Spatial Structure of Nizhny Novgorod Urban Agglomeration in 2019–2021

The article sheds light to the transformations that took place in the spatial structure of the Nizhny Novgorod urban agglomeration in 2019–2021 during the coronavirus pandemic. The identified changes are analyzed in the context of two concepts: urban shrinkage and spatial resilience. Particular attention is paid to micro-level changes in the spatial distribution of the day and night population aggregated by anonymized data from cellular operators. According to the results, spatial structure of the Nizhny Novgorod urban agglomeration is characterized by a relatively high level of resilience to the negative effects of the pandemic, which can be explained by the complex nature of its structure as a system and the potential ability to redistribute negative effects. One of the key reactions of the spatial structure of both daytime and nighttime population was the significant increase in microlevel polarization. It has especially strongly affected public and business and mixed zones, as well as large housing estates. An increase in polarization was observed in the central zones of cities (including in the core of the urban agglomeration). There is a trend towards differentiation of low-density residential suburbs. As a result, it is postulated that the changes that have taken place in the urban spatial structure can be named a special form of “agglomerational shrinkage,” which is not accompanied by a decrease in the population of the agglomeration, but severely increases internal spatial disproportions.

1. Adedeji O.H., Odufuwa B.O., Adebayo O.H. Building capabilities for flood disaster and hazard preparedness and risk reduction in Nigeria: need for spatial planning and land management. J. Sustain. Dev. Afr., 2012, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 45–58.

2. Antonov E.V. Urban agglomerations: approaches to allocation and delimitation. Kontury Glob. Transform.: Polit., Econ., Pravo, 2020, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 180–202. (In Russ.).

3. Antonov E.V., Makhrova A.G. Largest urban agglomerations and super-agglomerations in Russia. Izv. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr., 2019, no. 4, pp. 31–45. (In Russ.).

4. Bartholomae F., Woon Nam C., Schoenberg A. Urban shrinkage and resurgence in Germany. Urban Stud., 2017, vol. 54, no. 12, pp. 2701–2718.

5. Batunova E.Yu., Gunko M.S., Medvedev A.A. Mismanaged space: planning and policymaking in the context of depopulation in Ivanovskaya Oblast. Vestn. S.-Peterb. Univ. Nauki Zemle, 2021, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 440–459. (In Russ.).

6. Buhnik S. From shrinking cities to Toshi no Shukushō: Identifying patterns of urban shrinkage in the Osaka metropolitan area. Berkeley Plan. J., 2010, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 132–155.

7. Carpenter S., et al. From metaphor to measurement: Resilience of what to what? Ecosyst., 2001, vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 765–781.

8. Cunningham-Sabot E., et al. Shrinking cities in France and Great Britain: A silent process. In The future of shrinking cities: Problems, patterns and strategies of urban transformation in a global context, 2009, pp. 17–28.

9. Dovey K., Rao F., Pafka E. Agglomeration and assemblage: deterritorialising urban theory. Urban Stud., 2018, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 263–273.

10. Fol S. Urban shrinkage and socio-spatial disparities: are the remedies worse than the disease? Built Environ., 2012, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 259–275.

11. Gill D., Ritchie L. Considering cumulative social effects of technological hazards and disasters. Am. Behav. Sci., 2020, vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 1145–1161.

12. Gunko M.S., Eremenko Yu.A., Batunova E.Yu. Planning strategies in the context of urban shrinkage in Russia: evidence from small and medium-sized cities. Mir Rossii, 2020, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 121–141. (In Russ.).

13. Haase A., et al. Conceptualizing urban shrinkage. Environ. Plan. A, 2014, vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 1519–1534.

14. Haase A., et al. Varieties of shrinkage in European cities. Eur. Urban Reg. Stud., 2016, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 86–102.

15. Hospers G.J. Urban shrinkage in the EU. In Shrinking Cities. Routledge, 2014, pp. 47–58.

16. Lappo G.M. Goroda Rossii: vzglyad geografa [Cities of Russia: Geographer’s View]. Мoscow: Novyi Khronograph Publ., 2012.

17. Lappo G.M., Polyan P.M., Selivanova T.A. Agglomerations of Russia in the XXI century. Vestn. Fonda Reg. Razvit. Irkutsk. Obl., 2007, vol. 1, pp. 45–52. (In Russ.).

18. Ma X., et al. Evaluation of urban spatial resilience and its influencing factors: case study of the Harbin–Changchun urban agglomeration in China. Sustain., 2022, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 2899–2920.

19. Makhrova A.G., Babkin R.A., Kazakov E.E. The dynamics of day and night population as an indicator of structural and functional changes in the territory of the city in the zone of influence of the Moscow Central Ring using data from mobile operators. Kontury Glob. Transform.: Polit., Econ., Pravo, 2020, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 159–179. (In Russ.).

20. Makhrova A.G., Kirillov P.N., Bochkarev A.N. Methodical approaches to the study of labor commuting. In Teoreticheskie i metodicheskie podkhody v ekonomicheskoi i sotsial’noi geografii [Theoretical and Methodological in Economic and Social Geography], 2019, pp. 96–114. (In Russ.).

21. Marek D., et al. Economic impacts of Covid-19 on the labor market and human capital. Terra Econ., 2020, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 78–96.

22. Masnavi M.R., Gharai F., Hajibandeh M. Exploring urban resilience thinking for its application in urban planning: A review of literature. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2019, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 567–582.

23. Meerow S., Newell J.P., Stults M. Defining urban resilience: A review. Landsc. Urban Plan., 2016, vol. 147, pp. 38–49.

24. Nefedova T.G. Polarization of Russian space: areas of growth and “black holes”. Econ. Sovrem. Rossii, 2009, vol. 1, no. 44, pp. 62–77. (In Russ.).

25. Nefedova T.G., Starikova A.V. Migrations as a way of population adaptation to polarization of space at the Center of Russia. Sotsiolog. Issled., 2020, no. 10, pp. 24–38. (In Russ.).

26. Polyan P.M. Territorial’nye struktury – urbanizatsiya – rasselenie [Territorial Structures – Urbanization – Settlement System]. Мoscow: Novyi Khronograf Publ., 2014.

27. Polyan P.M., Zaslavskii I.N., Naymark N.I. Problem of delimitation of urban agglomerations: comparison and synthesis of leading methods. In Problemy territorial’noi organizatsii prostranstva i rasseleniya v urbanizirovannykh raionakh [Problems of Territorial Organization of Space and Settlement in Urbanized Areas]. Sverdlovsk, 1988, pp. 26–40. (In Russ.).

28. Raisikh A.E. Defining the boundaries of urban agglomerations in Russia: model creation and results. Demogr. Obozr., 2020, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 54–96. (In Russ.).

29. Shetty S., Reid N. Global challenges and local responses: creating a new urban world in the shrinking cities of the US industrial Midwest. Reg. Sci. Policy Pract., 2013, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 201–217.

30. Taşan-Kok T., Stead D., Lu P. Conceptual overview of resilience: history and context. In Resilience thinking in urban planning. Istanbul, 2013, pp. 39–51.

31. Yi C., Jackson N. A review of measuring ecosystem resilience to disturbance. Environ. Res. Lett., 2021, vol. 16, no. 5, article 053008.

32. Zubarevich N.V. Inequality of regions and large cities of Russia: what was changed in the 2010s. Obshchestv. Nauki Sovrem., 2019, no. 4, pp. 57–70. (In Russ.).