The dichotomy between city and countryside in the Italian experience of regional landscape planning

Main Article Content

Nicola Martinelli
Vito D'Onghia


Cities represent public places where urban planning rules meet urban policies in order to build conditions of pluralism that characterize the difficult relationship between man and city. Urban space has always been the existing link between place and use, where the meaning of the project and form affect the community and the identifying sharing of practices and operational views. (Pasqui G., 2018)
This contribution aims at investigating the urban tensions placed within the space of the metropolitan dimension of the city and on the matrix nature of the countryside in proximity, by understanding the exchanges, interpretations and cultural reflections that raise the issue of the urban limit on spatial regulation under the scrutiny of the regional territorial planning processes.
The task of urban planning as a field of practice recognizes the organization at different levels in technical, administrative and political activities and the capacity to restore rules and new sustainable approaches to identify horizons organized in a defined spatial prefiguration between urban and rural dimension. (Secchi B, 1987)
The new paradigms established in the broad vision of cities describe a new agro-natural setup as the result of processes put in place between multi-sectoriality and production practices, defining the possibility for shared governance to stem the processes of fragmentation and of urbanization that outline a new structure between city and countryside.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
MartinelliN., & D’OnghiaV. (2020). The dichotomy between city and countryside in the Italian experience of regional landscape planning. UPLanD - Journal of Urban Planning, Landscape & Environmental Design, 5(1), 141-160.


Agostini, S. (2018). Urbanistica periagricola, Pratiche di rigenerazione territoriale. Santarcangelo di Romagna, IT: Maggioli editore.

Alleanza Italiana per lo Sviluppo Sostenibile (ASviS), (2018, October 16). Agenda 2030. Retrieved from:

Carta, M., & La Greca, P. (2017). Cambiamenti dell’urbanistica, Responsabilità e strumenti al servizio del paese. Roma, IT: Donzelli Editore.

Clèment, G., (2004). Manifesto per il Terzo Paesaggio. Macerata, IT: Quodlibet.

Magnaghi, A. (1998). Il territorio dell'abitare. Lo sviluppo locale come alternativa strategica. Milano, IT: Franco Angeli.

Magnaghi, A., & Fanfani, D., (2010). Patto città-campagna. Un progetto di bioregione urbana per la Toscana centrale. Firenze, IT: Alinea editrice.

Marson, A. (2013). Riprogettare i territori dell’urbanizzazione. Macerata, IT: Quodlibet.

Mininni, M., Bisciglia, S., & Dansero, E., (2019). Sistemi del cibo nelle economie urbane e periurbane. In E. D’Albergo, D. De Leo, G. Viesti (Eds.), IV Rapporto sulle città, Il governo debole delle economie urbane. Bologna, IT: Il Mulino.

Mininni, M.V. (2006). Campagne Urbane – Una nuova proposta di paesaggio della città. Roma, IT: Donzelli Editore.

Mininni, M.V., & Leone, A. (2017). Il nuovo patto città campagna: ambiente, agricoltura, paesaggio (economie, turismo, produzione). In M. Carta & P. La Greca (Eds.), Cambiamenti dell’Urbanistica. Responsabilità e strumenti al servizio del paese (pp. 149-155). Roma, IT: Donzelli

Minnini, M.V. (2012). Approssimazioni alla città. Roma, IT: Donzelli Editore.

Pasqui, G. (2018). La Città, i saperi, le pratiche. Roma, IT: Donzelli Editore.

Pisano, C. (2018). Patch Metropolis, Progetto di città contemporanea. Siracusa, IT: Lettera Ventidue.

Regione Friuli Venezia Giulia (2018, Juanary 16). Retrieved from:

Regione Piemonte (2018, Juanary 16). Retrieved from:

Regione Puglia (2018, Juanary 16). Retrieved from:

Regione Toscana (2018, Juanary 16). Retrieved from:

Secchi B. (1990). Un sapere cumulativo. Urbanistica, 101.

Secchi, B. (1987). Disegnare il piano. Urbanistica, 89, 8-19.