Since the beginning of the transition from an agricultural to an industrial society at the beginning of the 19th century, rural settlements as important components of the cultural landscape of Germany have experienced a profound transformation. Due to structural changes in agriculture and an accelerated urbanisation process since the end of World War II, this transformation of rural areas has taken a new momentum. For many centuries, a village was a relatively homogeneous social unit that relied mainly on agriculture. Today, however, it is not easy to define a village [1]. Depending on the location within the spatial settlement pattern [2], different functional types of rural settlements evolved. On the one hand, there are rural settlements within densely populated regions and/or tourist areas that are characterised by urban life styles and modern economic systems. On the other hand, villages in remote areas are frequently hit by rural exodus or population stagnation. Since the early 50s, federal and provincial governments have been trying to develop concepts and programs for the preservation and renewal of rural settlements in the context of
These different concepts were characterised by changing political paradigms as can be observed in the villages today.
The first programs for a systematic improvement of rural settlements date back to the so-called "Landesverschönerungsbewegung" (a movement to improve rural areas) at the beginning of the 19th century. They were influenced by romantic images of rural life opposing the early industrial development. It was only in the 20th century, however, that systematic renewal programs for rural areas were generated. For the first time, the Prussian law on rural restructuring (1920) defined the remodeling of villages as an important measure to improve rural life conditions in addition to the classical consolidation measures. In 1937, a special land consolidation law (the so-called "Reichsumlegungsverordnung") forced all German provinces to improve structural conditions of the villages. The implementation of these laws, however, was not always very convincing. Special development programs were rather the exception than the rule.
Changes occurred after WW II, with striking differences within the two Germanies after 1949. While the renewal of villages was neglected in the former GDR up to the 80s, it became an important landmark of rural planning policies in the FRG after 1949. As a result of the devastating situation in the post-war years this was more than necessary. In the first years, the rural regions accounted for an enormous population increase. However, the migration of population from the cities to rural areas was only temporary. Already in the early 50s the situation changed: due to general living conditions such as housing, lack of infrastructure (thousands of villages neither had electricity, a main water supply nor paved streets), restricted job opportunities, etc., more and more people moved from rural to urban settlements, a real rural exodus was to be observed over a number of years in the 50s and 60s. Political measures and development programs became more and more important, especially because:
In the early 50s, first measures to improve the rural settlement structure were closely connected to the improvement of the agricultural structure, especially of land consolidation (which means the spatial reorganisation of ownership structures - (before - after). A special Land consolidation law, passed in 1953 ("Flurbereinigungsgesetz") [7] expressly imposed the restructuring of rural settlements as an important measure to be considered in order to improve rural living conditions. However, the underlying idea was less a comprehensive renewal of the villages but more an improvement of the competitiveness of agriculture. Next to the consolidation of fields and improvements in local traffic conditions, the relocation of farms from the old village cores towards the peripheries or even completely outside the traditional villages [8] was of major importance. By 1971, approximately 15,000 farms were relocated according to this legal requirement all over the FRG (Beck 1998: 13). However, there were also negative aspects of these measures: the social context of the rural community changed substantially, old neighbourhoods were given up without being replaced by new ones, children did not have easy access to playgrounds, schools etc. In the villages themselves, living conditions were somewhat improved, despite the fact that ongoing measures for renewal, were often missing. For a long time to go the housing situation in the villages as well as many utility-systems did not conform to modern living conditions.
When the Federal Construction Law [9] (Bundesbaugesetz) was debated in 1960, the renewal of villages was explicitly mentioned as a specific task of planning endeavours. This was an important step to improve the extremely unsatisfactory situation within the villages. In the following years, millions and millions of federal and provincial money went into the installation of sewers and the construction of streets, schools and other kinds of rural infrastructure. Furthermore, a competition called "Make our village beautiful" was implemented by the Ministry [10] of Food, Agriculture and Forestry. Since then, many villages have competed annually on the county, provincial or federal level to be awarded for the nicest flower arrangements, gardens or village centres. While the competition mainly aimed at making the villages more beautiful, public subsidies for construction measures concentrated on expansive demolition rather than punctual renewal as well as the enlargement of streets rather than the conservation of the village character. The awareness of the architectural uniqueness of the village unfortunately evolved only after many historic buildings had been torn down already. Between 1960 and 1972, an overall 5 to 10 percent of the traditional village architecture had disappeared (Henkel 1993: 218). In many places, the rural character of the village was lost because of poorly adapted construction projects such as pedestrian areas, modern housing construction, the enlargement of traffic roads etc.
In the middle of the 70s, policies and concepts for the development [11] in rural areas changed.The heritage values of the rural cultural landscape, almost lost in many cases, were rediscovered. The preservation of these values became a major guideline for rural planning in the following years. No radical replacement, but adapted renewal and heritage preservation became now the credo of the planning policies (Dorferneuerungsbericht 1990). In the first phase up to the early 80s, the conservation of the historic settlement structure and the witnesses of rural culture [12] were the main concerns. The protection of historical monuments (Denkmalschutz), already applied in the cities, gained in importance. The programs for village renewal concentrated mainly on the historic centres of the villages that were supposed to become revitalized. In a second phase until the middle of the 80s, programs focused on the building and design of new residential areas. This was necessary, because many rural settlements, especially within densely populated areas were struck by a suburbanisation process [13]. In order to control the growth of settlements, ecological and social aspects had to be integrated into the renewal programs. Even more, as a reaction to increasing suburbanisation of industry and services, the involvement of these aspects became an important part of all plans in the third phase by the end of the 80s. Consequently, in accordance with political objectives, village renewal has developed from a one-sided agricultural measure to a complex planning procedure in order to improve the living conditions in rural areas. Today, the main targets of village renewal programs can be defined as follows:
In order to support those aims in practice, the measures of village renewal were institutionalised. As part of the programs for village renewal ( Dorferneuerungsprogramm) [16], detailed lists of planned actions and measures, of costs involved for their realisation and their maintenance, of prognoses for future developments etc. are requested in each individual case.
After the unification of Germany in 1990, the program of village renewal was also applied to East Germany. However, due to different circumstances and preconditions, many problems arose. On the one hand, the traditional structure of the cultural landscape had been changed by collective agriculture in the former GDR On the other hand, in some regions such as the sparsely populated northeast, historic settlement types had been preserved. They urgently needed renewal, however, because only in the 80s did the communist government start to look after their villages. In 1981, a competition called "our beautiful villages and communities - help us" was launched but the implementation did not really materialise. Only in the years since reunification, have the structure and the appearance of villages in Eastern Germany improved immensely, as can be seen from an example [17] of the Uckermark region. To further reduce the disparities between rural areas in East and West Germany has been an important political goal since 1990. To achieve this goal might still take many years.
In more general terms it can be said that today the implementation of village renewal programs includes increasingly the inhabitants of the villages themselves. They take more and more part in the planning procedures as well as in the decision-making process (Knievel/Täube 1999: 313): The idea is, that planning concepts can only be successful if local people are actively involved [18] in the process. Especially for the recognition of endogenous potentials of a region, existing social networks in the rural area such as youth-groups [19], rural wives [20] or farmer associations [21] etc. are necessary. Only in co-operation with those insiders is it possible to develop promising strategies and sustainable programs and to make the right steps towards the village of the 21st century, that has to be more than just the "left over of an urban society".
| Top | Content | VGT Home |
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}