Selected Methods and Models for Analysing Spatial Processes in Urban Regions : Comparison and Assessment

Virtuelles Projekt Urbanisierung

Wien

2002

64 S. + CD-Rom

zahlr. Lit. Ang.

Bandaufführung

3-85224-108-1

14620

95978

In conclusion it can be said that the application of all methods to the Linz case study area led to some remarkable results. The two models that work with static parameters, the Boustedt and the ÖSTAT Model, show three very clear and concurrent structures (see figure 10): - the Traun axis, - the Linz-Enns axis, - the rural areas around Eferding in the north-western part of the case study area and the rural areas in the south-eastern border region. There is just one very obvious difference between the results, which is the length of the Linz-Enns-axis. The Boustedt results show the axis starting in Linz and extending to the borders of the case study region whereas the ÖSTAT model shows an axis, which only extends to Enns. Also the size and location of the rural areas in the south-eastern part of the case study region differ in the results derived by the two methods. The Boustedt Methods does not take into account the nearby city of Steyr and defines the muncipipalities, which are part of the urban region of Steyr as rural because the interactions between these municipalities and Linz are low. The ÖSTAT method shows a more detailed picture in this case and defines the two municipalities Wolfern and Dietach as part of the urban area Steyr. Nevertheless both methods show a similar image of the region. Not only the results but also the methods themselves are very simular. Both models assume an urban region that is orientated towards one center and which shows a clear gradient from the center towards the periphery. Both models are eary to use and lead to clear results. The ÖSTAT Model, which is adapted to Austrian conditions, generates more realistic and less generalized results but can therefore not be applied to investigation areas outside Austria.