations should be the protection of the public interest: to create an attrac-
tive and friendly environment for both entrepreneurship and life of citizens. Cities
in  cooperation  with  the local business community and representatives of citizen

102

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
groups can prepare transparent rules of the game for urban development, which
express  and  take  into  account  interests  of  the  government,  private  and  citizens
sector.  Such  partnerships  can  contribute  to  the  economically,  socially  and  ecol-
ogically sustainable development of the city.
What  is  the  reality  in  post-socialist  metropolises  and  namely  n  Prague.  The
post-communist urban development has been characterized by an uneven impact
on urban space. Most politicians see this as a natural outcome of market mecha-
nisms that are creating economically efficient land use pattern. However, the spa-
tially uneven development can in the future threaten economic efficiency, social
cohesion and environmental sustainability. The question of social justice and so-
cial cohesion, issues of environmental impacts and sustainability, and more bal-
anced spatial development have been up to now rather subordinated to the prefer-
ences given to economic growth. Urban governments could attempt to stimulate
investment activity in less preferred locations to distribute the benefits from the
growth and development more evenly across the urban territory. In a number of
cases, cities need support from the national government to solve some of the most
severe problems. The urban problems, however, currently are not among the is-
sues of political and public debate on the national level. Some attention has been
given to the decline in post-war housing estates and to the regeneration of brown-
fields. Most urban problems are, however, seen as local in their nature and left to
local solutions.
In  Prague  the  major  achievements  of  urban  policy  and  planning  during  the
1990s were:
(1) planning system was kept in operation despite unfavourable conditions;
(2)  basic  planning  documents,  i.e.  Master  Plan  and  Strategic  Plan  were  ap-
proved by the end of the 1990s;
(3) Strategic Plan and Single Programming Documents pay attention to both
urban competitiveness and sustainability.
The major weaknesses of contemporary urban policy and planning in Prague
however are:
(1)  non-existence  of  city  marketing/promotion  strategy,  city  land  policy  and
real  estate  strategy  and  policy  towards  inward,  especially  foreign  direct  invest-
ments;
(2) very weak consideration of sustainability principles;
(3) virtually no cooperation between the city and private sector and prevailing
relations of confrontation between the city officials and environmental NGOs.
The city government took the inflow of foreign capital for granted and up to
now there has been a lack of activity in attraction of FDI, city promotion or public
private  partnership  with  foreign  firms.  Despite  a  number  of  issues  which  fall
within the range of economic, social and ecological sustainability are present in
city planning documents, the explicit declaration of political commitment to pur-

103

Ludek Sýkora :
The Czech case study – Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Their Relationships with Competitiveness in the Czech Republic.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 77-104. p. Discussion Papers, Special
sue  the  principles  of  sustainable  development  are  still  missing.  The  voluntary
citizens sector has quickly developed, especially in the second half of the 1990s,
and  a  number  of  NGOs  by  their  activities  increased  public  awareness  of  some
issues and projects in Prague’s urban development. While at the beginning there
has  been  hostility  between  “city  bureaucrats”  and  “radical  environmentalists”,
some limited opportunities were opened for the involvement of NGOs represen-
tatives to the decision-making processes.
The main aim of national, regional, and city government should be to promote
such  development  that  will  result  in  the  increasing  quality  of  life  of  urban  citi-
zens.  At  present,  there  are  three  major  challenges  to  governments  seeking  to
achieve  that  goal.  They  are:  (1)  the  increasing  global  competition  between  re-
gions,  cities,  and  localities  for  inward,  especially  international  investments;  (2)
the growing attention paid to sustainable ecological, social and economic devel-
opment; (3) the necessity to open up urban policy and planning procedures for the
involvement  of  representatives  from  the  private  sector  and  voluntary  citizen  or-
ganizations (Sýkora 2002). The third of these challenges is procedural in nature;
each of the urban policies applied should pay attention to the integration of pub-
lic,  private,  and  citizens  sectors  into  decision-making,  implementation,  and
evaluation, thereby building new and more complex modes of urban governance.
The first of the challenges is very much about the activity of the government con-
cerned  itself.  A  city’s  competitiveness,  however,  is  also  dependent  on  specific
objective local conditions and can be threatened, for instance, by having an obso-
lete infrastructure or vast derelict or declining areas. In such a case, the national
and EU urban policies can support cities in diminishing the negative impacts of
such  obstacles.  Even  if  cities  are  successful,  new  investments  do  not  automati-
cally  bring  wealth  to  all  parts  and  all  residents  of  the  city  and  its  metropolitan
region.  The  location  decisions  of  investors  are  highly  selective  in  urban  space,
with  a  preference  given  to  urban  cores  and  suburban  greenfield  sites.  Cities
should attempt to achieve a more balanced, sustainable development. The second
challenge seems to be one where the support of the cities from national and EU
urban policies would be the most valuable. Urban policies should provide support
to  declining  areas  within  cities,  stimulate  sustainable  development,  and  restrict
unsustainable growth patterns. In the context of Czech cities, attention should be
paid  to  the  regeneration  of  post-war  housing  estates  and  some  inner-city
neighbourhoods,  to  brownfield  regeneration,  to  the  application  of  sustainable
metropolitan transportation systems, and to putting limits on sprawling patterns of
metropolitan growth. The application of EU programmes in the Czech Republic is
capable of helping to consolidate government measures towards these issues and
possibly even to establish urban policy as a key tool for the coordinated and com-
plex solution of the most pressing urban problems. However, whether is happens
remains to be seen yet.

104