Some history.
The tragic side of our history: wars, partitions and continuous shifts of borders, among others – on the level of developmental conditions – is the beneficial polycentrism of the settlement network. We have a number of urban centres of different sizes, spread regularly across the country, and there are no very large size differences between them. This is in fact the only major affirmative effect of Poland remaining in the region of abrading the interests of large powers and empires, causing growth of centres in different areas of influence under different jurisdictions. It takes on peculiar importance today, erstwhile past has accelerated and these old-fashioned interests are becoming more and more visible.
We have a number of urban centres of different sizes, spread regularly across the country, and there are no very large size differences between them. This is in fact the only more serious affirmative effect of Poland remaining for centuries in the region of the clash of interests of large powers and empires.
The main links of the Polish polycentric settlement strategy are centres that developed in possessive territories or even earlier in various lands, principalities, etc., including countries another than Poland. Their improvement has stimulated the location as centres of large administrative and economical regions (Warsaw, Kraków, Poznań, Wrocław, Szczecin), the industrial revolution of the 18th–XIXth century, which in most of today's area of Poland arrived late (Katowice, Łódź), but besides the function of "gate" (Gdansk, Gdynia). These 8 centres presently have the best-educated metropolitan functions, although any after 1989 face serious problems (industrial restructuring of Katowice conurbation and Łódź).
A network of cities of supraregional importance developed, whose developmental conditions were rather similar, but either lost or had to fight competition, or their facilities were not so large (Bydgoszcz, Toruń, Kielce). Importantly, any of these centres are increasing rapidly after 1989 (Bialystok, Rzeszów), discounting the remaining of their current facilities outside the influence of another centres, the dominant ones being the facilities in historical times (Vilno, Lviv).
In this polycentric arrangement, 1 must not forget that the territory of Poland has changed, and in the vicinity of the current borders are erstwhile Polish (II Rzeczpospolita) large cities: Lviv, Vilnius, Brest and Grodno, as well as another cities: Ostrava, Prague, Dresden and Berlin. There are besides many alleged double cities along the border, including the Polish-German border, sometimes around a 100 thousandths (Zgorzelec-Görlitz, Słubice-Frankfurt nad Odra).
According to the layout of the settlement network, a network of major trade routes developed. It was created in a hexagonal strategy (approximately a spider net or hub and spokes), optimal in terms of transport efficiency, since the sum of the dimension of roads of different order and thus the number and hierarchy of cities acting as nodes (according to the layout of roads – besides different order) is the best. These historical functional links are inactive being restored to this day, but they do not always discount the modern, altered (forced) boundaries fresh settlement improvement and changing needs of the settlement hierarchy. For example, the way from Warsaw (and earlier from Germany) to Vilnius and Moscow ran naturally through Białystok (with branching in Grodno), but already in the 1970s it was directed south by Belarusian Brest (this was lived shortly after 1989 in the form of the Paris-Berlin-Warsaw-Moscow axis). After 2000, the precedence of links with the Baltic States was restored, but the historical way was moved north with the omission of Białystok (Via Baltica). The road from Berlin to Poznań and Warsaw omits fresh regional centres, both Gorzów Wielkopolski and Zielona Góra. And if you look at the capital of Germany, it reproduces a hexagonal layout in the form of motorways A2 and A4 and S6 (speakers) with successive arches connecting metropolitan, supraregional and regional centres: S3, A1, S19.
A small theory.
Why are polycentric settlement systems so beneficial to development? simply put, there are no negative feedback, or self-propelled, systematic washouts. In colloquially speaking, the larger 1 doesn't eat the smaller one. There is simply a comparative balance between all centres in the city system. This is followed by synergies, resulting in a larger mass of centres than would consequence from a simple summation. There is simply a strengthening of the aggregate potential. Spatial availability is besides better. In polycentric systems, the unit costs of handling connections and establishing relationships are lower, so these systems are more economically competitive.
Polycentric sedimentary systems are so beneficial for development, due to the fact that – in colloquially speaking – the larger 1 does not eat the smaller one. There is simply a comparative balance between all centres in the city system.
Knowledge of the benefits of having a polycentric strategy is known in developed countries, for example, in the strategical planning of the European Union (Territorial Agenda 2030) attaches specified importance to this1. Interestingly, this thought came out of Poland partially due to, among others, prof. Kazimierz Dziewoński, who in the 1970s vaccinated it with his students and colleagues (prof. Piotr Korcelli and others) in the countries of the European economical Community. Against this background, Poland in Europe is 1 of the highest indicators of polycentricity: likewise to Germany, in which this arrangement besides derives from historical factors and the fact of the improvement of the territory broken down in the 19th century into many principalities and functional regions.
At the another pole there are countries specified as Hungary, Spain and Finland, where a significant, sometimes dominant part of the socio-economic possible is concentrated in 1 place (Budapest, Madrid, partially with Barcelona, Helsinki). In the mediate are, among others, France, Italy and Bulgaria. The dominance of 1 or 2 major centres in large territorial countries mostly results in strong negative feedback and the effects of leaching of various types of capital (human, financial).
Modern and projected changes in the settlement system
At present in Poland we are dealing with respective major processes in the settlement system, mainly due to the demography and the absolute depopulation of the country. In terms of demographic potential, and hence economical potential, it is the shrinking of most cities (about 80% of their number in Poland), especially average and tiny ones, and among the largest cities of Katowice conurbation. Secondly, this is simply a peculiarly strong increase in agglomeration cities, linked to suburbanisation, including environmental factors (better surviving conditions) and economical factors (lower cost of purchasing housing). Thirdly, the alleged 5 centres have developed in Poland, which are constantly increasing (Warsaw, Kraków, Poznań, Tricity, Wrocław). This is not always shown in authoritative statistics: especially the Polish capital has surely already over 2 million permanent residents (not counting Ukrainian refugees). There are exceptions to these 3 main correctnesss: among the larger cities (beyond the large five) in the east, Białystok and Rzeszów grow rather intensively, and among the average ones - in the north Elk and Kołobrzeg. The first 1 (similar to Białystok and Rzeszów) discounts the urbanisation hold of the east part of the country, the second 1 – benefits from the improvement of tourist functions, rehabilitation of wellness etc.
Today 80% of Polish cities shrink, while peculiarly strong growth concerns a group of agglomeration cities, related to suburbanisation. In fresh years the alleged 5 centres have developed in our country, which are constantly increasing – including Warsaw, Kraków, Poznań, Tricity and Wrocław.
In low fertility conditions (one of the lowest in the world), migrations become a key origin in demographic development. Their consequence is, among another things, to compensate for labour marketplace shortages, including request from the developing economy of urban centres. However, the attractiveness of cities in this respect is determined not only by the balance of inflows and outflows. This is besides the distance of movements: if a individual from Kaszub migrates in search of a occupation and a better place to live in Warsaw, alternatively of a close Tricity, this means that the force of attracting the Polish capital is much greater. If we multiply these distances by the number of migrants (so it's like migrant work), we get a reasonably universal and comparable rate of migration attractiveness for different cities.2. This is shown on the map below.
Ryc. 1. Migration attractiveness of cities from 1989 to 2021
Source: Śleszyński 20233.
In 1989, the settlement strategy was closer to balance, i.e. comparatively many average and large centres had a affirmative balance of attractiveness. In 2021 the situation is very different. On the 1 hand, we see a affirmative “big five” along with its proximitys (towns of suburban zones), on the another hand a very numerous, even overwhelming number of negative centres. This group includes many medium-sized – regional and sub-regional cities, besides now voivodship cities (Bydgoszcz, Częstochowa, Gorzów Wielkopolski, Katowice, Kielce, Lublin, Łódź, Radom, Szczecin, Wałbrzych, Włocławek). These are the centers that most lost in the transformation race after 1989. There are many reasons for this, but a description of this is simply a task for another survey (scaling the importance in the 1970s, administrative improvement of 1999, shrinking migratory resources in natural sinks, competition of "great five" and another cities, investment decisions of abroad corporations and others).
There are many indications that polarization of the settlement strategy will deepen. According to all available demographic forecasts, the population of Poland is expected to decline faster. The already "sucked" cities' migration basins will shrink even more and the low fertility will deepen the negative balance of natural motion. At the same time, there will be expanding labour marketplace shortages. Around 2050, the number of people of working age and the number of jobs will fundamentally be equalised.4 – which means that in order to keep the supply balance, the full adult (production age) population of Poland would gotta work. Of course, this is not possible and abroad immigration will surely increase, which will most likely be counted in millions of workers. This immigration was already clear before the war in Ukraine and before the COVID-19 pandemic, including in many cities it had a crucial share of the labour market5.
Around 2050, the number of people of working age and the number of jobs will mostly be equal – which means that in order to keep the supply balance, the full adult (production age) population of Poland would gotta work. As a result, abroad immigration will increase, which will most likely be counted in millions of workers.
In the home market, interregional and intra-regional competition will increase, in which big, stronger cities will be won, but this will take place at the expense of the weaker ones, in various agreements: "big five" – another cities, regional capitals – region cities, including sub-regional ones, and above all Warsaw – the remainder of the country. This will mean the weakening of smaller centres and their "falling out" from the existing functional hierarchy. Many subregional and region cities, and possibly any provincial cities, will not be able to execute their functions due to degradation and besides low economical base. This calls into question the rationality of the current administrative division, including, in particular, the weakness of the region level and the failure of depopulated municipalities.
So the polycentric strategy is not given erstwhile and for all. Of course, the processes I compose about take place on a scale not measured for years, only decades and centuries. But most likely in the foreseeable future – one, 2 generations – many cities cannot be stopped. However, this process can be slowed down and weakened and sometimes even sought restitution and increased importance of these centres.
In the home market, interregional and intra-regional competition will increase, in which big, stronger cities will be won, but this will take place at the expense of the weaker ones, in various agreements: "big five" – another cities, regional capitals – region cities, including sub-regional ones, and above all Warsaw – the remainder of the country. Can this process be slowed down and weakened?
Towards polycentralisation and regional degglomeration and local concentration
The starting point for further consideration is the conclusion that, despite the progressive demographic erosion and settlement polarisation, we inactive have a polycentric network of cities and thus, both in the national and regional systems, we can have an impact on more sustainable development. This polycentrism should be a flywheel, or at least a safety brake in spatial structures, including territorial organisations. However, in order to do so, it is essential to reshape regional and local policies, including the recognition of key, not always and completely correctly diagnosed mechanisms for the improvement of territories.
At this point, I would like to put the thesis that we have a bad dilemma in this discussion: polarised (polarisation) or sustainable development. Both concepts can be reconciled. improvement should be balanced regionally, according to the rule of polycentricity, and concentrated locally. Growth poles should not be separate centres but their interconnected network. This is simply a concept originally formulated primarily by Prof. Piotr Korcelle under the name “Poland Network Metropolitany” during the work of the Expert Group on the Concept of Spatial Land Management6.
The choice between polarised and balanced improvement is an apparent dilemma. Both concepts can be reconciled. improvement should be balanced regionally, according to the rule of polycentricity, and concentrated locally.
Firstly – and this is simply a fundamental question – we request to consider which settlement network and strategy of cities, in conditions of strong depopulation, we should be afraid about in the future. Should we proceed to keep and even stimulate the increasing mismatch between the administrative strategy and the functional settlement, or should we do something about it? The answer should be clear: the administrative strategy needs to be rehierarched, i.e. on the 1 hand, the actual metropolises (the mentioned "great five" plus the infirm Łódź and Katowice), possibly another ones, and on the another hand, strengthening the regional level (non-voivod cities with a possible of 100-200 1000 inhabitants). erstwhile I compose about regional cities, I mean centres specified as: Bielsko-Biała, Częstochowa, Elbląg, Grudziądz, Kalisz, Koszalin, Legnica, Płock, Radom, Słupsk, Tarnów, Wałbrzych, Włocławek. They have mostly clearly educated regional functions, but they frequently face a very strong decline in the population (Wałbrzych has lost as much as 20% of the population since 1989, and it is recorded – the scale of depopulation due to unrecorded outflow is most likely higher). There are besides respective multipolar agreements with a full possible – the best known and most of which are already formally established cooperation agreements, are Kalisz-Ostrów Wielkopolski (with Pleszew and another municipalities), "Four Towns", or Tarnobrzeg, Stalowa Wola, Low and Sandomierz, Legnicko-Głogowski Functional Area or Koszalin-Kołobrzeg-Słupsk.
The sub-regional network should besides be rationalised. Many cities are presently undervalued in terms of performing functions (mostly they are cities under the laws of the county), another group – is or will be overvalued. In 1999 there were 28 cities-capitalities with a population of little than 10,000 inhabitants, and in 2021 there were 38. These centres are not able to execute major supra-local functions, as time goes by, becoming a primary service facility, e.g. for agriculture and tourism. With the failure of population, especially in working age, they lose their economical base and their place in the functional hierarchy.
A separate problem is the rationalisation of cities and their agrarian counterparts, alleged bagel municipalities. There are over 150 specified agreements in Poland: they could be urban municipalities, and sometimes they could be merged (casus Green Mountain). This would surely improve management, reduce unit costs in areas powerfully linked by e.g. travel to work, schools, justify maintenance costs and gross for local governments.
The way to support the above polycentralisation is to deglomerate the higher order functions. Not everything must be located in Warsaw, but in provincial layouts – in their capitals. Many countries have a degglomeration policy. But we request to be careful: this is not about "smacking" about 100 central offices around the country (this concept appeared around 2017 and although the author of this text mostly supported this idea, he did not mean specified a deglomerational fragmentation.7), but alternatively about looking for any rational, legitimate concentration. For example, the location of the main economical institutions in the Katowice conurbation (including the Central Communication Port due to close Kraków and Ostrava), cultural – in Łódź, the stock exchange in Poznań, geodesic satellite services in Olsztyn or environmental agendas (including the Ministry of Environment) in Białystok. In turn, the degglomeration of typical mediate cities (such as Chełm, Łomża or Piła) should trust on reindustrialisation and incentives (and for state companies – possibly duties) for the location of industrial, logistical, etc. The second should be a competitive asset of Poland to the needs of production safety (including food) and shortening supply chains in an increasingly troubled world.
Not everything must be located in Warsaw, but in provincial layouts – in their capitals. Many countries have a degglomeration policy. However, care must be taken: this is not about "smacking" about 100 central offices around the country, but alternatively about seeking any rational, legitimate concentration.
The transformation requires housing policy, as the main polarization mechanism, in addition to leaching functions of various types, is the migration of people in search of work and better life. Accommodation+ programmes should be targeted exclusively on non-voivod cities, including region ones: this would encourage population concentration. There are still, although shrinking, surplus agricultural and peri-agricultural populations (formal urbanisation in Poland is about 60%). They are estimated to be 1.5 million, possibly 2 million people. This is simply a serious resource, due to the fact that if only 1/3 of this possible migration stream were directed towards medium-sized cities, then the population decline could be severely slowed down. The conditions are attractive jobs (possibly due to industrial degglomeration and services), hybrid work, raising the conditions and quality of life, including a satisfactory cultural offer for young people. The last legislature of tiny and average Cities in Chełma (April 2023) organized in a new, modern urban library showed that even in specified comparatively tiny cities interesting investments in this area could be created.
As far as the argument for concentration is concerned, it is crucial due to the strong dispersal of buildings, which is due to both historical factors (the possessive policy in agrarian areas) and contemporary ones (a defective spatial law that generates spatial chaos and urban sprawl in urban and tourist urban areas).
Cities don't hang in a spatial vacuum, they're not just host on the Internet: they must be linked by a conventional (roads, railways) efficient and rational transport network. In this context, it is essential to adapt the connections of different orders to the hierarchy of functional cities. Unfortunately, many mistakes have been made so far. Many major junctions between motorways and expressways are located in besides tiny towns, these roads besides frequently bypass regional capitals (remembered casus Bialystok and Via Baltica, but besides e.g. Olsztyn). This reduces the natural formation of exchange centers, logistics etc., there is simply a tunnel effect. In general, the transport network should strengthen the polycentric layout of urban centres alternatively than destabilize it: the main node for motor traffic was located in Stryków (instead of closer Warsaw), resulting in the fastest way to the Tricity from the country's capital Łódź, importantly extending the way – 20% compared to S7. In turn, the S7 way bypasses Olsztyn and runs through comparatively tiny cities. However, from the point of view of forming a polycentric network of connections, the most needed in this region would be the connecting way S10 (along the Vistula River to Toruń/Bydgoszcz), including the network of fast traffic and activating Płock and Włocławek and giving way to the distant communication from the centre of Szczecin. If there is always specified a route, then individual can ask, why S7 north of Warsaw and on the side of Olsztyn?
Cities don't hang in a spatial vacuum, they're not just host online: they request to be tied up by a conventional (roads, including railways) efficient and rational transport network. This in turn should strengthen the polycentric layout of urban centres alternatively than destabilise it.
In general, the transport network should reflect the possible burden of agglomerations and cities in order to achieve, inter alia, these synergies and reduce the cost of establishing relationships, including travel times (figure 2). A survey a twelve years ago showed that in the collection of cities over 100,000 inhabitants, the alleged matrix efficiency via high-speed roads (accessibility in the matrix of about 40 cities, weighed by distance – the more distant the centres were, the weight of the relationship) in 1989 was 22%, in 2008 – 30%, and for 2015 it was estimated at 63%8. In the second case, this was about the current state in the calculations, but with the complete S7, S17 and S19 (which has not been successful today) and so the efficiency rate is surely lower today. Moreover, given the intense pace of the improvement of the expressway and motorway networks, the accomplishment of the 100% rate was estimated to be around 2040.
Thus, despite the spectacular improvement of the road network after Poland's entry into the European Union, there are inactive serious shortcomings in the assembly of the transport network. presently (spring 2023) are inactive not connected by the shortest possible way on the full section of Warsaw with Krakow (two major metropolitan centres), or Katowice with Poznań. This mankament is most much related to neighbouring provincial centres (Białystok-Olsztyn, Kielce-Lodz, Lublin-Kielce and others). The dense transit movement passes through the mediate of Warsaw (at foggy and surely late prospects on the alleged large bypass), which is Kuriozum on an unprecedented scale in civilized countries. In specified conditions, in the absence of hierarchisation and prioritising of the most crucial connections in fresh decades, it is hard to talk about the primary support of the polycentric settlement network strategy and the polycentric functional link system. Although it should be admitted that after around 2004 much was done to break the inefficient transit way layout of the high-speed road network in Poland (north-south and east-west axes promoted since the 1980s, among others, in connection with the military needs of the erstwhile Warsaw Pact, i.e. focusing exclusively on parallel A2 and A4 and then on the meridian A1 and S3).
Ryc. 2. Gravity stresses in Poland and the environment measured by GDP9
Despite the spectacular improvement of the road network following Poland's entry into the European Union, there are inactive serious shortcomings in the assembly of the transport network. Currently, they are inactive not connected by the shortest possible way on the full Warsaw-Krakow or Katowice section with Poznań. This mankament is most much related to neighbouring provincial centres (Białystok-Olsztyn, Kielce-Lodz, Lublin-Kielce and others).
While the road corridors with advanced method parameters are already good (although only after 2 decades of more intensive expansion) reflect the request for a coherent polycentric settlement network of higher order centres (or at least plans for the improvement of high-speed roads are not geared almost exclusively to transit), this condition is inactive not met by the railway system. The conditions of the occupations, i.e. the separate railway systems of the possessive states, as well as the deliberate policy of bypassing crucial and possibly developmental centres (e.g. on the Warsaw–Petersburg way in the second half of the 19th century) play an crucial function here. However, it would be hard to believe that specified factors have been affecting more than a 100 years since the expansion of this network and even were reinforced after 1989 (the demolition of railway lines on specified a scale in specified a large country unprecedented in the past of the modern world10).
Unfortunately, ambitious plans to grow the network, especially in connection with the CPK railway programme, do not correlate with the polycentric network of cities, but even deepen the monocentric transport system. In the position of the Spatial Planning Committee of the Polish Academy of Sciences prepared in 2020,11 We can read that the strategical Localization survey of the CPK “is a paper redefining the country's transport strategy and thus changing the basis of Poland's spatial organisation and that the proposed layout of fresh and upgraded railway lines poses a threat to the polycentric improvement of the country. The polycentric (multicentre) settlement structure of Poland is an asset distinguishing on a European scale (a akin arrangement is held only by Germany). It promotes balance of improvement and counteracts excessive concentration of economical functions (GDP). (...) The proposed investment focus on the directions to CPK (and in practice to the capital) means strengthening the monocentric strategy and a comparative weakening of direct links among another metropolitan areas. The proposed monocentric strategy would besides be much little resistant to various risks."
Unfortunately, ambitious plans to grow the Polish railway network, especially in connection with the railway programme of the CPK, do not correlate with the polycentric network of cities, but even deepen the monocentric transport system.
So what should be the optimal arrangement? Focused on more slanted and interregional links, i.e. connecting Białystok with Szczecin by Olsztyn and Gdańsk, and not by moving to Warsaw in Baranów. The improvement of the access of medium-sized cities to Warsaw, as argued in connection with the investment, should be achieved by regional centres. The expansion plan clearly overestimates the importance of fast rail availability from smaller cities: there is simply no request for travel to Warsaw.
Financial degglomeration is besides needed. Firstly, not only the drain of human capital but besides financial capital should be sealed. The money generated in local layouts is "sucked" in various relations – from the country abroad, from tiny towns and municipalities to Warsaw or to the capitals of voivodships, etc. possibly a solution would be to introduce local currencies, specified as a territorially bound voucher for all born child. specified a voucher would be valid only in a given city or district, and it would be possible to cover fees for local expenses, to pay for services, in shops, etc. Reforms require a strategy of taxation redistribution of PIT, and in peculiar CIT: it is profoundly unfair and even anti-development. But not due to the fact that they lose the biggest cities, headed by Warsaw (this is simply a misunderstanding, which is referred to further). The point is that a tiny part of the municipalities have very advanced profits due to the location of very large plants, mainly industrial ones. Local taxes, especially taxation revenues, do not stimulate entrepreneurship. The neighbouring and functionally connected municipalities have nothing of this, even to keep roads, on which their residents-workers drive regular to increase the profits of large factories.
As far as the taxation position of Warsaw is concerned, it is not entirely acceptable to agree with the reasonably common thesis that Warsaw is losing due to the “janosik”. This is simply a reversal of reasoning about the causes of the formation and redistribution of wealth. The position and dominance of Warsaw stems from its capital, which in Poland is powerfully connected with economical control functions, i.e. the office of the largest companies. These companies pay taxes in Warsaw (with this being different, especially in the case of abroad companies, although it must be admitted that in fresh years they are getting better), but profits very frequently come from activities all over the country. This is, among another things, the previously described financial drainage of banks or commercial and service networks. This is 1 of the key mechanisms for socio-economic polarisation of the country and the frustration of the provinces, which besides results in human drainage (aside from financial) and, consequently, weakening polycentrism in various regional and functional systems. If you wanted to justify this state of affairs (in the sense of fair play, and not to defend themselves with arguments), it is not only ‘janostic’ here, but besides the inhabitants of the functional region (the area of access to work), and possibly the state or even the full country could have any influence on the city's authorities (currently only steel, registered residents choose this authority).
Completion
Poland has a polycentric settlement system, which it inactive cannot usage effectively. It is crucial to realize that this strategy has been creating centuries and is inactive evolving. Fundamental change in demographic processes in Poland, which is an absolute decline in population (formally since 2000, and in fact most likely from 1990 to 1995 due to strong, poorly registered, abroad emigration – and in fact the largest exodus in the past of the country), it should entail a change of thought about the mark (in the position of respective decades) administrative system. In this agreement that any cities will not be able to fulfil their existing functions, and any municipalities will request to be merged for the same reason. However, there are inactive opportunities in any regions of the country to counter this, and at least to mitigate the negative processes, linked not only to the absolute failure of the population, but even more serious social consequences and to public budgets ageing and mostly deformations of the age and sex structure (in Poland there is simply a peculiarly advanced drain from the periphery of women of married age). This will only partially offset the increase in abroad immigration, which is inevitable: these immigrants will settle, according to the observed trend, mainly in the largest cities, as well as in industrial centres in the west and south of the country. The typical exile migration besides tends to be located especially in the largest cities. In another words, the increase in abroad immigration will alternatively deepen the diversity of the city strategy and thus decrease its polycentricity.
Addressing problems related to the degradation of the settlement system, becomes peculiarly crucial after the COVID-19 pandemic and under conditions of war in the East. In the first case, the aim is to strengthen the polycentric settlement strategy so as to maximise its support for production autonomy to be immune to various types of crises. This may be related, in particular, to deglomeration of higher-ranking functions in different systems (the capital of the country – large regional centres, regional capitals – subregional cities), reindustrialisation of typical medium-sized cities (this is where the conditions are peculiarly justified due to the restoration of alleged host zones), precise migration policy (reduction of support for housing programmes in the cities of "great Fridays", besides due to their already excessive density and many different nuisances – these cities, due to, for example, the congestion of traffic, are little suitable for life), improvement of taxation redistribution and others. Administrative improvement can be a peculiarly effective tool. For this reason, the erstwhile 1 was created before the technological revolution of the first and second decades of the 21st century, which radically changes the needs of mobility and the challenges of serving the population and spatial accessibility.
The views on the improvement of the settlement strategy besides change the geopolitical situation and the aggression of Russia on Ukraine. It turns out that even more request to support the oblique directions of the links, specified as Via Intermare (a concept promoted in 1990, especially by Prof. Marcin Rościszewski and prof. Grzegorz Węcławowicz) and Via Baltica, and mostly look for these gravitational loads in the global system, which can strengthen and not weaken the polycentricity of the Polish city system.
1 See https://territorialagenda.eu/ [access 10.06.2023].
2 Mr Sleszyński, The concept of a fresh indicator of migration attractiveness and its application, Geographical Journal, 91, 1–2, pp. 37–58.
3 Mr Sleszyński, Internal migration [in:] The demographic situation of Poland. study 2020–2021, D. Bojarska-Lis, M. Budziński, E. Kowalczyk (ed.), Government Council of Population, Warsaw 2023.
4 Mr Sleszyński, Demographic challenges of regional improvement in Poland, Studyes of the PAN Country Planning Committee, 183, pp. 225-247.
5 A. Upper, P. Śleszyński, Exploring the spatial concentration of abroad employment in Poland under the simulated procedurese, Geographicia Polonica, 92, 3, pp. 331–345.
6 P. Korcelli, M. Degórski, D. Drzazga, T. Komornicki, T. Markowski, J. Szlachta, G. Węcławowicz, J. Zaleski, J. Zaucha, Expert task of the concept of land usage by 2033, KPZK PAN studies, 122, Warsaw 2010.
7 Mr Sleszyński, Poland mediate Cities. The assumptions and concept of deglomeration in Poland, Jagiellonian Club, Warsaw 2018.
8 Mr Sleszyński, Development of a modern road transport network and the efficiency of connections between major urban centres (1989-2015), Highways, 7, pp. 50–53.
9 M. Nowak, P. Śleszyński, P. Legutko-Kobus, Spatial planning in Poland. Law, Property marketplace and Planning Practice, Springer Briefs in Geography, Springer, Cham 2022.
10 Z. Taylor, Development and regression of railway network in Poland, Monografies, 7, Institute of Geography and Spatial Management of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw 2007.
11 Position of the Committee on Local Planning of the Polish Academy of Sciences on strategical Localization survey of CPK, Warsaw, 5 March 2020, https://kpzk.pan.pl/images/END_firmowy_postosko_SSL_CPK.pdf [on-line access].
