1. Extrapolating the Dutch Experience Kees Schotten Wideke Boersma Camiel Heunks

2. Demand for information 5th Memorandum on physical planning  Possible spatial developments  given social and economic drivers and ongoing spatial policy  “Distance to target”  to policy targets or societal aims related to economy, ecology and social structure  The pro’s and con’s of various spatial principles

3. Spatial allocation Autonomous spatial developments Spatial policy for collective forms of land use INPUT (Starting point) AUTONOMOUS ECONOMIC SCENARIOS Economic Growth (Industry and Agriculture) Demographic developments Land Use claims fit in the available area ? ANALYSIS Capacity of the area (The Netherlands) Effects ecology, social/ cultural, economy

5. Starting point 3 AUTONOMOUS SCENARIOS

6. Capacity : “ The claimed area is 46 000 ha more then available!”

7. Spatial allocation of land use Spatial alternatives Driving forces Economic strong land use forms replace weaker land use forms Corrective forces Policy for Nature, Landscape, Recreation and Environment Effects

8. Policy assumptions behind land use change 1995 - 2020 1995 -2010  Residential areas : 4th memorandum practice; not inside natural areas  Industry : None  Infra : Realisation of the Long Term Infrastructure policy (MIT99)  Natuur : Realisation Ecological Network (EHS)  Agriculture: None 2010 - 2020  Residential areas : Autonomous developments; not inside natural areas  Industry : None  Infra : Realisation 1a, 2, and 3 projects of MIT99  Natuur : Total realisation Ecological Network (EHS)  Agriculture: None

9. Foreseen Ecological Network in 2020 Existing natural areas New natural areas

10.  Chances for the development of residential areas for Randstad Holland based on historical trends (1980 - 1995) Autonomous developments

11. The model

13. ThemeIndicator Natural area Coherency nature Fauna Flora Use of energy (CO2) N surplus in groundwater Deposition ammonia Water depleted natural area Proximity recreation Quality of recreation Quieting in Landscape Openness Landscape Historical value Landscape Flooding risk Water surplus Commuting by car Commuting by train Nature Environment Recreation Landscape Safety Mobility -40-200204060  Present-2020

14. The Dutch experience: Conclusion  The effects are for a large part determined by the spatial principles  This urges to evaluate spatial alternatives  Many methodological and practical problems to solve: Data, etc  Main problem will be the growing complexity of this type of integrated assessments

15. Expanding the Dutch experience

16. Scale levels  National / Regional: learning of each other experiences  Regional / Cross border: inclusion of european driving forces in national simulations  Europe: simulation on a European scale

17. The impact of cross bordereffects on the Netherlands

20. Simulation result:

21. Effectindicator on biodiversity

22. Final Conclusions  Main advantage is the quantification of the effects of different spatial alternatives, supporting open and clear evaluation  Main methodogical problem will be the growing complexity of this type of integrated assessments  Land use simulation on an European scale level:  Keep it simple  select only a few effect indicators  Focus analyses on the main driving forces  Select a few test sites throughout Europe :  to gain fundamental understanding of driving forces  to stratify Europe on basis of demand of land and driving forces