Spatial planning policy (Alento)

Editor's note 6Jun14: Sources D142-4

Several spatial planning regulatory instruments are in force in the Alento study site.

Spatial planning policy instruments and actors

Source: Authors

Urban expansion and construction are regulated by a complex set of laws that lack uniformity and cohesion. Laws are applied via a series of instruments - i piani urbanistici – which can be formulated and managed by town Councils, the Province, or the Region, in addition to some State administrations, depending on the location and scope of planned construction and the extent of the council’s authority.  

Since 1942, planning in Italy has been divided into two levels: urban/municipal (General Regulatory Plans) and territorial/regional – provincial (Piano Territoriale di Coordinamento and Piano Territoriale Paesistico). In 1971, the Italian regions were given the authority to pass their own regional laws on urban planning.

The official procedure for urban planning authorisation in Italy resembles a pyramidal organisation, although it is not strictly hierarchical. The State is at the top of the planning authorisation triangle and the Regions, Provinces, Town Councils, Park Authorities, and Basin Authorities are at the base.

Hierarchy of Spatial Planning Procedure

Source: Authors

The instruments of spatial planning can be divided into two groups:

• general planning instruments are those provided by National and Regional urban planning laws and fall under the competency of local authorities; the region, province, or town council;
• specialized planning instruments refer to landscape conservation and environmental protection laws.

General and Specialized Urban Planning Instruments

Source: Aiuthors

Implementation, Impacts, Effectiveness of of spatial planning policy

The adoption of territorial and urban planning instruments is the responsibility of the region, province, and town councils. Territorial and urban planning is carried out through the creation of spatial plans with the participation of the authorities in charge of safeguarding different specific interests. All functions relative to the governing of the local territory, which are not explicitly assigned to the region or provinces, are delegated to town councils.

The implementation of planning instruments in Alento has produced several positive impacts such as the Protection of the local territory and valorization of natural and archeological resources, the diffusion of tertiary sector activities, production and recreational activities, the absence of environmentally damaging pollutant industries, funding to areas under Park protection and the even distribution of accommodation structures, housing, and centres of production.

Critical issues which current regulations have failed to address include degradation of inhabited areas along the coast, diffusion of unauthorized housing along the coast, over-development of touristic residences, under-development of accommodation structures in buildings of particular historic or architectural value, no cover of urban planning in the valley area Valle dell’Alento, excessive administrative fragmentation and excessive fragmentation of municipalities in the local territory, insufficient application of new sustainable technologies and innovations in the field of energy production, waste, and water management.  

Urbanized areas have consistently increased over the last fifty years. 

Surface of urbanized areas in 1960 - 2010 in the Alento study site

Source: Authors

The plans in place in the local area (the Park Plan, Landscape Protection Plan, Spatial Plan of Coordination) are characterized by the re-interpretation of the territory according to its different identities. Interviews with stakeholders from the Cilento and Vallo di Diano National Park have revealed strengths and weaknesses. Weaknesses include:

1. constraints imposed by the Park. Some view the Park as an obstacle, particularly to the construction sector. In others cases, the Park is seen as a missed opportunity to achieve its full potential, as many operators in the local agro-alimentary industry maintain that the environmental protections put in place by the Park have little benefit for producers.
2. Difficulty in dialogue with local bodies; particularly the case in the smallest town councils and communities in the study area.
3. Difficulty in accessing financial aid; there remains a significant level of ignorance regarding the different types of funding and subsidies available to local businesses.
4. Inefficiency of infrastructure and transport networks; this is in part due to the inherent geographic position and characteristics of the local area, particularly inland. Local companies face huge costs for transport, which is particularly problematic for easily perishable local produce.

Strengths to have emerged from stakeholder interviews can be summarized as follows.

1. Typicality and quality of local production (wines, olive oil, cheeses, meats, etc.) which can be further promoted within the local tourism industry to produce a greater synergy between the two industries.
2. Historic Cultural and Archeological Patrimony: The area’s cultural patrimony, although not yet valorized to its full potential, is an important resource to the Park territory.
3. Opportunities since the creation of the Park of Cilento; sectors aside from construction or with other intrusive environmental impacts benefit from the creation of local brands that can compete for titles of official recognition (e.g. especially products in the agro-alimentary sector).

Problems in reference to the efficiency of the aforementioned planning instruments are related to the perceived lack of organization and “understanding” between the Campania region and other bodies (the Park authority, the local town councils). Another significant problem is the lack of concrete land management plans in the Alento area which are not subject to misinterpretation or uncertainties.

In some cases, within the boundaries of the National Park, spatial planning policies are seen as too restrictive and non-conducive to economic development. On more than one occasion, local residents have questioned the Park’s zoning criteria and have repeatedly requested that the areas within the municipality which are heavily urbanized, densely inhabited, or home to touristic structures, extensive cultivations, etc. be included in the category of “bordering areas”. This designation would be in line with the effective environmental needs of such areas. In other cases, the regulatory framework for urban planning is seen as too weak and ineffective in the face of mass unregulated construction.   

• Next >